Rep Jim McDermott Town Hall Meeting answered one question

September 3, 2009

On September 1, 2009, Representative Jim McDermott of the 7th Congressional District in Seattle, Washington on the Campus of the University of Washington at Meany Hall for the Health Care Town Hall Meeting only took one, yes, 1 question.

How do I know this.

Questions which were gathered were on 3 X 5 inch cards and Mr. McDermott was given questions on 5 X 7 inch cards.  I was in the front row.  He read about four and answered four to the audience. 

Many questions from the audience of about 800+ were asked.  But, and this is the reason why I say but, there was a code to who was supposed to be picked for the questions which Mr. McDermott would answer.  A combination of a Nazi 45 degree raised hand and a communist raised hand was the signal.  A closed fist and a Nazi open hand was the singled.  But instead of being an outstretched open hand the first two fingers were out and the last two fingers were tucked under.  Simplistic yet unsuspecting.  They also had three cards with them instead of only the one 3 X 5 card which were handed out outside to the audience line they the questioners had 5 X 7 inch cards as well and three cards each.  I am assuming this would be just in case the questions had already been asked by someone else. 

The surprising aspect of the brownshirt technique here for occupying time was that after the question was asked the questioner would walk outside to the lobby area and leave.  Normally someone would wait to ask the question and then leave but leave to their seat.  These people left not to their seat but to the outside of the back doors.  There was a set of mikes on both sides of the aisles as well so no excuse here.    

Heckles were plentiful during the initial history comments of where we are in the health care process.  This was obviously set up as a repeat of the Nazi Brownshirts technical to intimidate and disorient other prospective hecklers.  Was most liberals do not realize is that conservatives want to hear both sides of an debate and determine their final decision on all facts and circumstances.  This obviously was and historically has been a technique of the far left and was extremely predominant in the Nazi Party Brownshirters in the 1930’s and 1920’s. 

One lady did get a questions through however.  She did not raise her hand upright with the palm out but had here palm out with a 45 degree angle.  Her question was original, in my opinion, because that was the only question which Mr. McDermott wrote down prior to answering the question.

Next time, Mr. McDermott answer real questions.  If you really do not know the answer just say you do not know the answer.  Do not rely on Brownshirt techniques of deception.  Say the answer to a question will be included on your website. 

Duh!  Do the right thing. 

QuestionOne:  Since the Veterans Administration is collecting and permitted to selling Veterans Medical Files around the world to anyone through the University Medical system what is to stop anyone from finding out what the Minuteman Launch codes are from a Veteran who had access to them through deception medical knowledge trickery.  An example would be someone who might be allergic to peanuts and then getting the veteran drug after inserting peanuts into their food so they are weak and asking them about three or four of the launch code numbers.  This is both a national security issue and a health privacy issue. 

Question Two:  What is to prevent selling of records also in the same fashion of Military personnel to the highest bidder and getting the DNA records of the Military personnel.  A weapon currently could detect the DNA pattern and with a flip of the switch eliminate the entire force facing an enemy.  What is their to prevent this from happening.     

You see Mr. McDermott hardball questions can make a bill stronger and not weaker and at the same time strengthen our national system.  There are reason for the current system besides just money.   

Next time, stop wasting the time of 800+ american citizens or united states citizens and answer real questions. 

Thanks


R-71Pastors/Church Guide

June 20, 2009

The way to use the below until I can change it is the first yes/no refers to Churches and the second yes/no refers to Pastors.  This reflects how someone can or cannot relate to R-71 in a Church or Pastor environment.

See also www.ProtectMarriageWA.com or R-71 for the bill information.

 

CIVIC PARTICIPATION GUIDELINES FOR PASTORS AND CHURCHES
By Mathew D. Staver, Esq.
SUPPORTING OR OPPOSING CANDIDATES CHURCH PASTOR
Endorsing or opposing political candidates No Yes
Contributions to political candidate No Yes
In-kind and independent expenditures for or against political candidates No Yes
Contributions to Political Action Committees No Yes
Appearance of political candidate at church meeting or service Yes N/A
Introduction of political candidates at church Yes Yes
Political candidate to preach or read scripture (contributions should not be solicited & message
should not urge people to vote for the candidate) Yes N/A
Voter registration programs and campaigns (non-partisan) Yes Yes
Distribution of candidate surveys and incumbent voting records (avoid editorial opinions) Yes Yes
Distribution in church parking lot of political statements and opinions on political issues (so
long as no church endorsement) Yes N/A
Rent or loan church mailing lists to political candidates (list must be made available to all
candidates on similar terms and prices) Yes N/A
Church bulletin political ads at regular price and news stories Yes N/A
Church bulletin editorial where the pastor or staff member endorses or opposes a candidate No No
Church bulletin editorial regarding political issues or two different church members take
opposing views on a candidate Yes N/A
Use of church facilities by political candidates (if all other candidates are allowed or invited) Yes N/A
Fund-raising for candidates No Yes
Campaigning for candidates No Yes
Educate members of the public about viewpoints of candidates Yes Yes
Discuss church doctrine pertaining to candidate views such as abortion Yes Yes
Granting use of name to support a political candidate No* Yes*
Support or oppose judicial, department or cabinet appointments Yes Yes
Support or oppose judicial candidates No Yes
Support or oppose other political appointments of non-elected officials Yes Yes
SUPPORTING OR OPPOSING LEGISLATION CHURCH PASTOR
Use of church facilities by lobbying groups to discuss social issues Yes N/A
Rent or loan church mailing list to lobbying groups Yes N/A
Preach sermons on social issues and political issues and activism Yes Yes
Educate on political process and political/social/legislative issues Yes Yes
Petition drives supporting or opposing legislation Yes Yes
Support or oppose legislation unrelated to the church organization Yes** Yes
Support or oppose legislation that directly relates to the organization Yes*** Yes
Encourage members to voice their opinions in favor or in opposition to certain legislation Yes** Yes
Lobby candidates to support or oppose legislation Yes** Yes
Distribute position papers supporting or opposing legislation Yes** Yes
*A pastor may include title and church affiliation in a personal endorsement along with the following notation: “Title and
affiliation for identification purposes.”
**Churches and other 501(c)3 organizations may support or oppose legislation so long as such activity comprises an
insubstantial part of the overall operation. A 501(c)4 organization may support or oppose legislation without any limitations.
***A church or any other 501(c)3 organization may without limitation support or oppose legislation that directly affects the
organizational structure and operation of the organization. For example, a church may without limitation oppose legislation
attempting to repeal the tax-exempt status of the church.
Copyright © 2000-2004. Resource: Liberty Counsel:


HB 2377 Family Medical Care and Temporary 0.3% General Sales Tax Increase

April 25, 2009

RC62 Universal Child Care Benefit and US/Canada Treaty

April 1, 2009

Concerning your Universal Child Care Benefit, Form RC62, amount for $500. This is something which is unique to Canada and the United States does not have such an items of which is from the Federal Government. So I looked and researched to see if this was taxable income to the United States.

1)  The UCCB is taxable and must be reportable as income if you need to file a tax return.

 2)  The Canadian US Tax Treaty states that if an item is not taxable to one State then that item is not taxable to another State.

3)  The spouse with the lower net income has to report this amount on line 117 of his or her return regarless of which person received the benefit.

 4)  Could not find the information but your spouse is filing married filing jointly so the spouse would have to report all worldwide income in order for you to be able to file jointly with your spouse. This would have been a prior election.

But I have determined that this $500 CAD income is not taxable on your US tax return because if your spouse were to file a tax return it would not be taxable.

Your spouse under number 3 and 4 is the only one that can claim this income. And since this is (number one) taxable income but the Revenue Canada return which is filed separately would account for no taxable income and since the treaty (number three) specifically disallowed an item from being taxable if this is not taxed in Canada then this is not taxable in the United States and this is the reason why I will not be including your UCCB amount of $500 on your US tax return.

The spouse lives in Canada and has no income.  The taxpayer lives in Canada and works in the United States under a work visa.  The spouse has previously elected to include all worldwide income in the United States income tax return.

The RC62, Universla Child Care Benefit is new for Revenue Canada income tax returns as of 2007.  The wording on the treaty was near the end of the treaty wording itself.   

This is interesting because in the United States we also as well as Canada have a daycare credit on Form 2441.  The employer can pay this amount.  This Canadian credit is designed for low income stay at home moms and would seem to be a social repayment.  If the income is too high then the amount of the benefit would slowly vanish.  In the United States the daycare credit has a maximum amount of credit benefit of 20% and does not get eliminated.  The only State where the amount is subsequently eliminated is in California which as of a few years ago limited the amount of the daycare credit to $100,000.  I believe they have been slowly increasing this amount every year by a yearly increased inflation factor.

Having fun now.


ACLU suggestions adopted in new wording for I-1043

March 4, 2009

What the news release does not indicate is that part of the credit should be going to La Raza.   La Raza was also part of the law suite with the ACLU.  The stronger wording will enhance the Initiative. 

My thanks to the ACLU, La Raza, the Thurston County Judge and also the Washington State Attorney General for all of their continuing efforts.  A stronger initiative wording is a clearer initiative wording.

I-1043_rev_by_court_order.pdf 

******************************

Media Release

Contact:

Leon Donahue, Secretary Respect Washington
Phone: (206) 935-3505
E-Mail: info@respectWashington.us
PO Box 65488, University Place, WA 98464-1488

March 2, 2009

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

ACLU suggestions adopted for New-Improved “Respect for Law” Ballot Title

Today the Washington State Secretary of State issued a revised Ballot Title for Initiative to the People No. 1043. (pdf of AG’s advisory to SS attached)

To improve understanding by petition signers and voters come the November 3rd General Election, the ACLU challenged the Attorney General’s original ballot title composition. The improved wording now reads:

BALLOT TITLE

Statement of Subject: Initiative Measure No. 1043 concerns public and private enforcement of immigration laws.

Concise Description: This measure would require state and local agencies to enforce federal immigration laws and verify immigration status to issue driver’s licenses and public benefits. All employers would have to “E-Verify” employees’ immigration status.

Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]

BALLOT MEASURE SUMMARY

This measure requires state and local agencies to assist in enforcing federal immigration laws. All private and public employers would be required to “E-Verify” immigration status of employees, subject to loss of licenses and other penalties. It would require verification of immigration status of applicants for many public benefits. Nonprofit organizations would be prohibited from offering employment services without proof of immigration status. Issuance of driver’s licenses would be prohibited without proof of immigration status.

I-1043 legislation differs only slighty from that also filed by Respect Washington in 2008 as I-409.

Refinement from I-409 include the requirement that Department of Licensing allow the Tribal Identification Card as an acceptable form of photo ID in drivers license applications. Also, the expiry of the Washington State Drivers Licenses must occur no later than the expiry date of any alien VISA. The need for stricter care by DoL’s was brought to light after it was learned that many of the 9-11 bombers traveled on valid state-issued drivers licenses even after their VISA’s had expired.

The four major pillars of I-409 remain in I-1043:

1. Empowerment all public employees to cooperate with Federal immigration authorities despite obstructionist “sanctuary city” polices in some local jurisdictions.

2. Empowerment of all employers (public, private and union halls) to verify work authorization through the US Government’s E-Verify online program. Over 100,000 US employers now participate in E-verify as their protection against the presentation of false identification documents. Since the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli Amnesty ALL employers have been required to collect this same information on paper Form I-9. (“E-verify” is a taxpayer-funded Social Security Number verification tool of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services branch of the Department of Homeland Security which every employer is today encouraged to voluntarily use without charge. See www.uscis.gov)

3. Mandate to local government to verify legal presence through the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program (similar to E-verify) prior to the gifting of taxpayer-funded benefits. Such public benefits would include tax rebates proposed by Governor Gregoire, lottery winnings and university education dollar grants to illegal aliens.

4. Mandate to Wash. St. Dept. of Licensing to verify legal presence through SAVE prior to driver’s license issuance. (After the Democrat-controlled Oregon Legislature and Governor outlawed issuance to undocumented aliens in 2008, Washington State remains one of the few states that still abets the presence of illegal aliens be issuing them drivers licenses.)

I-1043’s citizen sponsor is Mr. Wendell Hannigan who is a leader in the effort to restore law and order on the Yakama Reservation. In recent years Yakama Nation lands have become plagued with crime surrounding the drug trade. Mr. Hannigan expressed relief that, as of today, citizens of Washington State have a weapon in the I-1043 signature petition to fight the growing corruption.

“A combination of corrupt, willfully-ignorant and unwitting employment of illegal aliens has ballooned the population of illegal aliens inside the United States to a level where corruption has become institutionalized for pure profit and political power.”

“If we are a nation without laws, then we are a nation in chaos. Under the current chaos all future generations will suffer an environment of Third World corruption as is now murdering thousands annually in Mexico.”
Respect Washington’s goals for I-1043 are:

1. Reduce political party and government corruption now exploding under a racist spoils system.

2. Reduce the Washington State Budget Deficit by over $600 Million now taken from law-abidding taxpayers annually to subsidize that illegal presence of aliens and employers who prey upon their slave labor.

3. Protect the jobs of lawfully-present American workers.

4. Reduce mounting gang and drug violence that flourishes in partnership with human smuggling.

5. Improve educational opportunities for all citizens and lawfully-present aliens enrolled in Washington State public schools.

6. Improve the social safety net for all citizens and lawfully-present aliens.

To earn a place on the statewide November ballot I-1043 supporters must collect 241,153 signatures by July 3rd, 2009.

Signature petitions may be downloaded from or ordered through www.RespectWashington.us

####


Washington State Balanced Budget

March 2, 2009

Mr. Brad Klippert
 
I know you are extremely interested in balancing the budget.

My idea is if something is changed with the senior citizens and nursing home care provided by the state then with some other ideas the state budget can be balanced. 
 
1)  Pass I-1043 Illegal immigrants initiative to the people.  Judge just signed off with the attorneys on the final wording on Friday.  Savings is $1 Billion for the biennium.
 
2)  Cut the aide to children for medical insurance in half.  This aide has increased in recent years from $2 Billion to around over $4 Billion.  This increase is mainly from increasing the parents level of income for qualifying a child for acceptance into the program.  Cutting this number in half will save $2 Billion for the biennium.  Savings now total is $3 Billion.
 
3)  Implement all of Brian Sonntag’s, State Auditor Performance Audits.  I do not see the exact number now on the State Auditor’s website but this should be a little bit over or around $3 Billion.   Although savings may not be fully achieved until later years it is the start of the process.  The Port of Seattle has implemented some of the savings and the employee morale has increase substantially at the same time.  Total savings of around $6 Billion.
 
4)  Senior citizens pay for their own Nursing Home care.  If the senior citizens pay $2.5 Billion for nursing home care paid out of their social security checks in the amount of $150 per month starting at age 65 then this could balance the budget.  This is the area of the numbers which I am trying to gather together at the present time.  Total savings of around $8.5 Billion for the biennium. 

Oh, this balances the budget with a little bit of change.

 
Actually the idea is to help in the process to balance the budget and also start to get the state out of the business of providing free nursing home care.  The state should not be in the business of providing welfare medical coverage.  The CFP and present legal method is to have individuals who can pay to not have senior nursing home insurance but to have the money come out of current earnings.  Edward Jones security advisors say this is with an equity of $3.5 million or more for an individual.  But previously about 15 years ago I was informed that one with $300,000 to $650,000 in assets would not be able to be on the state without draining their bank accounts and assets nor be able to self finance.  This was when the high end of nursing home care was $55,000 per year.  The amount is about $8-9,000 per month at the present time.  Below this level the state would provide coverage.  The strategy for the two lower levels was to get your assets over to an irrevocable trust within 35 months of entering a nursing home or to pay for nursing home insurance for a better quality of life and nursing home care.  My idea would be to get people to pay 15% of their social security income starting at age 65.  The senior citizen recipient could opt out of the state system by paying for their own nursing home insurance.  Notifications would go out at around age 60 and once per year until age 65 to the senior citizens.  Eventually virtually no one except for the very low income senior citizen would be on state assistance.  
 
I was in your office on the Tuesday of the start of the full day the legislature with Craig Keller and Albert Pong.  You put the I-409/I-1043 information in a box of ideas to balance the budget.  How about $8.5 Billion savings for balancing the budget.  
 
**********************************************************
 
I have one idea which if put together with other ideas I have will balance the State budget.  But I need a little bit more information in order to see if my idea will be viable.  It would require changing the law though.
 
The idea which I am exploring will lessen the stress on the families of the senior citizens.
 
What I am trying to find out now is how many senior citizens there are in Washington State at or over 65 years of age.  My initial findings from the www.ssa.gov website indicate there are 34 million.  91% are receiving social security benefits.  This means that 9% are waiting to the age 70 1/2 to start withdrawing SS benefits.
 
 
While studying for the financial planner, I noticed some drastic financial mutations which have to be gone through for the retirement planning process.  I also realize the State is in a financial crisis.  Mixing my ideas together like a pencil with an eraser I have come up with another idea and one which might help in solving the budget deficit.
 
1)  How many senior citizens are there in Washington State.
2)  How much does each one receive in social security benefits on average. The ssa.gov website says $2715 per month but this number does not connect with what I have been seeing on tax returns.  For Washington State.
3)  How many senior citizens are on full state nursing home care which is subsidized by the state.
4)  How many total senior citizens are in Washington and on nursing home care.
5)  Same last two questions but related to in-home care.
6)  How much is the average cost of nursing home care for senior citizens.
7)  What is the average cost of nursing home care by the state for senior citizens.
8)  What is the average duration of care for state recipients and other private pay recipients.
9) What is the average age of the starting of nursing home care for senior citizens in Washington State. This would be for Washington State recipients and private pay recipients counted separately.
 
Thanking you in advance for your prompt and courteous response to the email.
 
Sincerely
 
Keith Ljunghammar, EA

keithlj.wordpress.com


Barack Obama’s address to Congress 02/24/09

February 26, 2009
Barack Obama’s address to Congress

While President Barack Obama was addressing Congress he was talking to three sets of different chambers of Congress. Not the House and the Senate but rather the Republicans and the Democrats and the American people.

If the wording of what he said does eventually come true, and I believe parts of it will come true, then the other parts will have profound implications for generations to come. However, if other parts do not come through and the continuation of political differences continue, then our economy will eventually stagnate back to its normal course and take its place in a continuing history of events.

President Nixon proposed an Earned Income Tax Credit in one of his State of the Union addresses. The proposed items had been adopted by Congress and signed into law. However, does anyone realize this was presented by President Nixon in an effort to diminish the disparity between the haves and the have not. Or really should I say to diminish the distance between the racial divide which plagued the nation at that time and going back to the Civil War and to the Declaration of Independence. Social issues still seem to be an overriding attribute of equalization which past presidents have tried to address. Some take a radical approach and some have taken a progressive approach.

Energy is one of the items on Obama’s list of needs. This list was first placed on our national agenda in the 1970’s with the oil embargo and President Nixon’s administration. Congress could not find an equilibrium and still has not been able to find an equilibrium which would bring our country out of economic disadvantage from the rest of the oil producing countries. President Obama puts this in another fashion: ”

“In other words, we have lived through an era where too often, short-term gains were prized over long-term prosperity; where we failed to look beyond the next payment, the next quarter, or the next election. A surplus became an excuse to transfer wealth to the wealthy instead of an opportunity to invest in our future. Regulations were gutted for the sake of a quick profit at the expense of a healthy market. People bought homes they knew they couldn’t afford from banks and lenders who pushed those bad loans anyway. And all the while, critical debates and difficult decisions were put off for some other time on some other day.”

The finding of new sources of energy should be of a paramount goal for other goals may lead to other less savory short-term goals which only can bring on lesser achievements and lower profits in the long-run. Short-term profits always will remain short-term profits unless the long-term profits are first met.

The Pilgrims suffered for the long-term profit of establishing a settlement where they could worship God as they wanted to. The short-term profit of going south for warmth was not achieved and numerous settler passed away. But yet today their long-term goals are still being strived for as our country continues to worship God in an independent and respectful fashion. The reasoning behind “In God We Trust” becomes stronger as each generation passes the torch. A strong energy independent economy will help in the worshipping of God. Sources of oil in the Gulf and in the upper northern states need to be explored and come to fruitfulness for our continuing independence and for the joy of worshipping God.

God is still in control. From the time China unites with the United States over a common enemy to the United States once again becoming the salt of the earth our energy independence and non-reliance upon other countries would help in transforming the world once again to a vision which would be a full respecter of God and His wishes.

I read in the paper today that North Korea will be testing a rocket which could reach the United States. I believe this will be a uniting factor between the United States and China. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The small sayings can become true statements in the joining of forces.

“Now is the time to act boldly and wisely…”

When acting boldly and wisely the writers and signers of the Declaration knew that boldness and only boldness would unite the country. A single man helped in that endeavor, Thomas Payne, by writing a pamphlet called “Common Sense”. Is our country past common sense. I dare to say ‘No’. Do we need to act boldly now, ‘Yes’. But reacting wisely is also of importance. Thomas Jefferson was bold in his writing of the original draft of the Declaration of Independence. Others thought it not wise to include the freeing of slaves. The wisdom was thought we would not have a United States but a North and a South. The slave issue finally was arrested in the fighting of the Civil War. In times of unrest our Country has surrounded the independent spirit and the respect of everyone to worship God in their own way. A few people demanding that we respect the earth while not allowing others to respect the earth by drilling to uncovers its riches is a hindrance to our independence and of our founding father’s desire to worship God in their own fashion.

“As soon as I took office, I asked this Congress to send me a recovery plan by President’s Day that would put people back to work and put money in their pockets. Not because I believe in bigger government–I don’t.”

This is a revelation to both sides of the aisle. A democrat not wanting bigger government is like saying one is a Republican. Maybe the Republicans should listen and if this comes true they should adopt President Obama as a Republican. Not just yet though.

“Over the next two years, this plan will save or create 3.5 million jobs.

More than 90% of these jobs will be in the private sector — jobs rebuilding our roads and bridges; constructing wind turbines and solar panels; laying broadband and expanding mass transit.”

Mr. President, these may be from the private sector as in construction jobs but the money and the reasoning would be for the benefit of the government bureaucracy. Roads and bridges and mass transit are objectives of government. Turbines and solar panels would be the exception only to this. But some of this may become sources of ownership by big government. Please excuse my skepticism but this still sounds like big government. If the government would get out of the way then private citizens could build their own solar panels on their property and take the funds out of their IRA or ROTH/IRA and without a penalty or taxing the retirement fund then true individuals could build their own wealth by eliminating the need for government intervention. Government has a few roles but the creation of jobs can never be the result of government except when they get out of the way so the citizens can create.

“Because of this plan, there are teachers who can now keep their jobs and educate our kids.”

Building roads and bridges, constructing wind turbines and solar panels; laying broadband and expanding mass transit does not create jobs for teachers and educate our kids. Sorry but the logic does not flow.

“Because of this plan, 95% of the working households in America will receive a tax cut…” It would seem to me if our real estate taxes were cut to the level in which the value of the house is then a bigger tax cut would be coming to 100% of the working households in America. The smaller the government the bigger the tax cut.

Education has always been of concern to Thomas Jefferson. He even had one slave cook for him in a French Cooking style for five years and then let the slave go. I never have heard if the former slave opened up a restaurant in Washington, D.C. or not. Sometimes holding onto an asset is for the betterment of one. Letting it go could be for the benefit of many. Ditto with Oil. Ditto with letting the citizens develop their own source of energy independence. The collection of the many can be for the benefit of the whole and stronger than the whole also.

Government by mandate is not the solution to our economy woes but in reality the letting go of government will be the releasing of our independence. Government pressure and trying to be helpful is what got us into this mess in the first place. But placing this issue as a national project is what might save us. Stop right there. If government got us into this mess then government should get out of the way so the independent thinking can voice victory and victory should not be that of the government.

“I have appointed a proven and aggressive Inspector General to ferret out any and all cases of waste and fraud.” This is merely an endeavor to express your concern of resolving big government while really not proving your case. Only if waste and fraud are truly eliminated will anyone be able to respect this statement. Past Presidents have stood fast to this principle but only one has achieved this as a goal. Instead of cleaning up the government I say that not the yearly debt to be reduced in half by four years but rather the debt of the United States needs to be nullified in four years period of time. Being independent and the size of government being small can accomplish this feat. With $700 billion in oil imports costing us each year the multiplier of current money flow being 12X if independence of energy can be achieved then the complete budget deficit can be erased.

“…we clean up the credit crisis…”

If I see legislation which restricts the usage of credit card debt which must be paid within three months then I will believe this is a solution to the credit crisis. Forgiveness of all credit card debt longer than six months would greatly increase the capacity of independence and reduce high interest rates. The credit card industry has severely weakened our financial system and needs a reminder of constraint. Reducing the need for and access to credit card indebtedness is the only way to”…swiftly and aggressively to break this destructive cycle, restore confidence, and restart lending.”

If you are really trying to “reform our out-dated regulatory system” then you will indeed need to adopt a tough credit card policy which would bring a “…tough, new common-sense rules of the road so that our financial market rewards drive and innovation, and punishes shortcuts and abuse.”

“The only way this century will be another American century is if we confront at least the price of our dependence on oil and the high cost of health care: the schools that aren’t preparing our children and the mountain of debt they stand to inherit. That is our responsibility.” …. “I see it as a vision for America – as a blueprint for our future.”

“I reject the view that says our problems will simply take care of themselves; that says government has no role in laying the foundation for our common prosperity.”

But I would rather say that the problem is with government and the solution is really instructing the spirit of independence to squash the lack of enthusiasm and embrace the need for independence.

Again, government has laid the foundation for independence through the forming of IRA and ROTH/IRAs. Now is the time for government to allow the independent spirit of being able to use these funds for solar cells and wind power generation in ones own home. No tax penalty and no income tax upon withdrawal. Take the roadblocks to financial success out of the independent thinkers. The collection of IRAs and ROTH/IRAs is greater than the communistic collective governments of China’s government.

A recent wave power project for the Neah Bay Tribe in the Northwest corner of the State of Washington by a Canadian firm in Vancouver, B.C. was recently discontinued and another project picked up for construction in Ireland instead was started. Was this because big government was the solution or because the company did not know if they would be paid. Washington State is in financially dyre straight and the company also discontinued a like project in California in favor of Ireland. Noting that a 10 miles by 10 mile area in the ocean can produce a great amount of electric energy for the state. Also, on the Washington coast south of Neah Bay is where no human lives for 23 miles. Neah Bay project was projected to create electricity for 150 homes. A rather small project but a start for the state.

All sources of energy need to be explored. Did the Spanish explorers stop at the east coast.

Putting a “market-based cap on carbon pollution” will only drive our existing infrastructure into a tailspin. This is like saying to depression era unemployed citizens that they need to pay a higher tax so the workers can get jobs.

There are three things which economists say create economies.

1) Land

2) Labor

3) Capital

But I say there is a different method to economies. There are three things which can create a new economy.

1) Farming

2) Extracting Minerals

and the last one is

3) Innovation.

In no way is government in this mix. If government wants to be the one contributing capital then the solution is still there. But the locomotive was an innovation. The other five items were needed. Our country expanded. When the innovation of the auto assembly line was constructed by Henry Ford the others were used and increased. With President Eisenhower’s use of innovation and the highway system the other forces came in usage and created wealth. A more efficient farming system was one of the major benefactors.

But if the extracting of oil is not continued but rather punished then the objective of developing “our recovery plan, we will double this nation’s supply of renewable energy in the next three years” then in fact this could stall this three year plan as well. To decrease an existing innovation with a tax is essentially saying to the economy to slow-down.

Eisenhower did not eliminate all new or existing roads.

The train system did not replace the road.

The assembly line did not mandate all older systems to terminate.

If something is better than a prior technology then the prior technology will soon have a modified usage. Taxing it was not done in the past nor was it necessary or useful. The free market took over. Taxing a drill, baby, drill philosophy will not create the oppressors objectives of immediately depressing the older technology but will suppress the economy so the funds for the new segment will take longer and thus require the continuation of the older system.

If you are trying to not believe in “Big Government” but you “make clean, renewable energy the profitable kind of energy” then you are in-fact creating “Big-Government”. Big Government is the problem and not the solution.

Asking “Congress to send me legislation that places a market-based cap on carbon pollution and drives the production of more renewable energy in America.” If Congress tries to create a market-based cap then this is not a market-based cap. It is a government-based cap. The devil is in the interpretation. Market vs. Government. If government invests “fifteen billion dollars a year to develop technologies like wind power and solar power, advanced biofuels, clean coal, and more fuel-efficient cars and trucks built right here in America” then the government does not need to create a market-based cap. The innovation will create this and the market would be the solution. The auto industry will then by itself be required to be self “retooled, re-imagined auto industry that can compete and win. Millions of jobs depend on it.”

“…We must also address the crushing cost of health care.”

 

I am not seeing any new solutions for or from government here. Neither do I expect a real solution from government here. I think that only a natural solution is possible. The adherence to God’s principles can truly increase the need and longevity of life. The suppression via drugs which mask symptoms is at best artificial. Creative yes, but artificial.

“Promise of education in America.”

“Right now, three-quarters of the fastest-growing occupations require more than a high school diploma.” The definition of Labor from above needs to include education. If an adequate labor force is not available then the efficient usage of capital will not be needed. A competitive cradle to college objective has already been the prior government objective and a new system of education needs to be explored. Trying and throwing funds at the old style or old system will not improve the system. But if the system has been tried then by all means “expand our commitment to charter schools”.

I think about the innovation of the pencil when it comes to schools. The lead attachment was used and then a separate eraser was picked up and used if needed. Well, our education system does to have an eraser attached to it so the immediate extra steps of picking up the eraser do need to be exercised.

The education system needs to adopt the non-public system as an attachment to the public school system. With innovation some students parents could actually pay for the cost of the salary of a teacher. But in the non-public school system they can charge a higher price and get highly skilled professional teachers. To see a teacher without a doctoral degree in some private schools is rare. Only the exceptional masters degree teachers could apply. The eraser part of this would be the invitation of one or two students from the main school populace to be invited for one semester into the class of 8 or 10 students for a recognition of other accomplishments and achievements which the parents have voted in. This would instill a higher achievement level in the other students to achieve so they possibly could be selected as fellow high achiever students. Those parents willing to expend extra funds for the professor teacher would be rewarded with a higher capacity of learning available in a public school setting and the school system would get a better general student. The higher cost of private education would be mitigated modestly.

“And we must also begin a conversation on how to do the same for Social Security, while creating tax-free universal savings accounts for all Americans.” I thought this was tried in the Bush administration era. An immediate introduction of this and not even out of the batters box or the racing gate.

The military is still the backbone of all types and styles of economies. The foundation blocks of Land, Labor and Capital and the building blocks of Farming, Extracting Minerals and Innovation could not exist without any pre-existing strength from a well-qualified military force. The defending of the strength of these foundation blocks begins with the steady hand of the military.

A child who can utter the words of “we are not quitters” with conviction and steadfastness is showing off her strength as a David, as a Ruth as a Daniel or as a Mary. Her conviction should motivate the rest of us.

END