<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>OutSourcedNews-Group &#187; 10</title>
	<atom:link href="http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/10/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng</link>
	<description>You don&#039;t need to regulate FREEDOM</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 18:46:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>All they do is make criminals and violators of otherwise average people.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/23/all-they-do-is-make-criminals-and-violators-of-otherwise-average-people/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/23/all-they-do-is-make-criminals-and-violators-of-otherwise-average-people/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 16:31:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Albuquerque Police Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Buffalo Niagara International Airport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DUI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ET]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ID]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[korea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MADD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marivel Sotelo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Phil Mocek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[San Francisco]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transit Police Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transportation Security Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TSA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=32124</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/22/2012 10:45 PM, clairbear wrote: > &#8220;Sid9&#8243; wrote in news:jphdkh$rkk$1 @&#038;*$?%dont-email.me: > >> >> &#8220;jigo&#8221; wrote in message >> news:4fbc2be5$0$14812$607ed4bc @&#038;*$?%cv.net&#8230; >>> Sid9 wrote: >>>> >>>> &#8220;jigo&#8221; wrote in message >>>> news:4fbc1732$0$14808$607ed4bc @&#038;*$?%cv.net&#8230; >>>>> Sid9 wrote: >>>>>> &#8220;clairbear&#8221; wrote in message >>>>>> news:XnsA05ABDA4B535Eclairbear @&#038;*$?%216.196.97.142&#8230; >>>>>>> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; wrote in >>>>>>> news:jpeff6$20d$1 @&#038;*$?%dont-email.me: >>>>>>>> &#8220;Alan Baker&#8221; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/22/2012 <strong>10</strong>:45 PM, clairbear wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @ bellsouth.net> wrote in news:jphdkh$rkk$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dont-email.me:<br />
><br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;jigo&#8221; <retired @home.com> wrote in message<br />
>> news:4fbc2be5$0$14812$607ed4bc<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>cv.net&#8230;<br />
>>> Sid9 wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> &#8220;jigo&#8221; </retired><retired @home.com> wrote in message<br />
>>>> news:4fbc1732$0$14808$607ed4bc<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>cv.net&#8230;<br />
>>>>> Sid9 wrote:<br />
>>>>>> &#8220;clairbear&#8221; <sidisabitrary @msn.com> wrote in message<br />
>>>>>> news:XnsA05ABDA4B535Eclairbear<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>216.196.97.142&#8230;<br />
>>>>>>> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @ bellsouth.net> wrote in<br />
>>>>>>> news:jpeff6$20d$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dont-email.me:<br />
>>>>>>>> &#8220;Alan Baker&#8221; <alangbaker @telus.net> wrote in message<br />
>>>>> <snip headers><br />
>>>>>>>>> <a href="http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&#038;sid=20443602&#038;title=police-want-to-" >http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&#038;sid=20443602&#038;title=police-want-to-</a><br />
>>>>>>> sc<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any time you have an agency, the agency will try to<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> survive and grow. There is no end to the excuses they will<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> use to justify any hair brained scheme.<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This looks like they have more people than tasks, and need<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> people cut, instead of creating work.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> You hit the nail right on the head. Police and most government<br />
>>>>> agencies are constantly on the lookout for more things to do to<br />
>>>>> justify more spending and <strong>power</strong> for them. So in my state we have<br />
>>>>> cops being posted at motor vehicle agencies (the excuse being that<br />
>>>>> they might catch a terrorist applying for a license), at<br />
>>>>> construction sites and road work sites (the cost of course being<br />
>>>>> passed to the consumer, and answering calls for medical assistance,<br />
>>>>> even though they can&#8217;t do any good.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> The <strong>TSA</strong> has refused to allow airports to switch to private<br />
>>>>> screeners though it&#8217;s been shown the <strong>TSA</strong> is less efficient, costs<br />
>>>>> ten times as much, and often abuses passengers and steals from<br />
>>>>> their luggage.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> <a href="http://www.elliott.org/blog/tsa-backtracks-on-private-screeners-" >http://www.elliott.org/blog/tsa-backtracks-on-private-screeners-</a><br />
> amid<br />
>>>>> -more-lawsuits/<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> It&#8217;s not hard to image how much louder the public outcry would have<br />
>>>>> been during the pat-down controversy last year if the<br />
>>>>> <strong>Transportation Security Administration</strong> had also shut down it<br />
>>>>> Screening Partnership Program, which allowed airports to privatize<br />
>>>>> their security.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> After all, private screeners were seen as a loophole to avoid<br />
>>>>> increasingly aggressive federal transportation security officers.<br />
>>>>> Several airports were reportedly considering &#8220;firing&#8221; their <strong>TSA</strong><br />
>>>>> screeners after the new body-scanners began appearing, accompanied<br />
>>>>> by more intrusive physical searches.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> In short, the program was an escape valve through which the<br />
>>>>> traveling public let out a steam of rage. Had it not been there,<br />
>>>>> who knows what would have happened?<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> But here&#8217;s more evidence that the federal agency charged with<br />
>>>>> protecting our transportation systems understands the importance of<br />
>>>>> timing.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> At some point, the <strong>TSA</strong> will probably require the privatized<br />
>>>>> airports &#8211; including <strong>San Francisco</strong> International Airport and Kansas<br />
>>>>> City International Airport &#8211; to revert back to federal screeners,<br />
>>>>> even though many frequent travelers to Screening Partnership<br />
>>>>> Program airports say they&#8217;ve experienced significantly better<br />
>>>>> service and less intrusive and abusive searches.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Meanwhile, the <strong>TSA</strong>&#8216;s troubles have gone from bad to worse.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> A <strong>Transit Police Department</strong> officer was suspended on Thursday for<br />
>>>>> <strong>10</strong> days without pay after he admitted keeping more than 1,000 items<br />
>>>>> that <strong>TSA</strong> agents confiscated at Buffalo Niagara International<br />
>>>>> Airport over several years, according to a report in the Buffalo<br />
>>>>> News.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Then there&#8217;s the case of <strong>Phil Mocek</strong>, a Seattle software developer<br />
>>>>> arrested last year for refusing to show <strong>ID</strong> to <strong>TSA</strong> agents. He was<br />
>>>>> acquitted earlier this month by an Albuquerque jury. You can see<br />
>>>>> the cell phone recording of his arrest at the top of this post. It<br />
>>>>> is deeply troubling and shows an abusive federal agency that is<br />
>>>>> unaware of its own rules.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> The <strong>TSA</strong> spin machine shifted into high gear after the stunning<br />
>>>>> loss, insisting Mocek had &#8220;appeared to be trying to film sensitive<br />
>>>>> security information related to <strong>TSA</strong> standard operating procedures<br />
>>>>> on <strong>ID</strong> verification.&#8221; Which is, of course, complete nonsense.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Oh yeah, and that airport bombing in Russia? Turns out the <strong>TSA</strong><br />
>>>>> wouldn&#8217;t have been able to stop a similar attack in the States.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Here&#8217;s the bottom line: The <strong>TSA</strong> is the laughingstock of the<br />
>>>>> aviation world. Its public image is worse than the rent-a-cops it<br />
>>>>> replaced in 2002. We&#8217;re at the point where the only practical<br />
>>>>> solution is to push the &#8220;reboot&#8221; button. Nothing less than a<br />
>>>>> complete overhaul of the agency and its practices will fix this<br />
>>>>> mess.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>><br />
>>>>> The &#8220;Body&#8221; (Jesse Ventura) doesn&#8217;t want anyone touching his body.<br />
>>>>> Look up &#8220;irony&#8221; in<br />
>>>>> the dictionary.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Low blow.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Nor do I. I was sexually assaulted as a condition of flying at the<br />
>>>>> Vegas airport. I had a ticket I&#8217;d paid for to <strong>San Francisco</strong>, and<br />
>>>>> another ticket from <strong>SF</strong> home to <strong>LA</strong>, and an already-paid-for <strong>SF</strong> hotel<br />
>>>>> room at a newspaper conference I had to be at. This was before the<br />
>>>>> recent <strong>TSA</strong> stuff (last January) and I&#8217;m still disturbed by it, and<br />
>>>>> I&#8217;m no priss, but an advice columnist who gets letters about<br />
>>>>> people&#8217;s weird sexual issues, among other things.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Flying has become a normal way of getting around in this country<br />
>>>>> and the government doesn&#8217;t get to make (useless and unreasonable)<br />
>>>>> searches, sans probable cause, a prerequisite. What&#8217;s my<br />
>>>>> boyfriend&#8217;s choice? (He flies to Detroit from <strong>LA</strong> every two weeks<br />
>>>>> for his work.) Does he hitchhike or take a Greyhound for two days?<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> If anyone with a reading level that&#8217;s adequate to understand your<br />
>>>>> column, Chris, wanted to sneak something onto a plane to blow it<br />
>>>>> up, they could. They might have to have partners, but they could<br />
>>>>> manage to get a combo of things on.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> A Like Reply 1 year ago<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> I&#8217;ve traveled by train and car to avoid all the headaches and<br />
>>>>> frustrations of airport security in the past year. I haven&#8217;t flown<br />
>>>>> ONCE. And I can&#8217;t say I miss it. The removing of shoes, belts,<br />
>>>>> emptying pockets, having to open carry-ons, place toiletries in a<br />
>>>>> separate container is an absolute joke. It&#8217;s a circus act everyone<br />
>>>>> has to go through to just travel for business or leisure. It takes<br />
>>>>> the fun out of traveling, flying, and getting away from home. I&#8217;ve<br />
>>>>> had so many items taken from me that were not supposed to be<br />
>>>>> confiscated. But you can never win with the authorities -<br />
>>>>> especially if you have a plane to catch for important meetings.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> It&#8217;s not only our rights being taken away, but our dignity as well.<br />
>>>>> Being shuffled into security lanes, being treated as terrorists by<br />
>>>>> going through scanners or intrusive pat-downs, going through the<br />
>>>>> circus act of removing every imaginable object. It&#8217;s embarrassing<br />
>>>>> that this is how we treat other people. It&#8217;s even more embarrassing<br />
>>>>> to the world when they travel through our country. We&#8217;re really<br />
>>>>> that paranoid? give me a break. Our government is doing everything<br />
>>>>> possible and imaginable to find out more about us and to put us<br />
>>>>> into a state of fear.<br />
>>>>> that is it. I cannot stand the terrible ordeal that flying has<br />
>>>>> become.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Christopher Elliott, Consumer advocate and journalist.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Un-effing-believable. No, wait, this is <strong>TSA</strong> we&#8217;re talking<br />
>>>>> about. &#8220;These guys are worse than <strong>TSA</strong> when it comes to treating<br />
>>>>> people respectfully and with dignity.&#8221; And yet, NONE of these<br />
>>>>> stories regarding airport security are coming from those airports<br />
>>>>> which have private companies handling security, rather than <strong>TSA</strong>. I<br />
>>>>> think you&#8217;ve got it completely wrong, as <strong>TSA</strong>&#8216;s agents have proven<br />
>>>>> time and again that they have no training, no skills, and are<br />
>>>>> utterly incompetent.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> If someone is at the airport going through security, we&#8217;re on our<br />
>>>>> way to a destination &#8220;somewhere else&#8221;. Given we have a limited<br />
>>>>> amount of time to get to our gate, we have no choice but to comply<br />
>>>>> with either the porn-o-scan or &#8220;gate rape&#8221; to get there. If we<br />
>>>>> remotely raise our concerns at the airport, we will find ourselves<br />
>>>>> subjected to more abuse, probably missing our flight.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> <strong>TSA</strong> has us over a barrel and they know it. They also take advantage<br />
>>>>> of it as has been evidenced by numerous videos taken by the airport<br />
>>>>> security cameras as well as cell phones.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> A mother doesn&#8217;t want her breast milk x-rayed? She misses her<br />
>>>>> flight. A man doesn&#8217;t want someone to &#8220;touch his junk&#8221; and he is<br />
>>>>> asked to leave the airport.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> This is all government sanctioned molestation and they take<br />
>>>>> advantage of the <strong>power</strong> they wield to bully us all into submission.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> When Obama compared himself to Abraham Lincoln I knew we were in<br />
>>>>> for trouble. Habeas Corpus was a joke to Old Abe and it&#8217;s a joke to<br />
>>>>> Obama.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> I wonder if <strong>Phil Mocek</strong> would be able to sue Albuquerque Police<br />
>>>>> Department on basis of wrong imprisonment because as it looks like<br />
>>>>> he was not causing trouble in order to be arrested.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> A Like Reply 1 year ago<br />
>>>>> <strong>TSA</strong> Tightens Fascist Grip; Stamps Out Competition &#8221; Cynical Synapse<br />
>>>>> 01/30/2011 03:16 PM<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> <strong>TSA</strong> arrests teacher for having heavy bookmark<br />
>>>>><br />
> <a href="http://www.sptimes.com/2004/09/17/Hillsborough/Tourist_s_crime_Totin" >http://www.sptimes.com/2004/09/17/Hillsborough/Tourist_s_crime_Totin</a><br />
>>>>> .shtml<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Tourist&#8217;s crime? Toting bookmark<br />
>>>>> St. Petersburg Times <excerpt><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2004-08-12-screeners-" >http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2004-08-12-screeners-</a><br />
> theft_x.htm<br />
>>>>> Four NYC airport screeners charged with theft<br />
>>>>> Posted 8/12/2004 9:38 AM<br />
>>>>> NEW YORK (<strong>AP</strong>) &#8211; Four federal security screeners were charged with<br />
>>>>> stealing watches, jewelry and other property from baggage at two<br />
>>>>> New York City airports, authorities said Wednesday.<br />
>>>>> One screener was accused of stealing $40 in cash, watches and rings<br />
>>>>> from luggage sent by undercover detectives last week through<br />
>>>>> screening at the American Airlines terminal at John F. Kennedy<br />
>>>>> International Airport.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> A search of the man&#8217;s apartment later revealed watches, pens,<br />
>>>>> cigarette lighters and other merchandise that had also been planted<br />
>>>>> by undercover agents to go through screening, Queens District<br />
>>>>> Attorney Richard Brown said.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> 0-screener-theft.htm</a><br />
>>>>> 07/11/2003 &#8211; Updated <strong>10</strong>:59 AM <strong>ET</strong><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Airport security screener charged with stealing cash from bag<br />
>>>>> Have airport screeners damaged your luggage?<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> PHILADELPHIA (<strong>AP</strong>) &#8211; Federal prosecutors charged a government<br />
>>>>> security screener Thursday with stealing cash from a person&#8217;s<br />
>>>>> belongings at Philadelphia International Airport.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> The criminal complaint said <strong>Transportation Security Administration</strong><br />
>>>>> screener Calvin Sanders, 42, of Philadelphia, took $273 from a<br />
>>>>> passenger who passed through a terminal checkpoint on April 6.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> news/2003/07/10http://news4colorado.com/investigates/local_story_<br />
> 194<br />
>>>>> 194943.html<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Airport Security Checkpoint Theft<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Jul 12, 2004 5:39 pm US/Mountain<br />
>>>>> DENVER (News 4) <strong>Transportation Security Administration</strong> security<br />
>>>>> workers at airports across the country are charged with stealing<br />
>>>>> from the passengers they are supposed to protect, and now a News 4<br />
>>>>> investigation has found a series of theft complaints against <strong>TSA</strong><br />
>>>>> screeners at Denver International Airport.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Two months ago, <strong>TSA</strong> screener Steven McCumber was convicted of<br />
>>>>> stealing $700 from <strong>Marivel Sotelo</strong>&#8216;s wallet.<br />
>>>>> [That's just a few examples}<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> What's wrong with computer generated speeding tickets?<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> Speeders are a serious danger to the public.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> The police don't use this as an efficiency measure to prevent<br />
>>>>> crime. It's pure PR on their part, trying to make it seem they're<br />
>>>>> becoming better. In fact, if you take the trouble to look up the<br />
>>>>> data, you'll see that the police do more harm than good. The<br />
>>>>> percentage of crimes that they solve is miniscule. They have no<br />
>>>>> significant effect on the crime rate, and they routinely stop,<br />
>>>>> harass, arrest, and even beat and kill innocent people (mainly to<br />
>>>>> show they're doing something).<br />
>>>>> <a href="https://sites.google.com/site/thepolicedomoreharmthangood/" >https://sites.google.com/site/thepolicedomoreharmthangood/</a><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> There is no "inherent danger" in exceeding and arbitrary number<br />
>>>>>>>>> written on a piece of metal.<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> The arbitrary number on a piece of metal is the law.<br />
>>>>>>>> You don’t like the law?<br />
>>>>>>>> Don’t drive or try to get it changed.<br />
>>>>>>>> About 40% of our vehicular deaths result from speeding.<br />
>>>>>>> You say but it does not makit true where's the proof of you<br />
>>>>>>> arbitrary 40% Drunk drivers are far more the cause of vehicular<br />
>>>>>>> deaths<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> Those "arbitrary" numbers are set by traffic engineers who know<br />
>>>>>>>> the subject a lot better than you do.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> A lot of them fudge the statistics to make them come out the way<br />
>>>>> hey want. Here's an excerpt from a recent article about how certain<br />
>>>>> organizations and government agencies fudge <strong>DUI</strong> statistics:<br />
>>>>><br />
> --------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
>>>>> ---- A RIDL for <strong>MADD</strong><br />
>>>>> --Paul Mulshine, Newark Star-Ledger, 20 July 2003<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> I got my renewed car registration in the mail the other day. With<br />
>>>>> it was a notice about drunken driving. It included the following<br />
>>>>> statement: "Nearly half of all fatal accidents involve a drunken<br />
>>>>> driver."...[The Department of Motor Vehicles] had gotten the<br />
>>>>> information from Mothers Against Drunk Driving (<strong>MADD</strong>): &#8220;In 2002,<br />
>>>>> 17,970 people were killed in crashes involving alcohol,<br />
>>>>> representing 42% of the 42,850 people killed in all traffic<br />
>>>>> crashes.&#8221;&#8230;<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> [A] National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration<br />
>>>>> spokesman&#8230;pointed out that the &#8220;alcohol-related&#8221; category<br />
>>>>> employed by <strong>MADD</strong> includes a great number of accidents in which the<br />
>>>>> participants were either not drunk or not driving. If a car hits<br />
>>>>> you as you walk across the street after having a glass of wine with<br />
>>>>> dinner, for example, then the 0.01 blood-alcohol <strong>content</strong> in your<br />
>>>>> corpse will be sufficient for NHTSA to classify your untimely<br />
>>>>> demise as alcohol-related&#8211;even though the driver was totally<br />
>>>>> sober&#8230;.NHTSA statistics [show that only] about 21% of drivers in<br />
>>>>> fatal accidents have a blood-alcohol <strong>content</strong> above 0.08 [the new,<br />
>>>>> lower national standard for drunk driving]<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> RIDL (Responsibility in <strong>DUI</strong> Laws, <a href="http://www.ridl.us" >www.ridl.us</a>) director&#8230;computer<br />
>>>>> scientist Jeanne Pruett said of <strong>MADD</strong>, &#8220;They&#8217;re trying desperately<br />
>>>>> to make the problem worse than it is. They have to justify their<br />
>>>>> existence.&#8221;<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> The actual number of people killed annually in accidents involving<br />
>>>>> drunken drivers is not 18,000 per year but 7,500&#8230;and most of<br />
>>>>> those victims are the drunken drivers themselves. For example,<br />
>>>>> almost a third of the drunken drivers involved in fatal crashes are<br />
>>>>> on motorcycles. Many others kill only themselves when they run off<br />
>>>>> the road late at night&#8230;.The number of innocent people killed by<br />
>>>>> drunken drivers is about 2,500 annually.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> <end quote><br />
>>>>><br />
> &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;<br />
>>>>> &#8212;- My postscript: Even that last figure is an exaggeration, since<br />
>>>>> it assumes that the drunk drivers caused all the accidents they<br />
>>>>> were involved in and that the accident was due to the alcohol. In<br />
>>>>> many cases, they may be driving perfectly well and be hit by a<br />
>>>>> sober driver. There was one famous case of a guy convicted of a<br />
>>>>> drunk-driving fatality where he was just stopped at a traffic light<br />
>>>>> and was rear-ended by a sober driver.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> The DEA made similar claims about marijuana not long ago&#8211;that<br />
>>>>> nearly half of reckless drivers tested positive&#8211;which were<br />
>>>>> similarly shown to be fudging the statistics. And just taking drugs<br />
>>>>> in itself is no more a real crime than drinking alcohol is. Reminds<br />
>>>>> me of that quote by H. L. Mencken&#8211;<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> &#8220;The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace in a<br />
>>>>> continual state of alarm (and hence clamorous to be led to safety)<br />
>>>>> by menacing them with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them<br />
>>>>> imaginary.&#8221;<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Automated speed screening and ticketing uses LESS police personnel<br />
>>>> and should produce safer roads.<br />
>>>> Intersection cameras have already reduced intersection collisions.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Where we had two motorcycle cops at an intersection we now have<br />
>>>> cameras on duty catching red light violators and no police.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> 21st Century solutions for old problems.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Do you really think that will lead to fewer cops and save <strong>money</strong>?<br />
>>> Theoretically it could, but the police will fight tooth and nail for<br />
>>> keeping their numbers and their overtime pay. The politicians will<br />
>>> support them because politicians know that the police unions wield a<br />
>>> lot of <strong>power</strong> in <strong>money</strong> and votes.<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>> .<br />
>> .<br />
>> My only issue is driving safety.<br />
>><br />
>> I believe speeding will be inhibited by continuous monitoring and<br />
>> enforcement of driving speed limitss.<br />
> At least 90% of drivers speed at some point 75% speed regularly<br />
> arcording to a source quoted here You really think camera speed traps<br />
> will stop speeding if people know where they are they may not speed<br />
> there If you want a big brother world why don&#8217;t you just move to North<br />
> <strong>Korea</strong><br />
> Next time somebody assaults or robs you try calling a camera and see<br />
> what happens</p>
<p>Passing laws that NOT popular, is a losing plan&#8230;..  it&#8217;s also counter<br />
to the idea of this voter driven Constitutional government where most<br />
laws and regulations require a majority of &#8220;representatives&#8221;  so either<br />
they are NOT the Majority passing these or they are NOT representative<br />
of what the people wanted.</p>
<p>Prohibition was destined to fail as are drug laws and speeding laws.<br />
All they do is make criminals and violators of otherwise average people.</p>
<p>The speed should be different in the lanes and Left lanes <strong>10</strong> MPH faster<br />
than the slow lane.   Drugs and alcohol should be treated the same&#8230;<br />
Legal, regulated and taxed by the States as originally intended.</p>
<p></end></excerpt></snip></alangbaker></sid9></sidisabitrary></retired></sid9></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/23/all-they-do-is-make-criminals-and-violators-of-otherwise-average-people/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Even he doesn&#8217;t believe him.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/21/even-he-doesnt-believe-him/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/21/even-he-doesnt-believe-him/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 03:05:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Klaus Schadenfreude]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=32068</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/21/2012 10:24 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote: >> Too_Many_Tools wrote in talk.politics.guns : >> On May 20, 2:01 pm, Too_Many_Tools wrote: >>> On May 20, 12:08 am, Too_Many_Tools wrote: > > Are you THAT lonely you need to reply to yourself? He discovered how stupid he is and couldn&#8217;t agree with his own propaganda. He [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/21/2012 <strong>10</strong>:24 PM, <strong>Klaus Schadenfreude</strong> wrote:<br />
>> Too_Many_Tools <too_many_tools @yahoo.com> wrote in talk.politics.<strong>guns</strong> :<br />
>> On May 20, 2:01 pm, Too_Many_Tools <too_many_to ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>> On May 20, 12:08 am, Too_Many_Tools </too_many_to><too_many_to ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
> Are you THAT lonely you need to reply to yourself?</p>
<p>He discovered how stupid he is and couldn&#8217;t agree with his own<br />
propaganda.  He repeats the garbage the <strong>DNC</strong> faxed him and then when he<br />
read it&#8230;..  well he didn&#8217;t know he was that stupid.</p>
<p>Even he doesn&#8217;t believe him.</p>
<p></too_many_to></too_many_tools></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/21/even-he-doesnt-believe-him/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why We Regulate</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/21/why-we-regulate/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/21/why-we-regulate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 02:37:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Common Good]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Denigrating America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=32064</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/21/2012 10:02 PM, Clave wrote: > &#8220;Oglethorpe&#8221; wrote in message > news:Dv2dnYw4Nfr5difSnZ2dnUVZ_qOdnZ2d @&#038;*$?%mchsi.com&#8230; >> >> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; wrote in message >> news:jp5ujq$jor$1 @&#038;*$?%dont-email.me&#8230; >>> >>> &#8220;Werner&#8221; wrote in message >>> news:b3704ea3-6acf-428d-a662-2ee4d7fcb7ef @&#038;*$?%googlegroups.com&#8230; >>>> This is not just limited to CEOs. I have jet to hear demands for fewer >>>> benefits by Medicaid recipients when local [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/21/2012 <strong>10</strong>:02 PM, Clave wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Oglethorpe&#8221; <antikerry @go.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:Dv2dnYw4Nfr5difSnZ2dnUVZ_qOdnZ2d<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>mchsi.com&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @ bellsouth.net> wrote in message<br />
>> news:jp5ujq$jor$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dont-email.me&#8230;<br />
>>><br />
>>> &#8220;Werner&#8221; <whetzner @mac.com> wrote in message<br />
>>> news:b3704ea3-6acf-428d-a662-2ee4d7fcb7ef<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>>>> This is not just limited to CEOs. I have jet to hear demands for fewer<br />
>>>> benefits by Medicaid recipients when local governments have difficulty<br />
>>>> funding their health care, for example. Provide examples of wanting less<br />
>>>> from <strong>Congress</strong>. The country finds itlesf bankrupt. Who demands less for<br />
>>>> The <strong>Common Good</strong>? <a href="http://www.EndIt.info/how.html" >http://www.EndIt.info/how.html</a><br />
>>> .<br />
>>> .<br />
>>> .<br />
>>> There you go again.<br />
>>> <strong>Denigrating America</strong>.<br />
>>> America is not bankrupt&#8230;that&#8217;s a Republican lie.<br />
>><br />
>> America is broke. It&#8217;s not a lie&#8230;<br />
><br />
> It most certainly is a lie &#8212; you&#8217;ve just been told to believe it, so you<br />
> do.</p>
<p>Where does our <strong>money</strong> come from?</p>
<p>48 cents of every dollar that government spends is borrowed and they<br />
print a bunch too.</p>
<p>Why do people with <strong>money</strong> borrow half of their cost of living?</p>
<p>> No soveriegn nation is &#8220;broke&#8221; if it&#8217;s able to sell its debt, and the <strong>US</strong> is<br />
> in no trouble at all that way.</p>
<p>you can print <strong>money</strong>  but who says we will use it?</p>
<p>> The sky is not falling &#8212; it doesn&#8217;t matter how many times you repeat that<br />
> it is.</p>
<p>is anything floating up to the sky?    One way is rapture and the other<br />
is economic/political collapse.</p>
<p>What&#8217;s the forecast for the sky tomorrow?</p>
<p></whetzner></sid9></antikerry></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/21/why-we-regulate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If Climate Scientists Thing Denier Logic Is Bad . . .</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/20/if-climate-scientists-thing-denier-logic-is-bad/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/20/if-climate-scientists-thing-denier-logic-is-bad/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 02:45:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[41]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AGW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BEST]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CO2]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=32034</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/20/2012 10:41 PM, James wrote: > &#8220;Bret Cahill&#8221; wrote in message > news:5e9a5deb-2360-4f28-bb5f-dac079d9f258 @&#038;*$?%pr7g2000pbb.googlegroups.com >> Typically a denier will start off denying that the earth is warming. >> If you get the denier past that stage then he&#8217;ll deny that the warming >> is a problem. After the BEST study they were denying that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/20/2012 <strong>10</strong>:<strong>41</strong> PM, James wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Bret Cahill&#8221; <bret_e_cahill @yahoo.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:5e9a5deb-2360-4f28-bb5f-dac079d9f258<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>pr7g2000pbb.googlegroups.com<br />
>> Typically a denier will start off denying that the earth is warming.<br />
>> If you get the denier past that stage then he&#8217;ll deny that the warming<br />
>> is a problem.  After the <strong>BEST</strong> study they were denying that it&#8217;s caused<br />
>> by human created <strong>CO2</strong>.  If you get the denier past that stage then<br />
>> he&#8217;ll deny more <strong>CO2</strong> is a problem.  And so on.  (This really needs to<br />
>> be flow charted.)<br />
>><br />
>> Anyway, if you think <strong>AGW</strong> denier rationalizations are bad consider the<br />
>> recent teabagger glee on Texas executions of the innocent.<br />
>><br />
>> As recently as 8 years ago W. Bush was denying the State of Texas was<br />
>> executing the innocent.  In a &#8220;reorientation&#8221; that would put <strong>climate</strong><br />
>> <strong>change</strong> deniers to shame teabaggers are now snickering justifying even<br />
>> cheering the deaths of the innocent.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Bret Cahill<br />
><br />
> We know that people are full of <acronym title="shit"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> s&*$?%t</span></acronym> when they start out saying one<br />
> thing and end up slamming Bush. So yesterday Bret!</p>
<p>If he had said that last week, it would have been so yesterday&#8230;..</p>
<p></bret_e_cahill></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/20/if-climate-scientists-thing-denier-logic-is-bad/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>All Low Tax Low Education Advocates Want To Kill Professors, Teachers and Intellectuals</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/20/all-low-tax-low-education-advocates-want-to-kill-professors-teachers-and-intellectuals/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/20/all-low-tax-low-education-advocates-want-to-kill-professors-teachers-and-intellectuals/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 16:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cambodia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ideology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[KNOWLEDGE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[libertarians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mediocrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pol Pot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialist Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TOGETHER]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZOMBIE]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=32000</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/20/2012 10:55 AM, Bret Cahill wrote: >>>> Note: he&#8217;s not talking about intelligence, but rather intellectuals. >>> Never the twain shall meet. > >>> That&#8217;s exactly what the nazis and Pol Pot said before they killed >>> them. > >> The commies in Cambodia killed everyone with an education. > > It starts out [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/20/2012 <strong>10</strong>:55 AM, Bret Cahill wrote:<br />
>>>> Note: he&#8217;s not talking about intelligence, but rather intellectuals.<br />
>>> Never the twain <strong>shall</strong> meet.<br />
><br />
>>> That&#8217;s exactly what the nazis and <strong>Pol Pot</strong> said before they killed<br />
>>> them.<br />
><br />
>> The commies in <strong>Cambodia</strong> killed everyone with an education.<br />
><br />
> It starts out like that then the low tax low education <strong>libertarians</strong>/<br />
> nazis/commies [despots] start killing everyone.<br />
><br />
> The reasons <strong>libertarians</strong> want to kill intellectuals from the beginning<br />
> should be pretty clear.<br />
><br />
> High school drop out <strong>libertarians</strong> see themselves at a competitive<br />
> disadvantage to anyone with an education every time they fill out an<br />
> employment application.  Libertarians are so eaten up by envy they<br />
> want to level the playing field by keeping as many as possible as<br />
> ignorant as they are.<br />
><br />
> Why Oh Why would <strong>libertarians</strong> want to pay <strong>taxes</strong> for educating others<br />
> so _others_ can get ahead?<br />
><br />
> Moreover, government and political activism requires a certain amount<br />
> of sophistication.  Libertarians are too simple minded to play that<br />
> game so they are envious of those active in gummint.  They think they<br />
> can level the playing field by &#8220;getting rid of gummint.&#8221;<br />
><br />
> The envy and hate builds up until <strong>libertarians</strong> become bat <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym><br />
> insane.  This was confirmed by the recent teabagger glee on executions<br />
> of the innocent.  As recently as 8 years ago W. Bush was denying state<br />
> executions of the innocent in Texas.  In a &#8220;reorientation&#8221; that would<br />
> put <strong>climate</strong> <strong>change</strong> deniers to shame teabaggers are now cheering the<br />
> deaths of the innocent.<br />
></p>
<p>You&#8217;ve fallen into your own trap&#8230;.  you&#8217;ve just confirmed that you<br />
believe that people who go to a college are &#8220;smarter&#8221;  and yet an<br />
education is far from a measure of smart or a height of being<br />
successful.  It&#8217;s supposed to be a starting point and you have been<br />
indoctrinated to believe it&#8217;s the &#8220;coup de grace&#8221; as if you have reached<br />
your peak.</p>
<p>Dollar for dollar you get billionaires that are smart that dropped out<br />
of college to actually make their Billions.</p>
<p>I can remember before I went to college and after, and I can say that<br />
college didn&#8217;t make anyone I met, smart.  They retained some data and<br />
information but much of that was suspect and outright lies from<br />
professors who presumed themselves Omnipotent and superior to all.</p>
<p>College gave them some education and mostly misinformed them of the<br />
facts and never taught them how to obtain or use knowledge but instead<br />
worked at *filling their heads with already formed conclusions*. Maybe<br />
it was just the professors vanity that had them by the balls, but they<br />
presumed to have all the correct answers and they teach what they know<br />
don&#8217;t they.</p>
<p>ALL <strong>TOGETHER</strong> what I witnessed was more like indoctrination rather than<br />
mind expanding tactics to grow individuals, it was more of a mind<br />
hobbling that created misdirection and compliance.  I suspect it&#8217;s why<br />
so many Billionaires left college or didn&#8217;t go, they discovered that<br />
<strong>KNOWLEDGE</strong> is useless if you have no ability to apply it correctly.  Time<br />
spent learning the wrong things (<strong>LIES</strong>) is time wasted.</p>
<p>Better to have fewer facts and preconceived conclusions and still be<br />
able to apply the information you have and discover more that you need<br />
than to have a lot of useless information with a smattering of lies and<br />
no ability to apply it or discriminate between the truth and lies or any<br />
imagination to discover new information that&#8217;s useful.</p>
<p>I say the people that will accomplish truly great things, avoid the trap<br />
of modern colleges with their preconceived conclusions on <strong>Socialist<br />
Philosophy</strong>&#8230;..  College has become the place to churn out carbon copies<br />
and <strong>ZOMBIE</strong> workers.  The failure of the professors are directly<br />
connected to their failed <strong>ideology</strong> of <strong>Socialism</strong>. Everywhere you apply<br />
the <strong>ideology</strong> of <strong>Socialism</strong> which is the <strong>ideology</strong> of <strong>mediocrity</strong>, it<br />
spreads failure.  Colleges cost more and produce less and what garbage<br />
is taught spreads like casting seed to the wind, it multiplies and the<br />
resulting Socialist <strong>mediocrity</strong> creates even more failure. Stupidity is<br />
infinite, genius is finite.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/20/all-low-tax-low-education-advocates-want-to-kill-professors-teachers-and-intellectuals/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The continued use of race to pit one group against another has always been a Democrat trait and it continues today.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/20/the-continued-use-of-race-to-pit-one-group-against-another-has-always-been-a-democrat-trait-and-it-continues-today/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/20/the-continued-use-of-race-to-pit-one-group-against-another-has-always-been-a-democrat-trait-and-it-continues-today/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 05:27:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CONSERVATIVES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Racist Flag]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RIGHTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[STATES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yoorghis Jurgis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31986</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/19/2012 11:33 PM, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: > On Sat, 19 May 2012 14:28:12 +0000 (UTC), &#8220;First.Post&#8221; > wrote: > >>>>> I don&#8217;t know what rights laws will want to change >>>>> next, something horrible maybe, like giving women >>>>> the right to go topless like men. >>>> >>>> Or letting women vote. Or letting [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/19/2012 <strong>11</strong>:33 PM, <a href="mailto:Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net">Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
> On Sat, 19 May 2012 14:28:12 +0000 (UTC), &#8220;First.Post&#8221;<br />
> <occupierdumberthandirt @invalid.org> wrote:<br />
><br />
>>>>>       I don&#8217;t know what rights laws will want to change<br />
>>>>> next, something horrible maybe, like giving women<br />
>>>>> the right to go topless like men.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Or letting women vote. Or letting blacks vote..<br />
>>><br />
>>>        When were they stopped?<br />
>>><br />
>> Like most lib posters, Travesty doesn&#8217;t have anything real to <acronym title="bitch"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> b&*$?%h</span></acronym> about<br />
>> so they lie.  Truth of the matter is, historically the democratic party<br />
>> fought against giving both blacks and women the vote.<br />
><br />
> No, it&#8217;s called diversion<br />
><br />
> The Dixiecrats and southern democrats were <strong>CONSERVATIVES</strong></p>
<p>["As Vice President of the United States in 1865, he succeeded <strong>Abraham<br />
Lincoln</strong> following the latter's assassination. Johnson then presided over<br />
the initial and contentious Reconstruction era of the United States<br />
following the <strong>American Civil</strong> <strong>War</strong>. Johnson's reconstruction policies<br />
failed to promote the rights of the Freed men, and he came under<br />
vigorous political attack from Republicans, ending in his impeachment by<br />
the U.S. House of Representatives; he was acquitted by the U.S. Senate."]</p>
<p>Members of the Democrat party&#8230;..?</p>
<p>And still more Republicans as a percentage voted for the 1964 civil<br />
rights act.</p>
<p>Which means that <strong>Democrats</strong> were always the obstacle to civil rights.<br />
And still are as they Discriminate to curry favor from certain voting<br />
blocks.  The continued use of race to pit one group against another has<br />
always been a Democrat trait and it continues today.</p>
<p>> The same ideological positions of 19th and most of the 20th century<br />
> conservatives who denied equal rights and civil rights are embodied<br />
> today in republican party politics.</p>
<p>When did Republicans deny civil rights, was it when Lincoln freed the<br />
slaves?   Was it when Grant imposed reconstruction, or was it in 1964?</p>
<p>>  That includes the &#8220;States rights&#8221;<br />
> plank used to justify segregation, and the use of the <strong>Racist Flag</strong><br />
> conservatives began flying over southern state capitals.</p>
<p>States <strong>RIGHTS</strong> is just that&#8230;.. it has zero to do with Slavery since<br />
Slavery has been made unconstitutional and therefore NOT a States Right.</p>
<p>The 14th amendment ended States Rights to discriminate&#8230;. so you are<br />
including items in States rights that are actually <strong>Federal</strong> powers and or<br />
powers prohibited to the States and NO longer States decisions and you<br />
don&#8217;t even understand that what you attribute to States Rights is all wrong.</p>
<p>You are so ignorant that you don&#8217;t even know that 1865-1900 they changed<br />
the constitution so the position on States <strong>RIGHTS</strong> also changed, and by<br />
being for States <strong>RIGHTS</strong>, Republicans were all about States *NOT* having<br />
the right to discriminate or have slavery&#8230;. To the point that they<br />
<strong>IMPEACHED</strong> <strong>Andrew Johnson</strong> for his failure to promote the <strong>RIGHTS</strong> of the<br />
slaves that were free. The <strong>Federal</strong> Government under <strong>Democrats</strong> like<br />
Woodrow Wilson enacted segregation laws.  It was <strong>Democrats</strong> that passed<br />
laws that made it illegal for blacks to vote.</p>
<p><strong>AMENDMENT</strong> XIV</p>
<p>Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.</p>
<p>Note: Article I, section 2, of the <strong>Constitution</strong> was modified by section<br />
2 of the 14th amendment.<br />
Section 1.</p>
<p>All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the<br />
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State<br />
wherein they reside. No State <strong>shall</strong> make or enforce any law which <strong>shall</strong><br />
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;<br />
*nor <strong>shall</strong> any State deprive any person of life, liberty*, or<br />
*property*, without due process of law; nor deny to *any person* within<br />
its jurisdiction the *equal protection of the laws*.</p>
<p>["Amendment X<br />
The powers not delegated to the United States by the <strong>Constitution</strong>, nor<br />
*prohibited by it to the States*, are reserved to the States<br />
respectively, or to the people."]</p>
<p>&#8220;<strong>PROHIBITED</strong> BY IT TO THE <strong>STATES</strong>&#8220;&#8230;.   So the <strong>STATES</strong> <strong>RIGHTS</strong> in amendment<br />
<strong>10</strong> reaffirms that slavery is banned from the States jurisdiction.   It<br />
is prohibited to the States by the constitution in the 13th amendment.<br />
And it is clear that Slavery is NOT a power delegated to or reserved to<br />
the States.</p>
<p>Why would you be against that? YOU ARE A <strong>FOOL</strong>.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s incredible that you swallow that propaganda from the LEFT with the<br />
total rewrite of <strong>HISTORY</strong>.  You need to spend some time researching and<br />
verifying what Liberal-Socialists tell you, I find that they are LIARS.</p>
<p></occupierdumberthandirt></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/20/the-continued-use-of-race-to-pit-one-group-against-another-has-always-been-a-democrat-trait-and-it-continues-today/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reaching out to ALL Americans with more First Post Numbing stupidity</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/19/reaching-out-to-all-americans-with-more-first-post-numbing-stupidity/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/19/reaching-out-to-all-americans-with-more-first-post-numbing-stupidity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 04:58:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CONSERVATIVES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[First Post]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FOOL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Note Article]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Sat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PROHIBITED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Racist Flag]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RIGHTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[STATES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yoorghis Jurgis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31984</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/19/2012 11:33 PM, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: > On Sat, 19 May 2012 14:28:12 +0000 (UTC), &#8220;First.Post&#8221; > wrote: > >>>>> I don&#8217;t know what rights laws will want to change >>>>> next, something horrible maybe, like giving women >>>>> the right to go topless like men. >>>> >>>> Or letting women vote. Or letting [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/19/2012 <strong>11</strong>:33 PM, <a href="mailto:Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net">Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Sat</strong>, 19 May 2012 14:28:12 +0000 (<strong>UTC</strong>), &#8220;First.Post&#8221;<br />
> <occupierdumberthandirt @invalid.org> wrote:<br />
><br />
>>>>>       I don&#8217;t know what rights laws will want to change<br />
>>>>> next, something horrible maybe, like giving women<br />
>>>>> the right to go topless like men.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Or letting women vote. Or letting blacks vote..<br />
>>><br />
>>>        When were they stopped?<br />
>>><br />
>> Like most lib posters, Travesty doesn&#8217;t have anything real to <acronym title="bitch"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> b&*$?%h</span></acronym> about<br />
>> so they lie.  Truth of the matter is, historically the democratic party<br />
>> fought against giving both blacks and women the vote.<br />
><br />
> No, it&#8217;s called diversion<br />
><br />
> The Dixiecrats and southern democrats were <strong>CONSERVATIVES</strong></p>
<p>Members of the Democrat party&#8230;..</p>
<p>And still more Republicans as a percentage voted for the 1964 civil<br />
rights act.</p>
<p>Which means that <strong>Democrats</strong> were the obstacle to civil rights.</p>
<p>> The same ideological positions of 19th and most of the 20th century<br />
> conservatives who denied equal rights and civil rights are embodied<br />
> today in republican party politics.</p>
<p>When did Republicans deny civil rights, was it when Lincoln freed the<br />
slaves?   Was it when Grant imposed reconstruction, or was it in 1964?</p>
<p>>  That includes the &#8220;States rights&#8221;<br />
> plank used to justify segregation, and the use of the <strong>Racist Flag</strong><br />
> conservatives began flying over southern state capitals.</p>
<p>States <strong>RIGHTS</strong> is just that it has zero to do with Slavery since Slavery<br />
has been made unconstitutional and therefore NOT a States Right.</p>
<p>The 14ht amendment ended States Rights to discriminate&#8230;. so you are<br />
including items in States rights that are actually <strong>Federal</strong> powers and or<br />
powers prohibited to the States and NO longer States decisions and you<br />
don&#8217;t even understand that what you attribute to States Rights is all wrong.</p>
<p>You are so ignorant that you don&#8217;t even know that 1865-1900 they changed<br />
the constitution so the position on States <strong>RIGHTS</strong> also changed, and by<br />
being for States <strong>RIGHTS</strong> they were all about States *NOT* having the<br />
right to discriminate or have slavery&#8230;.  The <strong>Federal</strong> Government under<br />
<strong>Democrats</strong> like Woodrow Wilson enacted segregation laws.  It was<br />
<strong>Democrats</strong> that passed laws that made it illegal for blacks to vote.</p>
<p><strong>AMENDMENT</strong> XIV</p>
<p>Passed by <strong>Congress</strong> June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.</p>
<p>Note: Article I, section 2, of the <strong>Constitution</strong> was modified by section<br />
2 of the 14th amendment.<br />
Section 1.</p>
<p>All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the<br />
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State<br />
wherein they reside. No State <strong>shall</strong> make or enforce any law which <strong>shall</strong><br />
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;<br />
*nor <strong>shall</strong> any State deprive any person of life, liberty*, or<br />
*property*, without due process of law; nor deny to *any person* within<br />
its jurisdiction the *equal protection of the laws*.</p>
<p>["Amendment X<br />
The powers not delegated to the United States by the <strong>Constitution</strong>, nor<br />
*prohibited by it to the States*, are reserved to the States<br />
respectively, or to the people."]</p>
<p>&#8220;<strong>PROHIBITED</strong> BY IT TO THE <strong>STATES</strong>&#8220;&#8230;.   So the <strong>STATES</strong> <strong>RIGHTS</strong> in amendment<br />
<strong>10</strong> reaffirms that slavery is banned from the States jurisdiction.   It<br />
is prohibited to the States by the constitution in the 13th amendment.<br />
And it is clear that Slavery is NOT a <strong>power</strong> delegated to or reserved to<br />
the States.</p>
<p>Why would you be against that? YOU ARE A <strong>FOOL</strong>.</p>
<p></occupierdumberthandirt></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/19/reaching-out-to-all-americans-with-more-first-post-numbing-stupidity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The more government grows and borrows and the more interest we pay, the less of a standard of living you will enjoy.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/19/the-more-government-grows-and-borrows-and-the-more-interest-we-pay-the-less-of-a-standard-of-living-you-will-enjoy-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/19/the-more-government-grows-and-borrows-and-the-more-interest-we-pay-the-less-of-a-standard-of-living-you-will-enjoy-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 04:02:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COSTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Increasing America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[INTEREST]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Middle-East]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATIONAL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PIE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senator Barack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[share]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SKY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TGR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31982</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[> On Sun, 13 May 2012 08:58:30 -0500, jim < "sjedgingN0Sp"@m @&#038;*$?%mwt.net> > wrote: > >> emoneyjoe wrote: >> >>>> That would create inflation. >>> >>> Probably not, the thing that causes the >>> most inflation is things that drive up costs, >>> like wage increases, and scarcity, so what >>> is scarce today? >> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>> On Sun, 13 May 2012 08:58:30 -0500, jim < "sjedgingN0Sp"@m<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>mwt.net><br />
> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> emoneyjoe wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> That would create inflation.<br />
>>><br />
>>>       Probably not, the thing that causes the<br />
>>> most inflation is things that drive up costs,<br />
>>> like wage increases, and scarcity, so what<br />
>>> is scarce today?<br />
>><br />
>> Money is scarce due to private sector<br />
>> no longer borrowing $4 trillion like they<br />
>> did in 2007.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>><br />
>>>        Or any other product, service or tangible<br />
>>> offered for sale, if the <strong>money</strong> was gained honestly,<br />
>>> why wouldn&#8217;t <strong>money</strong> in the hands of a China man<br />
>>> be the same as for any other man.<br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> First you claim the bond buyers are going to<br />
>> put the <strong>money</strong> in the bank and not buy goods and services<br />
>> that cause inflation. Then you claim that they will<br />
>> use the trillions to buy goods and services<br />
>> that do cause inflation<br />
>><br />
>> The fact is the <strong>SS</strong> recipients are already<br />
>> spending the <strong>money</strong> once. You want twice as<br />
>> much $$ spent but insist there will be no inflation<br />
>>from doing that.<br />
><br />
>        No, I don&#8217;t, no I don&#8217;t, I don&#8217;t, just the same<br />
> pay  out, without borrowing, it is congress that<br />
> has already spent the <strong>SS</strong> trust fund and has to<br />
> borrow if the treasury needs any of the virtual<br />
> trust fund to pay pensions.<br />
>       The only way to do that is create emoney.<br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
>> Inflation is what costs me <strong>money</strong>.<br />
>> The interest on the federal debt costs me and<br />
>> my grandchildren nothing.</p>
<p>["<strong>TGR</strong>: How long will it take for the U.S. to get to the bang point?</p>
<p><strong>LH</strong>: We really don't know. A lot of economic analysis historically has<br />
downplayed the role of debt. I've done an exhaustive search of the<br />
literature, and never found a model that indicates when you reach the<br />
bang point. A host of parameters can play into the situation, but one of<br />
the triggering elements concerns the percentage of the revenue base of<br />
the governmental entity that must go to interest expense. As the<br />
interest expense rises, it absorbs a bigger and bigger portion of the<br />
revenue."]</p>
<p>More interest on debt creates more taxes and more inflation and I was in<br />
a few stores just yesterday and it&#8217;s NOT getting any cheaper out there<br />
to live.</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png" >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png</a></p>
<p>Government uses more of the <strong>GDP</strong> to pay the interest on the National debt<br />
as they increase the size and cost of Government.</p>
<p>["The argument for using <strong>GDP</strong> as a standard-of-living proxy is not that<br />
it is a good indicator of the absolute level of standard of living, but<br />
that living standards tend to move with per-capita <strong>GDP</strong>, so that changes<br />
in living standards are readily detected through changes in <strong>GDP</strong>."]</p>
<p>The higher the percentage of the <strong>GDP</strong> that goes to paying government debt<br />
(interest on the debt) the less your quality of living will be.</p>
<p>Why does the equation for the <strong>GDP</strong> NOT have government spending minus the<br />
government payment of interest on the debt as part of the equation.</p>
<p>["    <strong>GDP</strong> = private consumption + gross investment + government spending<br />
+ (exports ? imports), or</p>
<p><strong>GDP</strong> = C + I + G + ( X - M )    "]</p>
<p>You see government spending but where is the cost to the <strong>GDP</strong> of that<br />
government spending&#8230;.    It should be</p>
<p><strong>GDP</strong> = C + I + (G &#8211; <strong>INTEREST</strong> ON <strong>NATIONAL</strong> DEBT) + (X &#8211; M)</p>
<p>If you are going to add what the government spends to help the economy<br />
then you need to add what they are costing the economy also.</p>
<p>They have conveniently left out a huge part of the <strong>GDP</strong> which is interest<br />
on the National debt and it&#8217;s slated to be as much as our <strong>MILITARY</strong> <strong>COSTS</strong><br />
IN A FEW YEARS.</p>
<p>["<strong>Federal</strong> debt as a <strong>share</strong> of the nation's income has varied.<br />
Historically, the nation has run up deficits during wars and recessions,<br />
but then debt has subsequently declined. For example, debt as a <strong>share</strong> of<br />
the economy peaked just after World War II (112.7% of <strong>GDP</strong> in 1945), but<br />
then fell. In recent years, however, sharp increases in deficits and the<br />
resulting increases in debt have led to heightened concern about the<br />
long-term sustainability of the federal government's fiscal policies<br />
(62% of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010).[9]&#8230;..</p>
<p>Debt relative to <strong>GDP</strong> rose due to recessions and policy decisions in the<br />
early 21st century. *From* 2000 to 2008 *debt held by the public rose*<br />
from 35% to 40%, and to 62% by the *end of fiscal year* 2010.[19] During<br />
the presidency of George W. Bush, the gross public debt <strong>increased</strong> from<br />
$5.7 trillion in January 2001 to $<strong>10</strong>.7 trillion by December 2008,[20]<br />
due in part to the Bush tax cuts and <strong>increased</strong> military spending caused<br />
by the wars in the <strong>Middle East</strong>.[21] Under President Barack Obama, the<br />
debt <strong>increased</strong> from $<strong>10</strong>.7 trillion in 2008 to $15.5 trillion by February<br />
2012,[22] caused mainly by decreased tax revenue and higher safety net<br />
costs due to the late-2000s recession and stimulus spending.[12]&#8220;]</p>
<p>*Debt is up 22% since Obama took over.*</p>
<p>Even more since we have 2011 DATA and the National Debt is at 100% of<br />
<strong>GDP</strong>.  I notice that no one is updating the data that makes Obama look bad.</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Federal_debt_to_GDP_-_2000_to_2010.png" >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Federal_debt_to_GDP_-_2000_to_2010.png</a></p>
<p>["The federal government's interest payments depend primarily on<br />
interest rates and the amount of debt held by the public. Other factors,<br />
such as the rate of inflation and the maturity structure of outstanding<br />
securities, also affect interest costs (for example, long-term bonds<br />
generally carry higher interest rates than do short-term bills).<br />
Interest rates are determined by a combination of market forces and the<br />
policies of the <strong>Federal</strong> Reserve. Debt held by the public is determined<br />
mostly by cumulative budget deficits, which depend on policy choices<br />
about spending and revenues and on economic conditions and other factors.</p>
<p>Although *the federal government has <strong>increased</strong> its net borrowing* by<br />
more than $3 *trillion in the past two years*, net interest costs<br />
dropped from $253 billion in 2008 to $197 billion in 2010 because of<br />
remarkably low interest rates. The amounts of net interest shown in the<br />
budget include interest paid on all Treasury securities ($413 billion in<br />
2010), minus the portion of that interest that is received by trust<br />
funds ($186 billion in 2010) and the net amount of other interest<br />
received by the government ($30 billion in 2010). The last category<br />
consists primarily of net receipts to the Treasury from the financing<br />
accounts for federal loan programs (those accounts are not included in<br />
the federal budget).</p>
<p>In CBO's most recent projections, which assume that current laws remain<br />
the same, annual deficits decline from the $1.3 trillion recorded in<br />
2010, but the cumulative deficit from 2011 through 2020 exceeds $6.2<br />
trillion. Borrowing to finance that deficit--in combination with an<br />
expected rise in interest rates--would lead to a fourfold increase in<br />
net interest payments over the next <strong>10</strong> years, from $197 billion in 2010<br />
to $778 billion in 2020. As a percentage of <strong>GDP</strong>, net interest outlays<br />
would more than double during that period, rising from 1.4 percent to<br />
3.4 percent."]</p>
<p>Looks like the cost of the interest as part of the <strong>GDP</strong> doubles and what<br />
is bad is that the *<strong>PIE</strong> IN THE <strong>SKY</strong>* HOPE AND <strong>CHANGE</strong> is making things<br />
worse and NOT better as they predicted so you can imagine all these<br />
numbers being much worse as in more than doubling them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>All those good numbers are with Obama and the <strong>Federal</strong> reserve<br />
MANIPULATING interest rates and the economy&#8230;. what happens when they<br />
can no longer afford to manipulate this phony economy?</p>
<p>The more government grows and borrows and the more interest we pay, the<br />
less of a standard of living you will enjoy.</p>
<p>“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America &#8216;s debt limit<br />
is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the <strong>US</strong> Government<br />
cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing<br />
financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government&#8217;s<br />
reckless fiscal policies. <strong>Increasing America</strong> &#8216;s debt weakens us<br />
domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, &#8220;the buck stops<br />
here.&#8217; Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today<br />
onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt<br />
problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”<br />
*<strong>Senator Barack</strong> H. Obama, March 2006*</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/19/the-more-government-grows-and-borrows-and-the-more-interest-we-pay-the-less-of-a-standard-of-living-you-will-enjoy-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How California&#8217;s budget blunders led to my divorce from the Golden State</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/19/how-californias-budget-blunders-led-to-my-divorce-from-the-golden-state/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/19/how-californias-budget-blunders-led-to-my-divorce-from-the-golden-state/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 15:43:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Golden State]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liberal Socialist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sanders Kaufman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31938</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/18/2012 10:05 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote: > &#8220;Leroy N. Soetoro&#8221; wrote in message > news:XnsA057A9897CE4E6F089P2473 @&#038;*$?%202.177.16.121&#8230; > > Beginning with their attitudes towards oil and gas exploration, > California obstructs traditional energy production, preferring instead > > So &#8211; racists hate California because the beaches are clean. > California is poor because they pay [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/18/2012 <strong>10</strong>:05 PM, <strong>Sanders Kaufman</strong> wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Leroy N. Soetoro&#8221;  wrote in message<br />
> news:XnsA057A9897CE4E6F089P2473<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>202.177.16.121&#8230;<br />
><br />
> Beginning with their attitudes towards oil and gas exploration,<br />
> California obstructs traditional energy production, preferring instead<br />
><br />
> So &#8211; racists hate California because the beaches are clean.<br />
><br />
California is poor because they pay too many <strong>taxes</strong> and get nothing but<br />
Liberal-Socialist propaganda and indoctrination for all that tax <strong>money</strong>.</p>
<p>When you waste your <strong>money</strong> on useless status symbols&#8230;.  you get poor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/19/how-californias-budget-blunders-led-to-my-divorce-from-the-golden-state/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Generation Hobbled [Enslaved] by the Soaring Cost of College</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/19/a-generation-hobbled-enslaved-by-the-soaring-cost-of-college/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/19/a-generation-hobbled-enslaved-by-the-soaring-cost-of-college/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 15:29:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ADA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ANDREW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BREECH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eddie Haskell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harvard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Juris Diction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEHREN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MARTIN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MSM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NOTHING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ohio Kelsey Griffith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31934</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[> In article > &#60;4ca841fc-88ba-4571-bde8-c261e735f650 @&#038;*$?%d6g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, > Too_Many_Tools wrote: > >> On May 16, 10:49 am, &#8220;Eddie Haskell&#8221; wrote: >>> &#8220;Juris Diction&#8221; wrote in message >>> >>> news:iwas-C16E17.16465415052012 @&#038;*$?%news.shawcable.net&#8230; >>> >>>> In article , >>>> &#8220;Leroy N. Soetoro&#8221; wrote: >>> >>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/business/student-loans-weighing-dow&#8230; >>>>> generation-with-heavy-debt.html?src=me&#038;ref=general >>> >>>>> By ANDREW MARTIN and ANDREW W. LEHREN >>> >>>>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>> In article<br />
> &lt;4ca841fc-88ba-4571-bde8-c261e735f650<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>d6g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>,<br />
>  Too_Many_Tools <too_many_tools @yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On May 16, <strong>10</strong>:49 am, &#8220;<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong>&#8221; <rghr ...@sasas.com> wrote:<br />
>>> &#8220;<strong>Juris Diction</strong>&#8221; <i ...@theditch.com> wrote in message<br />
>>><br />
>>> news:iwas-C16E17.16465415052012<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>news.shawcable.net&#8230;<br />
>>><br />
>>>> In article <xnsa0549d8b43b46f089p2 ...@202.177.16.121>,<br />
>>>> &#8220;Leroy N. Soetoro&#8221; <leroysoet ...@usurper.org> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>>> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/business/student-loans-weighing-dow..." >http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/business/student-loans-weighing-dow&#8230;</a><br />
>>>>> generation-with-heavy-debt.html?src=me&#038;ref=general<br />
>>><br />
>>>>> By <strong>ANDREW</strong> <strong>MARTIN</strong> and <strong>ANDREW</strong> W. <strong>LEHREN</strong><br />
>>><br />
>>>>> <strong>ADA</strong>, Ohio ‹ Kelsey Griffith graduates on Sunday from Ohio Northern<br />
>>>>> University. To start paying off her $120,000 in student debt,<br />
>>><br />
>>>> Republicans vote down bill not to raise interest rates on student loans.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Because democrats irresponsibly refuse to pay for it so they will have a<br />
>>> campaign issue after the Goebbels <strong>MSM</strong> refuses to tell the public that fact.<br />
>>><br />
>>> <strong>DNC</strong> shameless butt <acronym title="fucking"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> f&*$?%g</span></acronym> lie #42467475:<br />
>>><br />
>>> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/iW8zN25q3sE&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /><br />
>>><br />
>>> -<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong><br />
>><br />
>> Nope it is a Repubican shameless butt fu*king truth <a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/666/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#666</a><br />
>><br />
>> Every college student will be voting for Obama.</p>
<p>And getting the Worthless education they deserve, just like Obama&#8217;s<br />
worthless <strong>Harvard</strong> Education.</p>
<p>Learning <strong>NOTHING</strong> but <strong>Socialism</strong> that always fails, is a waste of time, so<br />
far Obama&#8217;s education hasn&#8217;t helped him fix any problems we have and<br />
that will be the case in every government subsidized and affirmative<br />
action Socialist education.</p>
<p>The whole educational cornerstone is based on values that are known<br />
failures, and like anything built on a faulty foundation it will fail<br />
and be useless just like Obama.</p>
<p></leroysoet></xnsa0549d8b43b46f089p2></i></rghr></too_many_tools></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/19/a-generation-hobbled-enslaved-by-the-soaring-cost-of-college/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;intellectual RIGHTS&#8221;  have been overlooked as a taxable property for far too long.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/18/intellectual-rights-have-been-overlooked-as-a-taxable-property-for-far-too-long/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/18/intellectual-rights-have-been-overlooked-as-a-taxable-property-for-far-too-long/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 17:54:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eddie Haskell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IQ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IRS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oliver Wendell Holmes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RIGHTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wealth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31916</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message > news:8c4eccb5-30e0-46a6-b5aa-6f4b624c1878 @&#038;*$?%t2g2000pbl.googlegroups.com&#8230; > On May 18, 11:42 am, &#8220;Eddie Haskell&#8221; wrote: >> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message >> >> news:0719e841-631a-4ab1-a570-1235721cfce8 @&#038;*$?%n8g2000pbv.googlegroups.com&#8230; >> On May 18, 10:23 am, &#8220;Eddie Haskell&#8221; wrote: >> >> >> >>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message >> >>> news:b21e775c-a45e-485d-b6da-5a08db5067eb @&#038;*$?%e9g2000pbh.googlegroups.com&#8230; >>> On May 18, 4:20 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <video61 @tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
> news:8c4eccb5-30e0-46a6-b5aa-6f4b624c1878<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>t2g2000pbl.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
> On May 18, <strong>11</strong>:42 am, &#8220;<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong>&#8221; <rghr ...@sasas.com> wrote:<br />
>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>> news:0719e841-631a-4ab1-a570-1235721cfce8<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>n8g2000pbv.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>> On May 18, <strong>10</strong>:<strong>23</strong> am, &#8220;<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong>&#8221; <rghr ...@sasas.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>>> news:b21e775c-a45e-485d-b6da-5a08db5067eb<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>e9g2000pbh.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>>> On May 18, 4:20 am, Ubiquitous <web ...@polaris.net> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> could it be that you are a <strong>wealth</strong> worshiper perhaps:)))) the human<br />
>>>> race has always had those that pander to <strong>wealth</strong> and <strong>power</strong>. we call<br />
>>>> them brown noses:))))))<br />
>><br />
>>> What we have today are people that pander to stupidity greed and envy,<br />
>>> and<br />
>>> that would be the <strong>DNC</strong> to you, you low <strong>IQ</strong> monkey <acronym title="fucker"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> f&*$?%r</span></acronym>.<br />
>><br />
>>> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/54jr3Ceu894&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /><br />
>><br />
>>> -<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong><br />
>>> aristocracies always say to the pheasants they are envious. i am sure<br />
>>> the french aristocracy thought god would save them also.<br />
>>> &#8220;Taxes are what we pay for civilized society.&#8221; Justice Oliver Wendell<br />
>>> Holmes Jr.<br />
>><br />
>> Then why don&#8217;t you pay any, you rotten bottom 50 presenter piece of <acronym title="shit"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> s&*$?%t</span></acronym>?<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html" >http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html</a><br />
>><br />
>> -<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong><br />
><br />
>> i am a producer, i will have three new patents this year.</p>
<p>Provided that you don&#8217;t get patents to stop others from doing things.</p>
<p>You could sit on the patent and NOT allow any use of the property<br />
rights&#8230;  And here is another question, why do you get &#8220;intellectual<br />
property <strong>RIGHTS</strong>&#8221; but I can&#8217;t get my *personal property rights*?</p>
<p>You can tax away my property rights, but can I tax away your<br />
intellectual property?    Can I say that we need the government to use<br />
any portion of your patents for free?   Or poor people can use your<br />
intellectual property for free and sell the products until they hit a<br />
million dollars in profit and then they have to pay royalties on all<br />
sales over one million dollars.</p>
<p>These &#8220;intellectual <strong>RIGHTS</strong>&#8221;  have been overlooked as a taxable property<br />
for far too long.</p>
<p>You should be forced by taxation to either use your intellectual<br />
property or to lose it to the <strong>IRS</strong> and it be sold to someone that will<br />
use it.</p>
<p></web></vide></rghr></vide></rghr></video61></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/18/intellectual-rights-have-been-overlooked-as-a-taxable-property-for-far-too-long/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama beats Romney AGAIN at raising campaign cash..a prelude to the beating Romney will get in November</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/18/obama-beats-romney-again-at-raising-campaign-cash-a-prelude-to-the-beating-romney-will-get-in-november/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/18/obama-beats-romney-again-at-raising-campaign-cash-a-prelude-to-the-beating-romney-will-get-in-november/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 15:27:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AGAIN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Al Gore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOVERNMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Klaus Schadenfreude]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PROXY]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31908</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/18/2012 10:26 AM, Fred E Brown wrote: > > &#8220;Klaus Schadenfreude&#8221; wrote in message > news:bp9cr7t1f94lmi25744ag87rdag4j7pgd1 @&#038;*$?%4ax.com&#8230; >> >Too_Many_Tools wrote in talk.politics.guns : >> >>> Once again hisory repeats itself&#8230;a Democrat beats a >>> Republican..again and again and again >> >> >> Like Al Gore and John Kerry, you mean? >> >> [chuckle] >> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/18/2012 <strong>10</strong>:26 AM, Fred E Brown wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;<strong>Klaus Schadenfreude</strong>&#8221; <klausschadenfreude @yahoo.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:bp9cr7t1f94lmi25744ag87rdag4j7pgd1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com&#8230;<br />
>> >Too_Many_Tools <too_many_tools @yahoo.com> wrote in talk.politics.<strong>guns</strong> :<br />
>><br />
>>> Once again hisory repeats itself&#8230;a Democrat beats a<br />
>>> Republican..again and again and again<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Like <strong>Al Gore</strong> and John Kerry, you mean?<br />
>><br />
>> [chuckle]<br />
>><br />
><br />
> Sssshhhhhhhh&#8230;&#8230;don&#8217;t disillusion him. He and the other <strong>Democrats</strong> think<br />
> the election is in the bag and being lazy <strong>Democrats</strong> won&#8217;t bother to vote,</p>
<p>Typical <strong>Democrats</strong>, they will expect the <strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> to do everything for<br />
them, they will sit home on the couch and wait for government to inform<br />
them of how the Government used their <strong>PROXY</strong> vote.</p>
<p></too_many_tools></klausschadenfreude></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/18/obama-beats-romney-again-at-raising-campaign-cash-a-prelude-to-the-beating-romney-will-get-in-november/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Riots in America?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/18/riots-in-america/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/18/riots-in-america/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 15:03:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arthur Delaney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ASS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Gates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ET]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Joel Slemrod]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mao]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MILLION]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mon Apr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Egerman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Ryan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Cuts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31906</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/18/2012 10:30 AM, wolfagain wrote: > On May 18, 9:13 am, Nickname unavailable wrote: >> On May 18, 4:18 am, Ubiquitous wrote: >> >> gee, i wonder why. the wealthy have soaked up just about every red >> cent earned in america over the last three decades, and are sitting on >> record piles [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/18/2012 <strong>10</strong>:30 AM, wolfagain wrote:<br />
> On May 18, 9:13 am, Nickname unavailable <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote:<br />
>> On May 18, 4:18 am, Ubiquitous <web ...@polaris.net> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>  gee, i wonder why. the wealthy have soaked up just about every red<br />
>> cent earned in america over the last three decades, and are sitting on<br />
>> record piles of cash. this has starved the real economy to stall<br />
>> speed.<br />
>>  you cannot be educated, because you are hard wired to be a brown<br />
>> nose. i am posting this empirical evidence for the sane to read.<br />
>><br />
>> the wealthy create jobs:There is only one thing wrong with this<br />
>> premise and theory. It is not true! There is absolutely no empirical<br />
>> evidence to support such a claim. None!:you will find a clear positive<br />
>> correlation between?high tax rates and prosperity<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;&#8230;.Adam Smith—one of the founders of modern economics—recognized<br />
>> clearly that a poor distribution of wealth could undermine the free<br />
>> market system, noting that: “The disposition to admire, and almost to<br />
>> worship, the rich and the powerful and…neglect persons of poor and<br />
>> mean condition…is the great and most universal cause of the corruption<br />
>> of our moral sentiments.”<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/02/234238/conservative-myth-..." >http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/02/234238/conservative-myth-&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>> Bloomberg News interviewed <strong>Joel Slemrod</strong>, who was is an economist at<br />
>> the University of Michigian and is a former senior economic adviser to<br />
>> President Ronald <strong>Reagan</strong>, about the issue. Slemrod pointed out that<br />
>> high tax countries tend to perform well economically and said that<br />
>> returning to <strong>Clinton</strong>-era tax rates in 2013 would not harm the economy:<br />
>> “High <strong>GDP</strong> countries are high tax countries,” said <strong>Joel Slemrod</strong>, an<br />
>> economist at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business.<br />
>> “That doesn’t mean high <strong>taxes</strong> cause the high <strong>GDP</strong>.” [...] Slemrod, who<br />
>> served as senior staff economist for President Ronald <strong>Reagan</strong>’s Council<br />
>> of Economic Advisers, said raising <strong>taxes</strong> today would be risky because<br />
>> the economy remains fragile. But given the economy’s performance in<br />
>> the 1990s, returning marginal rates to their <strong>Clinton</strong>-era levels in<br />
>> 2013, as Obama proposes, wouldn’t be, he said. “It’s just hard to say<br />
>> that’s the kiss of death for economic growth,” Slemrod said.<br />
>><br />
>> 1/965951/-Job-creation-by-the-&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>> <strong>Mon Apr</strong> <strong>11</strong>, 2011 at 02:44 PM PDT<br />
>> Job creation by the wealthy&#8230;mostly a myth<br />
>><br />
>> Give the rich more <strong>money</strong> with tax breaks, and the result will be&#8230;<br />
>> they will get richer!<br />
>><br />
>> We hear it continually, it is the mantra of conservatives: “we must<br />
>> give tax breaks to the wealthy so they can create more jobs…and higher<br />
>> <strong>taxes</strong> will stifle economic growth…because the rich are the job<br />
>> creators…”  It is the basis of all the tax breaks given the top income<br />
>> groups in recent years, including the contentious extension of the<br />
>> Bush tax cuts to top brackets, last year.  It is the common subject of<br />
>> conservatives on the talk shows. Just last weekend, <strong>Paul Ryan</strong>, now the<br />
>> architect of the new Republican budget, reaffirmed his proposal to cut<br />
>> the top tax rate to 25% claiming in his plan: …advancing pro-growth<br />
>> tax reforms, this budget is a jobs budget. It sends signals to<br />
>> investors, entrepreneurs, and job creators that a brighter future is<br />
>> still possible.<br />
>> There is only one thing wrong with this premise and theory. It is not<br />
>> true!  There is absolutely no empirical evidence to support such a<br />
>> claim.  None!  Yet, those who purport it continue to glibly make the<br />
>> claim as though it were fact. And for good reason, it gives them cover<br />
>> for avoiding the charge that they are merely attempting to make the<br />
>> rich richer; and it also permits them to focus on deficit reduction<br />
>> through smaller government rather than having to address the revenue<br />
>> side of the equation as well.<br />
>> Indeed, there is actually evidence that there is not only no<br />
>> correlation between granting the wealthy tax relief to “grow the<br />
>> economy”, there is even some evidence that the contrary is frequently<br />
>> true.<br />
>> Since 1945, the increases in the Federal deficit went up 4.2% under<br />
>> Democratic administrations; and 36.4% under Republican presidents<br />
>> (source CBO).  That is not as relevant as the fact that the deficit<br />
>> increase was coincidental with GOP presidents who reduced <strong>taxes</strong> – most<br />
>> notably <strong>Reagan</strong> (deficit up11.2% &#038; 5.9% in his two terms); George H. W.<br />
>> Bush (6.5%); and especially George W. Bush (up 9% and10.7%).  While it<br />
>> may be argued, this is not necessarily related to “job creation”, it<br />
>> is related to increases in <strong>GDP</strong> (debt/<strong>GDP</strong> ratio) or relative robustness<br />
>> of the economy.  These presidents cut <strong>taxes</strong>, increased debt, but the<br />
>> economy did not grow accordingly.  In short, as with historical<br />
>> “trickle down” strategies…it failed.<br />
>> <strong>Joel Slemrod</strong>, Professor of Stephan Ross School of Business at the<br />
>> University of Michigan, and Harvard PhD, who studies and writes about<br />
>> this phenomena, has noted: judging by the political scene in<br />
>> Washington, one would think that low <strong>taxes</strong> were the main source of<br />
>> economic growth in the United States and around the world…even most<br />
>> Democrats dare not demand that President Bush’s tax cuts be rescinded…<br />
>> but there is no compelling evidence that high <strong>taxes</strong> impede economic<br />
>> growth.<br />
>> Based on his above findings, Slemrod wrote: “there is no supportive<br />
>> evidence for the claim that low <strong>taxes</strong> guarantee prosperity. In fact,<br />
>> if you just plot out?the points (internationally), you will find a<br />
>> clear, positive correlation between?high tax rates and prosperity, and<br />
>> that is because developed countries?are the ones with the high tax<br />
>> ratios.” And similarly regarding capital gains tax reductions, “That<br />
>> argument is not implausible, but I know of no evidence?that<br />
>> establishes a connection between prosperity and at what rate we tax<br />
>> capital gains.”<br />
>> The fallacy is most apparent at the highest end of tax forgiveness.?In<br />
>> recent years, the top 400 taxpayers had an average income of $344.8<br />
>> million, up  from their average $263.3 million income in 2006,<br />
>> according to figures in a report that the IRS issued.  Their effective<br />
>> income tax rate fell to 16.62 percent. That rate is lower than the<br />
>> typical effective income tax rate paid by Americans with incomes in<br />
>> the low six figures. Giving the rich a tax break is obviously not<br />
>> needed – they figure out their own tax benefits. Yet, there is<br />
>> absolutely no real evidence that this generous tax advantage among the<br />
>> upper wealthy is incenting them to create new jobs. It simply is not<br />
>> happening.  Folks this rich, do not need to trivialize themselves<br />
>> creating new jobs; and Ryan’s tax proposal is simply ridiculous for<br />
>> this group; they can get along very well with about $300 million after<br />
>> <strong>taxes</strong>. The facts are further described in a new report on angel and VC<br />
>> investing in 2010.<br />
>> Virtually everyone concedes is will be small businesses, and often<br />
>> “start ups” that will propel an improved economy, But despite the low<br />
>> tax rates (now extended), this report confirms that wealthy angel<br />
>> investors are not increasing investing in new job creation. In fact,<br />
>> they are investing less. Total investments in Q1,2 2010 were $8.5<br />
>> billion, a decrease of 6.5% over Q1,2 2009, according to the Center<br />
>> for Venture Research at the University of New Hampshire. Angel<br />
>> investors have decreased their appetite for seed and start-up stage<br />
>> investing, with 26% of Q1,2 2010 angel investments in the seed and<br />
>> start-up stage, marking a steady decrease in the seed and start-up<br />
>> stage that began in 2008 (45%) and 2009 (35%), and it is the smallest<br />
>> percentage in seed and start-up investing for several years. This<br />
>> significant percentage of latent investors indicates that while many<br />
>> high net worth individuals may be qualified investors, they have not<br />
>> converted this interest into direct participation –  and it is not<br />
>> <strong>taxes</strong> that are driving their decisions.<br />
>> In short, the premise and the promise that giving substantial tax<br />
>> breaks to the very wealthy will stimulate the economy, and “create new<br />
>> jobs”, simply has no basis in fact or reality. What it has done,<br />
>> factually, is to increase the deficits whenever it has been tried…it<br />
>> further confirms the failure of trickle down economics…and it has made<br />
>> the already wealthy, wealthier.   It also makes for great sound bites<br />
>> for conservative proponents of the plan. But what is has not done is<br />
>> to create new jobs as proponents have  portrayed – because that is a<br />
>> myth.<br />
>> &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br />
>> the reagan/bush tax cuts:the wealthy create jobs myth:I do not know<br />
>> how much I&#8217;ve saved over <strong>10</strong> years but I&#8217;m sure it is several million<br />
>> dollars:probably in excess of $<strong>10</strong> million:what have you done with all<br />
>> that cash?:I&#8217;ve kept it he said:I have not done anything with that<br />
>> <strong>money</strong>.<br />
>> the wealthy create jobs myth:There is only one thing wrong with this<br />
>> premise and theory. It is not true! There is absolutely no empirical<br />
>> evidence to support such a claim. None!:you will find a clear positive<br />
>> correlation between?high tax rates and prosperity<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/06/patriotic-millionaires-bush-..." >http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/06/patriotic-millionaires-bush-&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>> <strong>Arthur Delaney</strong> <a href="mailto:art...@huffingtonpost.com">art&#8230;@huffingtonpost.com</a> Become a fan of this reporter<br />
>><br />
>> &#8216;Patriotic Millionaires&#8217; Describe What They&#8217;ve Done With Their Bush<br />
>> <strong>Tax Cuts</strong>: &#8216;I Built A Dance Floor In My House&#8217;<br />
>> ?First Posted: 06/ 6/<strong>11</strong> 02:29 PM <strong>ET</strong> Updated: 06/ 6/<strong>11</strong> 04:26 PM <strong>ET</strong><br />
>><br />
>> WASHINGTON &#8212; <strong>Paul Egerman</strong> isn&#8217;t certain how many millions he&#8217;s saved<br />
>> from the tax cuts enacted during the George W. Bush administration in<br />
>> the early 2000s and extended by President Barack Obama in December of<br />
>> last year.<br />
>> &#8220;I do not know how much I&#8217;ve saved over <strong>10</strong> years but I&#8217;m sure it is<br />
>> several million dollars &#8212; probably in excess of $<strong>10</strong> million,&#8221; said<br />
>> Egerman, founder of a medical transcription company called eScription.<br />
>> And what, HuffPost asked, have you done with all that cash?<br />
>> &#8220;I&#8217;ve kept it,&#8221; he said. &#8220;I have not done anything with &#8230;<br />
>><br />
>> read more »<br />
><br />
> DUMB <strong><acronym title="ASS"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> A&*$?%S</span></acronym></strong>!!! when was the last time a Poor person hired an unemployed<br />
> loser like you? the 3 biggest job creators of the last 30 years were<br />
> BILLIONAIRES Sam Walton, <strong>Steve Jobs</strong>, and <strong>Bill Gates</strong>&#8230;yet another<br />
> HuffPost MORON chirps in&#8230;STFU!!!</p>
<p><strong>Socialists</strong> don&#8217;t understand how the economy works&#8230;.   They are<br />
ignorant of how Capitalism creates wealth.</p>
<p>So ignorant that they think only an all powerful totalitarian government<br />
that distributes <strong>money</strong>/food equally will ever keep them from<br />
starving&#8230;.  and let them live as well as the elites.</p>
<p>But wait, Americans aren&#8217;t starving and <strong>Mao</strong> was running a totalitarian<br />
Government that actually starved 40 <strong>MILLION</strong> people (albeit they were<br />
peasants that didn&#8217;t take to collectivization)   but they were people<br />
and they were working to feed themselves and their family.  Until <strong>Mao</strong><br />
decided that they needed things to be better and more equal and<br />
Socialist so they could live as well as all the other <strong>Socialists</strong> in<br />
China.  The fact is that rather than living like the &#8220;elite Chinese&#8221; or<br />
having more to eat, the peasants starved.</p>
<p>Got to love the <strong>Socialists</strong> brain farts.</p>
<p></web></vide></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/18/riots-in-america/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>non-natural CO2 killing basic sealife</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/17/non-natural-co2-killing-basic-sealife/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/17/non-natural-co2-killing-basic-sealife/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 23:14:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Antarctica]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BIRD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CO2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FLU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[future]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ice Age]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[San Francisco]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Southern Ocean]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transition Zone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TRILLION]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31898</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/17/2012 6:44 PM, Tom P wrote: > On 05/17/2012 10:08 PM, $27 TRILLION to pay for Kyoto wrote: >> On May 17, 2:02 pm, Transition Zone wrote: >>> &#8211;http://e360.yale.edu/digest/antarctic-krill-embryos-severely-affected&#8230;. >>> >>> >>> The Southern Ocean, which surrounds Antarctica, is expected to be >>> severely affected by acidification because cold water more readily >>> takes [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/17/2012 6:44 PM, Tom P wrote:<br />
> On 05/17/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, $27 <strong>TRILLION</strong> to pay for Kyoto wrote:<br />
>> On May 17, 2:02 pm, <strong>Transition Zone</strong><mogu ...@hotmail.com>  wrote:<br />
>>> &#8211;http://e360.yale.edu/digest/antarctic-krill-embryos-severely-affected&#8230;.<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> The <strong>Southern Ocean</strong>, which surrounds <strong>Antarctica</strong>, is expected to be<br />
>>> severely affected by acidification because cold water more readily<br />
>>> takes up <strong>CO2</strong>. Acidic seawater inhibits the formation of shells of the<br />
>>> shrimp-like krill, and Australian scientists discovered that while<br />
>>> acidification at current levels (380 ppm) and moderate levels (1,000<br />
>>> ppm) did not adversely affect krill embryos, none of the embryos in an<br />
>>> experimental tank survived when concentrations reached 2,000 ppm. <strong>CO2</strong><br />
>>> concentrations increase in deeper waters, and carbon dioxide levels at<br />
>>> depth could rise to 1,400 ppm by 2100. Antarctic krill are the most<br />
>>> important food for the hundreds of millions of penguins, seabirds,<br />
>>> seals, and whales that live and breed in <strong>Antarctica</strong> and the Southern<br />
>>> Ocean.<br />
>><br />
>> Something else will  take their place.<br />
><br />
> Like in how many million years?<br />
></p>
<p>It seems that plankton would NOT be eaten by krill that don&#8217;t survive<br />
and a bloom of plankton would lower the <strong>CO2</strong> which is what will be<br />
happening in general as we re-introduce natures <strong>CO2</strong>, the life on the<br />
planet will balance the Oxygen and the <strong>CO2</strong>.   There is one guy that does<br />
just that, he spreads something like iron sulfite and that depletes the<br />
oxygen and creates a bloom of plankton that exchange <strong>CO2</strong> for oxygen.</p>
<p>What has kept the <strong>CO2</strong> and Oxygen balanced till now?   It will do it in<br />
the <strong>future</strong>.</p>
<p>The economy will collapse much sooner and millions of humans will<br />
likely starve around the world&#8230;..   Our carbon footprint as will our<br />
economy, shrink and maybe even by numbers that will <strong>change</strong> the balance<br />
of life on earth and <strong>change</strong> the rate at which <strong>CO2</strong> and Oxygen will find<br />
equilibrium again.</p>
<p>["We might also store carbon dioxide in the oceans. Already, on the<br />
oceans’ surface, clouds of blooming plankton ingest amounts of carbon<br />
dioxide comparable to those taken in by trees. Climos, a geo-engineering<br />
start-up based in <strong>San Francisco</strong>, is trying to cultivate ever-bigger<br />
plankton blooms that would suck in huge supplies of carbon. When the<br />
plankton died, the carbon would end up on the sea floor. Climos began<br />
with the observation that plankton bloom in the ocean only when they<br />
have adequate supplies of iron. In the 1980s, the oceanographer John<br />
Martin hypothesized that large amounts of oceanic iron may have produced<br />
giant plankton blooms in the past, and therefore chilled the atmosphere<br />
by removing carbon dioxide. Spread powdered iron over the surface of the<br />
ocean, and in very little time a massive bloom of plankton will grow, he<br />
predicted. “Give me half a tanker of iron,” Martin said, “and I’ll give<br />
you the next <strong>Ice Age</strong>.” If Martin’s ideas are sound, Climos could in<br />
effect become the world’s gardener by seeding Antarctic waters with iron<br />
and creating vast, rapidly growing offshore forests to replace the ones<br />
that no longer exist on land. "]</p>
<p><a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/07/re-engineering-the-earth/7552/" >http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/07/re-engineering-the-earth/7552/</a></p>
<p>Will economics mean that pandemics will have insufficient medicines to<br />
stop the death.   Why worry about <strong>CO2</strong> when the <strong>BIRD</strong> <strong>FLU</strong> will kill you<br />
next year NOT 100 years from now.</p>
<p></mogu></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/17/non-natural-co2-killing-basic-sealife/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Louisiana sheriffs are motivated to incarcerate</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/17/louisiana-sheriffs-are-motivated-to-incarcerate/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/17/louisiana-sheriffs-are-motivated-to-incarcerate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 16:12:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yoorghis Jurgis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31880</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/17/2012 12:34 AM, emoneyjoe wrote: > On Wed, 16 May 2012 21:58:47 -0600, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: > >> On Wed, 16 May 2012 21:31:56 -0400, emoneyjoe >> wrote: >> >>>> You seem devoid of all ability to think, JoeLoon. >>>> >>>> If the price of drugs went from $5, or $10 per hit of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/17/2012 12:34 AM, emoneyjoe wrote:<br />
> On Wed, 16 May 2012 21:58:47 -0600, <a href="mailto:Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net">Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On Wed, 16 May 2012 21:31:56 -0400, emoneyjoe <emoneyjoe @iglou.com><br />
>> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> You seem devoid of all ability to think, JoeLoon.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> If the price of drugs went from $5, or $<strong>10</strong> per hit of drugs&#8212;down to<br />
>>>> $0.15c&#8212;would you &#8220;go into business&#8221;?<br />
>>><br />
>>>         Sounds like a junky&#8217;s dream, hypothetically only,<br />
>>> if legalized, only drug stores would be allowed to sell<br />
>>> them, and not for 15 cents.<br />
>>><br />
>>>         Nobody would sell a joint for 15 cents if they<br />
>>> had all the business they could handle.<br />
>><br />
>> You&#8217;re really not capable of following a cogent thought, are you?<br />
><br />
>       Not about illegal drugs, why don&#8217;t you watch<br />
> &#8220;Up In Smoke&#8221; a few more times.</p>
<p>People huff Scotch guard to get high&#8230;..  you&#8217;ll never stop it.  Just<br />
as Liberals say kids will have sex and you might as well <strong>hand</strong> out<br />
condoms&#8230;.  you might as well <strong>hand</strong> out safe drugs so that kids don&#8217;t<br />
get into trouble and ruin their life like a baby would ruin their life.</p>
<p></emoneyjoe></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/17/louisiana-sheriffs-are-motivated-to-incarcerate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;France Entrepreneurs Flee From Hollande Wealth Rejection&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/15/france-entrepreneurs-flee-from-hollande-wealth-rejection/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/15/france-entrepreneurs-flee-from-hollande-wealth-rejection/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 19:50:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PJ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Singapore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wealth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[YET]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31850</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/15/2012 3:24 PM, Runge 666 wrote: > Crossposter donovan opens his home to all the nice wealthy french. > OK evleth you can knock at his door, even if you&#8217;re not french. > > > &#8220;PJ O&#8217;D&#8221; a écrit dans le message de groupe de > discussion : > 7fd07959-97da-47d9-b604-8410d51afcf9 @&#038;*$?%h41g2000yqm.googlegroups.com&#8230; >> Bloomberg: &#8220;France [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/15/2012 3:24 PM, Runge 666 wrote:<br />
> Crossposter donovan opens his home to all the nice wealthy french.<br />
> OK evleth you can knock at his door, even if you&#8217;re not french.<br />
><br />
><br />
> &#8220;<strong>PJ</strong> O&#8217;D&#8221; <gapaddy @gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de groupe de<br />
> discussion :<br />
> <a href="mailto:7fd07959-97da-47d9-b604-8410d51afcf9<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>h41g2000yqm.googlegroups.com">7fd07959-97da-47d9-b604-8410d51afcf9<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>h41g2000yqm.googlegroups.com</a>&#8230;<br />
>> Bloomberg: &#8220;France Entrepreneurs Flee From Hollande Wealth Rejection&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> 0/entrepreneurs-in-<strong>france</strong>-flee-from-hollande-s-rejection-of-wealth.html</a><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> excerpt:<br />
>><br />
>> “Hollande is using the 75 percent tax as a symbol to convey certain<br />
>> values through stigmatization,”<br />
></p>
<p><strong>YET</strong> Hollande is stigmatizing himself and the <strong>Socialists</strong> as thieves that<br />
steal from the people that create the <strong>wealth</strong>.</p>
<p>I just read an article that highlighted people and business that plan to<br />
leave FRANCE for <strong>Singapore</strong>&#8230;.    It seems <strong>Singapore</strong> will be the magnate<br />
that attracts the rich and will be the new Nation of the Movers and<br />
shakers that create <strong>wealth</strong>.  That will make <strong>Singapore</strong> a wealthy Nation.</p>
<p></gapaddy></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/15/france-entrepreneurs-flee-from-hollande-wealth-rejection/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>3 1/2 years of progress! Three and a half years ago we were importing about 60 percent of our oil, and now it&#8217;s around 45 percent.   &gt;&gt;&gt;Obama said &#8220;DRILL BABY DRILL&#8221;  ????</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/15/3-12-years-of-progress-three-and-a-half-years-ago-we-were-importing-about-60-percent-of-our-oil-and-now-its-around-45-percent-obama-said-drill-baby-drill/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/15/3-12-years-of-progress-three-and-a-half-years-ago-we-were-importing-about-60-percent-of-our-oil-and-now-its-around-45-percent-obama-said-drill-baby-drill/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 18:59:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Almost Science Fiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BABY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DRILL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Energy Location Washington]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Envia Systems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Tue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sarah Palin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Chu Title]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31848</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/15/2012 2:53 PM, emoneyjoe wrote: > On Tue, 15 May 2012 10:11:29 -0400, &#8220;Sid9&#8243; wrote: > >> Energy Secretary Steven Chu Discusses the &#8220;Weird Little Bacteria&#8221; in Our >> Energy Future >> Steven Chu on the futuristic batteries and &#8220;little weird&#8221; bacteria that will >> pave our way to energy independence >> >> By [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/15/2012 2:53 PM, emoneyjoe wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Tue</strong>, 15 May 2012 <strong>10</strong>:<strong>11</strong>:29 -0400, &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @ bellsouth.net> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> Energy Secretary Steven Chu Discusses the &#8220;Weird Little Bacteria&#8221; in Our<br />
>> Energy Future<br />
>> Steven Chu on the futuristic batteries and &#8220;little weird&#8221; bacteria that will<br />
>> pave our way to energy independence<br />
>><br />
>> By <strong>David</strong> Biello  | Monday, April 16, 2012 | 3<br />
>><br />
>> Steven Chu<br />
>> Title: U.S. Secretary of Energy<br />
>> Location: Washington, D.C.<br />
>><br />
>> Is domestic energy indepen­dence a useful goal?<br />
>><br />
>> It&#8217;s certainly a useful goal to strive toward energy indepen­dence. The good<br />
>> news is that three and a half years ago we were importing about 60 percent<br />
>> of our oil, and now it&#8217;s around 45 percent. We see the trend going for­ward,<br />
>> decreasing even more. We are already largely energy-independent in terms of<br />
>> electricity generation, although some electricity comes from <strong>Canada</strong>.<br />
>><br />
>> We also see a flattening, perhaps even a decrease, in the use of<br />
>> transportation fuels as we go to more efficient automobiles. We see more<br />
>> diversification of transportation energy. Liquefied natural gas for<br />
>> long-haul trucks has already been shown to make sense. Private companies are<br />
>> investing hundreds of millions of dollars to build natural gas<br />
>> infrastructure. If you build it every 200 miles on the highway, you can<br />
>> capture a significant market, perhaps even half the market, and heavy trucks<br />
>> consume 20 percent of our transportation energy.<br />
>><br />
>> Does that mean we&#8217;ve given up on combating <strong>climate</strong> <strong>change</strong>?<br />
>><br />
>> No, absolutely not. This is all very consistent with <strong>climate</strong> <strong>change</strong>. Natural<br />
>> gas as a transition fuel is great. It&#8217;s half the [carbon dioxide of burning<br />
>> coal]. We still need to figure out how to capture its carbon, which we need<br />
>> by midcentury no matter what the large source is [whether it is coal, oil or<br />
>> natural gas].<br />
>><br />
>> Renewable energy is getting cheaper and cheaper. Perhaps within this decade<br />
>> wind and solar will be as inexpensive as any form of<br />
>><br />
>> new energy. Solar has already come down threefold in the past four years,<br />
>> and we believe it will come down twofold in the next decade.<br />
>><br />
>> In transportation, there will be a mix of electrification and<br />
>> next-generation biofuels and efficiency. If we get breakthroughs, it can be<br />
>> game-changing.<br />
>><br />
>> Where do you think such break­throughs might come from?<br />
>><br />
>> Breakthroughs on the physics side will be in materials. The battery<br />
>> manufacturer Envia [Systems] announced a 400-watt-hour-per-kilogram battery.<br />
>> That&#8217;s at least a factor of two more than the previous best. It still has to<br />
>> go through some more stages of testing. We are investi­ng in other battery<br />
>> companies that will go another factor of two beyond that.<br />
>><br />
>> Biofuels are a little bit further out only because your competition is oil.<br />
>> Early-stage research sponsored by the Depart­ment of Energy has microbes you<br />
>> can feed simple sugars and out pops diesel fuel. Another company is using<br />
>> photo­synthetic bacteria and swapping whole genomes and metabolic pathways.<br />
>> [The microbe] generates long alkane chains that are the immediate precursors<br />
>> to diesel fuel. It&#8217;s 5 to <strong>10</strong> percent energy-efficient, whereas a typical<br />
>> plant is only 1 percent efficient. This is a little weird bacterium or<br />
>> yeast. In the past 15 years or so I&#8217;ve gotten into biology like this. I<br />
>> follow it with avid interest. It&#8217;s really almost science fiction.<br />
>><br />
>> What have you learned about how the government should fund new energy<br />
>> companies?<br />
>><br />
>> In areas of rapidly moving technology, you have to be increasingly careful<br />
>> when assisting in deployment. Some things happened so rapidly that nobody<br />
>> anticipated them. For example, the price of photovoltaics dropped 80 percent<br />
>> in [recent years] and 40 percent in another year. Those prices have now<br />
>> stabilized.<br />
>><br />
>> It&#8217;s very important that the U.S. remain a player in this technology<br />
>> [photovoltaics]. We invented a lot of this stuff [such as modern solar<br />
>> cells]-you name it. We still have the capability of outcompeting.<br />
>><br />
>> I knew full well coming in that unex­pected things can happen. [Tech­nology]<br />
>> leads can be lost. It&#8217;s a very competitive world out there. For example, we<br />
>> invented the airplane, lost the lead, then came back.<br />
>><br />
>> We are still highly competitive in all areas of high-tech manufacturing,<br />
>> includ­ing most new energy. We need to choose our battles, but a lot of them<br />
>> we can-and should-win.<br />
>><br />
>> This article was published in print as &#8216;&#8221;It&#8217;s <strong>Almost Science Fiction</strong>&#8220;.&#8217;<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=its-almost-science-fiction&#038;print=true" >http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=its-almost-science-fiction&#038;print=true</a><br />
><br />
>        The author commented on a breakthrough battery<br />
> of 400 watt hours per kilogram, but the attribute needed<br />
> in batteries is the number of times they can be charged<br />
> without going bad.</p>
<p>Obama said &#8220;<strong>DRILL</strong> <strong>BABY</strong> <strong>DRILL</strong>&#8221;  ?????????????????</p>
<p>So We really needed to elect <strong>Sarah Palin</strong> who supported the policy you<br />
say we are NOW following.</p>
<p></sid9></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/15/3-12-years-of-progress-three-and-a-half-years-ago-we-were-importing-about-60-percent-of-our-oil-and-now-its-around-45-percent-obama-said-drill-baby-drill/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama and Custer, both said Forward&#8230;&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/15/obama-and-custer-both-said-forward/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/15/obama-and-custer-both-said-forward/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 16:40:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Biden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EDDY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Soetoro Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[STEADY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UTC]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31842</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/14/2012 10:58 PM, STEADY EDDY wrote: > On May 14, 7:19 pm, Gary Forbis wrote: >> On May 14, 3:13 pm, F&#038;*$?%k of the Mountain wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 14 May 2012 18:09:18 +0000 (UTC), &#8220;Leroy N. Soetoro&#8221; >>>> Obama says he didn&#8217;t revise his position to achieve any political >>>> advantage. >> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/14/2012 <strong>10</strong>:58 PM, <strong>STEADY</strong> <strong>EDDY</strong> wrote:<br />
> On May 14, 7:19 pm, Gary Forbis <forbisga ...@msn.com> wrote:<br />
>> On May 14, 3:13 pm, <acronym title="Fuk"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> F&*$?%k</span></acronym> of the Mountain <kluster ...@aww.fukit> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 14 May 2012 18:09:18 +0000 (<strong>UTC</strong>), &#8220;Leroy N. Soetoro&#8221;<br />
>>>> Obama says he didn&#8217;t revise his position to achieve any political<br />
>>>> advantage.<br />
>><br />
>>> heh heh &#8230;.. I think we all know that Obama has been for gay marriage<br />
>>> from the start&#8230;. and to think that <strong>Biden</strong> just blurted this out<br />
>>> without an OK from the massiah is ludicrous&#8230;.<br />
>><br />
>> I think it more interesting that Mitt had others hold down a guy<br />
>> so he could cut the guy&#8217;s hair, not because the guy was gay<br />
>> but because he was different.  I hope you toe the Romney line.<br />
>><br />
>> Remember that if someone&#8217;s rights can be restricted by the government<br />
>> anyone&#8217;s rights can be restricted by the government.  Do you really<br />
>> believe our personal rights should be restricted based upon some<br />
>> arbitrary group identification?<br />
><br />
> A high school prank. Is this the best that the Obama folks can come up<br />
> with?</p>
<p>Obama has NO past, they hide all his college papers and other past<br />
information and his past since elected is a dismal failure&#8230;.</p>
<p>Obama has NO &#8220;good&#8221; in his past to put &#8220;forward&#8221; only Socialist failure.</p>
<p>Obama and Custer, both said &#8220;Forward&#8221;&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p></kluster></forbisga></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/15/obama-and-custer-both-said-forward/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Biden threw Obama under the gay marriage bus</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/15/biden-threw-obama-under-the-gay-marriage-bus/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/15/biden-threw-obama-under-the-gay-marriage-bus/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 15:18:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Biden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Soetoro Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UTC]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31814</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/14/2012 10:19 PM, Gary Forbis wrote: > On May 14, 3:13 pm, F&#038;*$?%k of the Mountain wrote: >> On Mon, 14 May 2012 18:09:18 +0000 (UTC), &#8220;Leroy N. Soetoro&#8221; > >>> Obama says he didn&#8217;t revise his position to achieve any political >>> advantage. >> >> heh heh &#8230;.. I think we all know [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/14/2012 <strong>10</strong>:19 PM, Gary Forbis wrote:<br />
> On May 14, 3:13 pm, <acronym title="Fuk"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> F&*$?%k</span></acronym> of the Mountain <kluster ...@aww.fukit> wrote:<br />
>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 14 May 2012 18:09:18 +0000 (<strong>UTC</strong>), &#8220;Leroy N. Soetoro&#8221;<br />
><br />
>>> Obama says he didn&#8217;t revise his position to achieve any political<br />
>>> advantage.<br />
>><br />
>> heh heh &#8230;.. I think we all know that Obama has been for gay marriage<br />
>> from the start&#8230;. and to think that <strong>Biden</strong> just blurted this out<br />
>> without an OK from the massiah is ludicrous&#8230;.<br />
><br />
> I think it more interesting that Mitt had others hold down a guy<br />
> so he could cut the guy&#8217;s hair, not because the guy was gay<br />
> but because he was different.  I hope you toe the Romney line.</p>
<p>Its like going to a government school where you can&#8217;t pray or hold a<br />
religious club meeting openly because you are different, the schools<br />
punish you for wearing an American flag but NOT for wearing other flags.<br />
You mean Romney, &#8220;is like that&#8221;?</p>
<p></kluster></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/15/biden-threw-obama-under-the-gay-marriage-bus/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mitt Needs To Listen To Ron Paul; Vets&#8217; Support Obama By 9 Pts.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/14/mitt-needs-to-listen-to-ron-paul-vets-support-obama-by-9-pts/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/14/mitt-needs-to-listen-to-ron-paul-vets-support-obama-by-9-pts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 00:48:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Faux Noise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAUL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RON]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31808</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/14/2012 3:10 PM, Bret Cahill wrote: >>> http://news.yahoo.com/weary-warriors-favor-obama-131752838.html >> >>> Ron Paul needs to mention this in his speech this summer in Tampa. >> >>> GO RON PAUL! >> >> LOL&#8230;I just won a steak dinner paid by a brain dead conservative who >> thought his fellow nutcases would be all over this story. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/14/2012 3:<strong>10</strong> PM, Bret Cahill wrote:<br />
>>> <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/weary-warriors-favor-obama-131752838.html" >http://news.yahoo.com/weary-warriors-favor-obama-131752838.html</a><br />
>><br />
>>> Ron Paul needs to mention this in his speech this summer in Tampa.<br />
>><br />
>>> <strong>GO</strong> <strong>RON</strong> <strong>PAUL</strong>!<br />
>><br />
>> LOL&#8230;I just won a steak dinner paid by a brain dead conservative who<br />
>> thought his fellow nutcases would be all over this story.<br />
>><br />
>> Conservatives are trying to ignore the poll because they know this<br />
>> shows how far their support has eroded.<br />
>><br />
>> Obama will be reelected this November thanks to the incompetent<br />
>> Republicans.<br />
><br />
> <strong>Faux Noise</strong> this morning was whining about culture wars as though<br />
> Repugs would be better off campaigning on the BushCo tax cut<br />
> recession!<br />
><br />
></p>
<p>They are done and over in January aren&#8217;t they, so you&#8217;ll get to see how<br />
it helps the economy for the government to take more <strong>money</strong> from the<br />
already collapsing economy.</p>
<p>It should be quite the educational experience for you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/14/mitt-needs-to-listen-to-ron-paul-vets-support-obama-by-9-pts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Jews killed Jesus!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/14/the-jews-killed-jesus/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/14/the-jews-killed-jesus/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 00:36:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Beach Cruiser Philosopher]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31806</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/13/2012 1:49 PM, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher wrote: > On May 13, 11:46 am, &#8220;TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher&#8221; > wrote: >> On May 13, 12:40 am, datakoll wrote: >> >>> 0/auschwitz-corpses.jpg >> >> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8_5D75Oe30A/T38cBUGMwsI/AAAAAAAABwM/B9YZkCK&#8230; > > &#8220;The Jews killed Jesus!&#8221; > The Germans killed the Jews&#8230;.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/13/2012 1:49 PM, TibetanMonkey, the <strong>Beach Cruiser Philosopher</strong> wrote:<br />
> On May 13, <strong>11</strong>:46 am, &#8220;TibetanMonkey, the <strong>Beach Cruiser Philosopher</strong>&#8221;<br />
> <comandante .ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>> On May 13, 12:40 am, datakoll <datak ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> 0/auschwitz-corpses.jpg</a><br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8_5D75Oe30A/T38cBUGMwsI/AAAAAAAABwM/B9YZkCK..." >http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8_5D75Oe30A/T38cBUGMwsI/AAAAAAAABwM/B9YZkCK&#8230;</a><br />
><br />
> &#8220;The Jews killed Jesus!&#8221;<br />
></p>
<p>The Germans killed the Jews&#8230;.</p>
<p></datak></comandante></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/14/the-jews-killed-jesus/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal tax receipts are lowest they have been since 1950.   -1attachment</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/14/federal-tax-receipts-are-lowest-they-have-been-since-1950-1attachment-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/14/federal-tax-receipts-are-lowest-they-have-been-since-1950-1attachment-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 15:58:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31772</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/13/2012 9:28 PM, jim wrote: > > > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> >> On 5/12/2012 10:30 PM, jim wrote: >>> >>> >>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> >>>> On 5/12/2012 10:11 PM, jim wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The debt in 1941 was a combination of things including savings >>>>>> bonds&#8230;.. >>>>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/13/2012 9:28 PM, jim wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>><br />
>> On 5/12/2012 <strong>10</strong>:30 PM, jim wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> On 5/12/2012 <strong>10</strong>:<strong>11</strong> PM, jim wrote:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> The debt in 1941 was a combination of things including savings<br />
>>>>>> bonds&#8230;..<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> How are savings bonds of 1941<br />
>>>>> different than today&#8217;s treasury bonds?<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> We were able to voluntarily buy our own debt&#8230;..  unlike today.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Nope it is exactly like today.<br />
>><br />
>> Yet today we don&#8217;t buy the debt the Chinese do.<br />
><br />
> And that would be  because<br />
> Back then the <strong>US</strong> consumers didn&#8217;t <strong>hand</strong><br />
> over trillions of dollars to the Chinese.</p>
<p>So it isn&#8217;t exactly like today?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/14/federal-tax-receipts-are-lowest-they-have-been-since-1950-1attachment-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NEW IMPROVED OBAMA SOCIALIST SUPER-SIZED FEDERAL GOVERNMENT&#8230;.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/13/new-improved-obama-socialist-super-sized-federal-government/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/13/new-improved-obama-socialist-super-sized-federal-government/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 00:28:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COSTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fed Bonds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOVERNMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IMPROVED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATIONAL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBAMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Sun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PIE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[share]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SIZED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SKY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialist #]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SUPER]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31764</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/13/2012 1:25 PM, emoneyjoe wrote: > On Sun, 13 May 2012 12:52:09 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: > >> On 5/13/2012 11:24 AM, emoneyjoe wrote: >>> On Sun, 13 May 2012 08:58:30 -0500, jim < "sjedgingN0Sp"@m @&#038;*$?%mwt.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> emoneyjoe wrote: >>>> >>>>>> That would create inflation. >>>>> >>>>> Probably not, the thing [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/13/2012 1:25 PM, emoneyjoe wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Sun</strong>, 13 May 2012 12:52:09 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On 5/13/2012 11:24 AM, emoneyjoe wrote:<br />
>>> <strong>On Sun</strong>, 13 May 2012 08:58:30 -0500, jim < "sjedgingN0Sp"@m<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>mwt.net><br />
>>> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> emoneyjoe wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>> That would create inflation.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>       Probably not, the thing that causes the<br />
>>>>> most inflation is things that drive up costs,<br />
>>>>> like wage increases, and scarcity, so what<br />
>>>>> is scarce today?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Money is scarce due to private sector<br />
>>>> no longer borrowing $4 trillion like they<br />
>>>> did in 2007.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>        Or any other product, service or tangible<br />
>>>>> offered for sale, if the <strong>money</strong> was gained honestly,<br />
>>>>> why wouldn&#8217;t <strong>money</strong> in the hands of a China man<br />
>>>>> be the same as for any other man.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> First you claim the bond buyers are going to<br />
>>>> put the <strong>money</strong> in the bank and not buy goods and services<br />
>>>> that cause inflation. Then you claim that they will<br />
>>>> use the trillions to buy goods and services<br />
>>>> that do cause inflation<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The fact is the <strong>SS</strong> recipients are already<br />
>>>> spending the <strong>money</strong> once. You want twice as<br />
>>>> much $$ spent but insist there will be no inflation<br />
>>> >from doing that.<br />
>>><br />
>>>        No, I don&#8217;t, no I don&#8217;t, I don&#8217;t, just the same<br />
>>> pay  out, without borrowing, it is congress that<br />
>>> has already spent the <strong>SS</strong> trust fund and has to<br />
>>> borrow if the treasury needs any of the virtual<br />
>>> trust fund to pay pensions.<br />
>>>       The only way to do that is create emoney.<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>>> Inflation is what costs me <strong>money</strong>.<br />
>>>> The interest on the federal debt costs me and<br />
>>>> my grandchildren nothing.<br />
>>><br />
>>>        You don&#8217;t spend enough on the things<br />
>>> that matter to be worrying about inflation,<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> More interest on debt creates more taxes and more inflation and I was in<br />
>> a few stores just yesterday and it&#8217;s NOT getting any cheaper out there<br />
>> to live.<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png" >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png</a><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Government uses more of the <strong>GDP</strong> to pay the interest on the National debt<br />
>> as they increase the size and cost of Government.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> ["The argument for using <strong>GDP</strong> as a standard-of-living proxy is not that<br />
>> it is a good indicator of the absolute level of standard of living, but<br />
>> that living standards tend to move with per-capita <strong>GDP</strong>, so that changes<br />
>> in living standards are readily detected through changes in <strong>GDP</strong>."]<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> The higher the percentage of the <strong>GDP</strong> that goes to paying government debt<br />
>> (interest on the debt) the less your quality of living will be.<br />
>><br />
>> Why does the equation for the <strong>GDP</strong> NOT have government spending minus the<br />
>> government payment of interest on the debt as part of the equation.<br />
>><br />
>> ["    <strong>GDP</strong> = private consumption + gross investment + government spending<br />
>> + (exports - imports), or<br />
>><br />
>>    <strong>GDP</strong> = C + I + G + ( X - M )    "]<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> You see government spending but where is the cost to the <strong>GDP</strong> of that<br />
>> government spending&#8230;.    It should be<br />
>><br />
>>    <strong>GDP</strong> = C + I + (G &#8211; INTEREST ON <strong>NATIONAL</strong> DEBT) + (X &#8211; M)<br />
>><br />
>> If you are going to add what the government spends to help the economy<br />
>> then you need to add what they are costing the economy also.<br />
>><br />
>> They have conveniently left out a huge part of the <strong>GDP</strong> which is interest<br />
>> on the National debt and it&#8217;s slated to be as much as our MILITARY <strong>COSTS</strong><br />
>> IN A FEW YEARS.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> ["Federal debt as a <strong>share</strong> of the nation's income has varied.<br />
>> Historically, the nation has run up deficits during wars and recessions,<br />
>> but then debt has subsequently declined. For example, debt as a <strong>share</strong> of<br />
>> the economy peaked just after World War II (112.7% of <strong>GDP</strong> in 1945), but<br />
>> then fell. In recent years, however, sharp increases in deficits and the<br />
>> resulting increases in debt have led to heightened concern about the<br />
>> long-term sustainability of the federal government's fiscal policies<br />
>> (62% of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010).[9]&#8230;..<br />
>><br />
>> Debt relative to <strong>GDP</strong> rose due to recessions and policy decisions in the<br />
>> early 21st century. *From* 2000 to 2008 *debt held by the public rose*<br />
>>from 35% to 40%, and to 62% by the *end of fiscal year* 2010.[19] During<br />
>> the presidency of George W. Bush, the gross public debt <strong>increased</strong> from<br />
>> $5.7 trillion in January 2001 to $<strong>10</strong>.7 trillion by December 2008,[20]<br />
>> due in part to the Bush tax cuts and <strong>increased</strong> military spending caused<br />
>> by the wars in the Middle East.[21] Under President Barack Obama, the<br />
>> debt <strong>increased</strong> from $<strong>10</strong>.7 trillion in 2008 to $15.5 trillion by February<br />
>> 2012,[22] caused mainly by decreased tax revenue and higher safety net<br />
>> costs due to the late-2000s recession and stimulus spending.[12]&#8220;]<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> *Debt is up 22% since Obama took over.*<br />
>><br />
>> Even more since we have 2011 DATA and the National Debt is at 100% of<br />
>> <strong>GDP</strong>.  I notice that no one is updating the data that makes Obama look bad.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Federal_debt_to_GDP_-_2000_to_2010.png" >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Federal_debt_to_GDP_-_2000_to_2010.png</a><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> ["The federal government's interest payments depend primarily on<br />
>> interest rates and the amount of debt held by the public. Other factors,<br />
>> such as the rate of inflation and the maturity structure of outstanding<br />
>> securities, also affect interest costs (for example, long-term bonds<br />
>> generally carry higher interest rates than do short-term bills).<br />
>> Interest rates are determined by a combination of market forces and the<br />
>> policies of the Federal Reserve. Debt held by the public is determined<br />
>> mostly by cumulative budget deficits, which depend on policy choices<br />
>> about spending and revenues and on economic conditions and other factors.<br />
>><br />
>> Although *the federal government has <strong>increased</strong> its net borrowing* by<br />
>> more than $3 *trillion in the past two years*, net interest costs<br />
>> dropped from $253 billion in 2008 to $197 billion in 2010 because of<br />
>> remarkably low interest rates. The amounts of net interest shown in the<br />
>> budget include interest paid on all Treasury securities ($413 billion in<br />
>> 2010), minus the portion of that interest that is received by trust<br />
>> funds ($186 billion in 2010) and the net amount of other interest<br />
>> received by the government ($30 billion in 2010). The last category<br />
>> consists primarily of net receipts to the Treasury from the financing<br />
>> accounts for federal loan programs (those accounts are not included in<br />
>> the federal budget).<br />
>><br />
>> In CBO's most recent projections, which assume that current laws remain<br />
>> the same, annual deficits decline from the $1.3 trillion recorded in<br />
>> 2010, but the cumulative deficit from 2011 through 2020 exceeds $6.2<br />
>> trillion. Borrowing to finance that deficit--in combination with an<br />
>> expected rise in interest rates--would lead to a fourfold increase in<br />
>> net interest payments over the next <strong>10</strong> years, from $197 billion in 2010<br />
>> to $778 billion in 2020. As a percentage of <strong>GDP</strong>, net interest outlays<br />
>> would more than double during that period, rising from 1.4 percent to<br />
>> 3.4 percent."]<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Looks like the cost of the interest as part of the <strong>GDP</strong> doubles and what<br />
>> is bad is that the *<strong>PIE</strong> IN THE <strong>SKY</strong>* HOPE AND CHANGE is making things<br />
>> worse and NOT better as they predicted so you can imagine all these<br />
>> numbers being much worse as in more than doubling them&#8230;&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>> All those good numbers are with Obama and the Federal reserve<br />
>> MANIPULATING interest rates and the economy&#8230;. what happens when they<br />
>> can no longer afford to manipulate this phony economy?<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> The more government grows and borrows and the more interest we pay, the<br />
>> less of a standard of living you will enjoy.<br />
>><br />
>> “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America &#8216;s debt limit<br />
>> is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government<br />
>> cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing<br />
>> financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government&#8217;s<br />
>> reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America &#8216;s debt weakens us<br />
>> domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, &#8220;the buck stops<br />
>> here.&#8217; Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today<br />
>> onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt<br />
>> problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”<br />
>> *Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006*<br />
><br />
>         Yeah, I remember when my Aunt died in 2001<br />
> she had been getting about 8 percent on bonds<br />
> and CDs, and as soon as I had them put in my<br />
> name, I was lucky to get 1.5 percent.<br />
><br />
>         April 2001, who was president?</p>
<p>And this time next year you and the others will be getting 8% and the<br />
government will be paying that and more to sell their <strong>Fed Bonds</strong> to get<br />
all that <strong>money</strong> they need to pay for their <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>IMPROVED</strong> <strong>OBAMA</strong> <strong>SOCIALIST</strong><br />
<strong>SUPER</strong>-<strong>SIZED</strong> <strong>FEDERAL</strong> <strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> &#8230;.  then the sky is the limit from that<br />
point.</p>
</thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/13/new-improved-obama-socialist-super-sized-federal-government/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal tax receipts are lowest they have been since 1950.  -1attachment</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/13/federal-tax-receipts-are-lowest-they-have-been-since-1950-1attachment/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/13/federal-tax-receipts-are-lowest-they-have-been-since-1950-1attachment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 00:09:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31756</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/12/2012 10:30 PM, jim wrote: > > > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> >> On 5/12/2012 10:11 PM, jim wrote: >>> >>> >>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> The debt in 1941 was a combination of things including savings >>>> bonds&#8230;.. >>> >>> How are savings bonds of 1941 >>> different than today&#8217;s treasury bonds? [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/12/2012 <strong>10</strong>:30 PM, jim wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>><br />
>> On 5/12/2012 <strong>10</strong>:<strong>11</strong> PM, jim wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The debt in 1941 was a combination of things including savings<br />
>>>> bonds&#8230;..<br />
>>><br />
>>> How are savings bonds of 1941<br />
>>> different than today&#8217;s treasury bonds?<br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>> We were able to voluntarily buy our own debt&#8230;..  unlike today.<br />
><br />
> Nope it is exactly like today.</p>
<p>Yet today we don&#8217;t buy the debt the Chinese do.</p>
<p>Obviously it&#8217;s NOT the same.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/13/federal-tax-receipts-are-lowest-they-have-been-since-1950-1attachment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>#Osama bin Laden&#8217;s death has had zero impact on America&#8217;s security</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/13/osama-bin-ladens-death-has-had-zero-impact-on-americas-security-5/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/13/osama-bin-ladens-death-has-had-zero-impact-on-americas-security-5/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 16:55:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Sat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31744</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/13/2012 10:22 AM, * US * wrote: > &#8220;The Inexplicable Enrichment of Bush Cronies&#8221; > > http://www.counterpunch.org/2007/04/17/the-iraq-money-trail/ > > Oh, but it&#8217;s explicable &#8230; > > On Sat, 12 May 2012 01:01:01 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: > >> On 5/11/2012 9:29 PM, * US * wrote: >>> On Mon, 07 May 2012 12:47:49 -0400, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/13/2012 <strong>10</strong>:22 AM, * <strong>US</strong> * wrote:<br />
> &#8220;The Inexplicable Enrichment of Bush Cronies&#8221;<br />
><br />
> <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/2007/04/17/the-iraq-money-trail/" >http://www.counterpunch.org/2007/04/17/the-iraq-money-trail/</a><br />
><br />
> Oh, but it&#8217;s explicable &#8230;<br />
><br />
> <strong>On Sat</strong>, 12 May 2012 01:01:01 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On 5/<strong>11</strong>/2012 9:29 PM, * <strong>US</strong> * wrote:<br />
>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 07 May 2012 12:47:49 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty </thendestroyeverything>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>>> &#8230; all idiots that can&#8217;t find their<br />
>>>> own <acronym title="ass"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym> with both hands.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Bush and Cheney found their way to their offshore accounts<br />
>>> with the contents of the <strong>US</strong> Treasury because of 9/<strong>11</strong>.<br />
>><br />
>> Yep they&#8217;re living the high life now&#8230;.<br />
><br />
> They&#8217;ve stolen a lot of <strong>money</strong>, betrayed Americans and others,<br />
> and can&#8217;t travel to those countries in which they&#8217;d be arrested.<br />
></p>
<p>Obama and Eric <strong>Holder</strong> need to be arrested while they are in the act of<br />
stealing our <strong>money</strong>&#8230;.    where are you, flanging your wanger over a<br />
cold case file.</p>
</thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/13/osama-bin-ladens-death-has-had-zero-impact-on-americas-security-5/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The more government grows and borrows and the more interest we pay, the less of a standard of living you will enjoy.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/13/the-more-government-grows-and-borrows-and-the-more-interest-we-pay-the-less-of-a-standard-of-living-you-will-enjoy/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/13/the-more-government-grows-and-borrows-and-the-more-interest-we-pay-the-less-of-a-standard-of-living-you-will-enjoy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 16:52:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CBO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COSTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Increasing America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[INTEREST]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MANIPULATING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Middle-East]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATIONAL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PIE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senator Barack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[share]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SKY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31742</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/13/2012 11:24 AM, emoneyjoe wrote: > On Sun, 13 May 2012 08:58:30 -0500, jim < "sjedgingN0Sp"@m @&#038;*$?%mwt.net> > wrote: > >> emoneyjoe wrote: >> >>>> That would create inflation. >>> >>> Probably not, the thing that causes the >>> most inflation is things that drive up costs, >>> like wage increases, and scarcity, so [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/13/2012 <strong>11</strong>:24 AM, emoneyjoe wrote:<br />
> On Sun, 13 May 2012 08:58:30 -0500, jim < "sjedgingN0Sp"@m<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>mwt.net><br />
> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> emoneyjoe wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> That would create inflation.<br />
>>><br />
>>>       Probably not, the thing that causes the<br />
>>> most inflation is things that drive up costs,<br />
>>> like wage increases, and scarcity, so what<br />
>>> is scarce today?<br />
>><br />
>> Money is scarce due to private sector<br />
>> no longer borrowing $4 trillion like they<br />
>> did in 2007.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>><br />
>>>        Or any other product, service or tangible<br />
>>> offered for sale, if the <strong>money</strong> was gained honestly,<br />
>>> why wouldn&#8217;t <strong>money</strong> in the hands of a China man<br />
>>> be the same as for any other man.<br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> First you claim the bond buyers are going to<br />
>> put the <strong>money</strong> in the bank and not buy goods and services<br />
>> that cause inflation. Then you claim that they will<br />
>> use the trillions to buy goods and services<br />
>> that do cause inflation<br />
>><br />
>> The fact is the <strong>SS</strong> recipients are already<br />
>> spending the <strong>money</strong> once. You want twice as<br />
>> much $$ spent but insist there will be no inflation<br />
>>from doing that.<br />
><br />
>        No, I don&#8217;t, no I don&#8217;t, I don&#8217;t, just the same<br />
> pay  out, without borrowing, it is congress that<br />
> has already spent the <strong>SS</strong> trust fund and has to<br />
> borrow if the treasury needs any of the virtual<br />
> trust fund to pay pensions.<br />
>       The only way to do that is create emoney.<br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
>> Inflation is what costs me <strong>money</strong>.<br />
>> The interest on the federal debt costs me and<br />
>> my grandchildren nothing.<br />
><br />
>        You don&#8217;t spend enough on the things<br />
> that matter to be worrying about inflation,</p>
<p>More interest on debt creates more taxes and more inflation and I was in<br />
a few stores just yesterday and it&#8217;s NOT getting any cheaper out there<br />
to live.</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png" >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png</a></p>
<p>Government uses more of the <strong>GDP</strong> to pay the interest on the National debt<br />
as they increase the size and cost of Government.</p>
<p>["The argument for using <strong>GDP</strong> as a standard-of-living proxy is not that<br />
it is a good indicator of the absolute level of standard of living, but<br />
that living standards tend to move with per-capita <strong>GDP</strong>, so that changes<br />
in living standards are readily detected through changes in <strong>GDP</strong>."]</p>
<p>The higher the percentage of the <strong>GDP</strong> that goes to paying government debt<br />
(interest on the debt) the less your quality of living will be.</p>
<p>Why does the equation for the <strong>GDP</strong> NOT have government spending minus the<br />
government payment of interest on the debt as part of the equation.</p>
<p>["    <strong>GDP</strong> = private consumption + gross investment + government spending<br />
+ (exports ? imports), or</p>
<p><strong>GDP</strong> = C + I + G + ( X - M )    "]</p>
<p>You see government spending but where is the cost to the <strong>GDP</strong> of that<br />
government spending&#8230;.    It should be</p>
<p><strong>GDP</strong> = C + I + (G &#8211; <strong>INTEREST</strong> ON <strong>NATIONAL</strong> DEBT) + (X &#8211; M)</p>
<p>If you are going to add what the government spends to help the economy<br />
then you need to add what they are costing the economy also.</p>
<p>They have conveniently left out a huge part of the <strong>GDP</strong> which is interest<br />
on the National debt and it&#8217;s slated to be as much as our <strong>MILITARY</strong> <strong>COSTS</strong><br />
IN A FEW YEARS.</p>
<p>["<strong>Federal</strong> debt as a <strong>share</strong> of the nation's income has varied.<br />
Historically, the nation has run up deficits during wars and recessions,<br />
but then debt has subsequently declined. For example, debt as a <strong>share</strong> of<br />
the economy peaked just after World War II (112.7% of <strong>GDP</strong> in 1945), but<br />
then fell. In recent years, however, sharp increases in deficits and the<br />
resulting increases in debt have led to heightened concern about the<br />
long-term sustainability of the federal government's fiscal policies<br />
(62% of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010).[9]&#8230;..</p>
<p>Debt relative to <strong>GDP</strong> rose due to recessions and policy decisions in the<br />
early 21st century. *From* 2000 to 2008 *debt held by the public rose*<br />
from 35% to 40%, and to 62% by the *end of fiscal year* 2010.[19] During<br />
the presidency of George W. Bush, the gross public debt <strong>increased</strong> from<br />
$5.7 trillion in January 2001 to $<strong>10</strong>.7 trillion by December 2008,[20]<br />
due in part to the Bush tax cuts and <strong>increased</strong> military spending caused<br />
by the wars in the <strong>Middle East</strong>.[21] Under President Barack Obama, the<br />
debt <strong>increased</strong> from $<strong>10</strong>.7 trillion in 2008 to $15.5 trillion by February<br />
2012,[22] caused mainly by decreased tax revenue and higher safety net<br />
costs due to the late-2000s recession and stimulus spending.[12]&#8220;]</p>
<p>*Debt is up 22% since Obama took over.*</p>
<p>Even more since we have 2011 DATA and the National Debt is at 100% of<br />
<strong>GDP</strong>.  I notice that no one is updating the data that makes Obama look bad.</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Federal_debt_to_GDP_-_2000_to_2010.png" >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Federal_debt_to_GDP_-_2000_to_2010.png</a></p>
<p>["The federal government's interest payments depend primarily on<br />
interest rates and the amount of debt held by the public. Other factors,<br />
such as the rate of inflation and the maturity structure of outstanding<br />
securities, also affect interest costs (for example, long-term bonds<br />
generally carry higher interest rates than do short-term bills).<br />
Interest rates are determined by a combination of market forces and the<br />
policies of the <strong>Federal</strong> Reserve. Debt held by the public is determined<br />
mostly by cumulative budget deficits, which depend on policy choices<br />
about spending and revenues and on economic conditions and other factors.</p>
<p>Although *the federal government has <strong>increased</strong> its net borrowing* by<br />
more than $3 *trillion in the past two years*, net interest costs<br />
dropped from $253 billion in 2008 to $197 billion in 2010 because of<br />
remarkably low interest rates. The amounts of net interest shown in the<br />
budget include interest paid on all Treasury securities ($413 billion in<br />
2010), minus the portion of that interest that is received by trust<br />
funds ($186 billion in 2010) and the net amount of other interest<br />
received by the government ($30 billion in 2010). The last category<br />
consists primarily of net receipts to the Treasury from the financing<br />
accounts for federal loan programs (those accounts are not included in<br />
the federal budget).</p>
<p>In <strong>CBO</strong>'s most recent projections, which assume that current laws remain<br />
the same, annual deficits decline from the $1.3 trillion recorded in<br />
2010, but the cumulative deficit from 2011 through 2020 exceeds $6.2<br />
trillion. Borrowing to finance that deficit--in combination with an<br />
expected rise in interest rates--would lead to a fourfold increase in<br />
net interest payments over the next <strong>10</strong> years, from $197 billion in 2010<br />
to $778 billion in 2020. As a percentage of <strong>GDP</strong>, net interest outlays<br />
would more than double during that period, rising from 1.4 percent to<br />
3.4 percent."]</p>
<p>Looks like the cost of the interest as part of the <strong>GDP</strong> doubles and what<br />
is bad is that the *<strong>PIE</strong> IN THE <strong>SKY</strong>* HOPE AND <strong>CHANGE</strong> is making things<br />
worse and NOT better as they predicted so you can imagine all these<br />
numbers being much worse as in more than doubling them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>All those good numbers are with Obama and the <strong>Federal</strong> reserve<br />
<strong>MANIPULATING</strong> interest rates and the economy&#8230;. what happens when they<br />
can no longer afford to manipulate this phony economy?</p>
<p>The more government grows and borrows and the more interest we pay, the<br />
less of a standard of living you will enjoy.</p>
<p>“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America &#8216;s debt limit<br />
is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government<br />
cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing<br />
financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government&#8217;s<br />
reckless fiscal policies. <strong>Increasing America</strong> &#8216;s debt weakens us<br />
domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, &#8220;the buck stops<br />
here.&#8217; Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today<br />
onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt<br />
problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”<br />
*<strong>Senator Barack</strong> H. Obama, March 2006*</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/13/the-more-government-grows-and-borrows-and-the-more-interest-we-pay-the-less-of-a-standard-of-living-you-will-enjoy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal tax receipts are lowest they have been since 1950. -1 attachment</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/12/federal-tax-receipts-are-lowest-they-have-been-since-1950-1-attachment-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/12/federal-tax-receipts-are-lowest-they-have-been-since-1950-1-attachment-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 02:16:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31730</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/12/2012 10:11 PM, jim wrote: > > > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: > >>> >> >> The debt in 1941 was a combination of things including savings >> bonds&#8230;.. > > How are savings bonds of 1941 > different than today&#8217;s treasury bonds? > We were able to voluntarily buy our own debt&#8230;.. unlike today.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/12/2012 <strong>10</strong>:<strong>11</strong> PM, jim wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
><br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>> The debt in 1941 was a combination of things including savings<br />
>> bonds&#8230;..<br />
><br />
> How are savings bonds of 1941<br />
> different than today&#8217;s treasury bonds?<br />
></p>
<p>We were able to voluntarily buy our own debt&#8230;..  unlike today.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/12/federal-tax-receipts-are-lowest-they-have-been-since-1950-1-attachment-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal tax receipts are lowest they have been since 1950. &#8211; 1 attachment</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/12/federal-tax-receipts-are-lowest-they-have-been-since-1950-1-attachment/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/12/federal-tax-receipts-are-lowest-they-have-been-since-1950-1-attachment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 01:44:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crazy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ERASE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FACT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOVERNMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HYPOCRITE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Laertes Neither]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[POLITICIANS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RAN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[REPLY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TRILLION]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White House]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wrong Home]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wrong Went]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31720</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/12/2012 9:59 AM, clairbear wrote: > &#8220;Sid9&#8243; wrote in news:jolks0$kr6$1 @&#038;*$?%dont-email.me: > >> >> &#8220;clairbear&#8221; wrote in message >> news:XnsA050EB16D5668clairbear @&#038;*$?%216.196.97.142&#8230; >>> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; wrote in >>> news:jokg43$kcv$1 @&#038;*$?%dont-email.me: >>> >>>> >>>> &#8220;Lamont Cranston&#8221; wrote in message >>>> news:jokfqu$p5s$8 @&#038;*$?%news.datemas.de&#8230; >>>>> On 5/10/2012 1:57 PM, clairbear wrote: >>>>>> &#8220;First.Post&#8221; wrote in >>>>>> news:XnsA04F9ED1B8CA6OccupierDumber @&#038;*$?%88.198.244.100: >>>>>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/12/2012 9:59 AM, clairbear wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @ bellsouth.net> wrote in news:jolks0$kr6$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dont-email.me:<br />
><br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;clairbear&#8221; <clairbearknowssidsux @Verizon.com> wrote in message<br />
>> news:XnsA050EB16D5668clairbear<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>216.196.97.142&#8230;<br />
>>> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @ bellsouth.net> wrote in<br />
>>> news:jokg43$kcv$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dont-email.me:<br />
>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> &#8220;Lamont Cranston&#8221; <friend @Umbra.org> wrote in message<br />
>>>> news:jokfqu$p5s$8<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>news.datemas.de&#8230;<br />
>>>>> On 5/<strong>10</strong>/2012 1:57 PM, clairbear wrote:<br />
>>>>>> &#8220;First.Post&#8221;<occupierdumberthandirt @invalid.org>  wrote in<br />
>>>>>> news:XnsA04F9ED1B8CA6OccupierDumber<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>88.198.244.100:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> clairbear<clairbear @msn.com>  wrote in<br />
>>>>>>> news:XnsA04FA304BE7F7clairbear<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>216.196.97.142:<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> jim< "sjedgingN0Sp"@m<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>mwt,net>  wrote in<br />
>>>>>>>> news:Z-qdnf6chbu4lzHSnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>bright.net:<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> clairbear wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> Debt was a bad Idea Under Bush and the the 110th dem<br />
>>>>>>>>>> controlled congress when it shot up dramatically , Itwas bad<br />
>>>>>>>>>> before that, It&#8217;s gotten far, far worse<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Nevertheless when the time comes you will embrace the<br />
>>>>>>>>> federal debt.<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> You do even begin to know who or what I am. But we know what<br />
>>>>>>>> your are Just by the <strong>FACT</strong> that you edit out reference to you<br />
>>>>>>>> hero and his saying ho wbad the debt was before HE <strong>RAN</strong> UP $5<br />
>>>>>>>> <strong>TRILLION</strong> worth of debt in less than 4 years  NOW be a good<br />
>>>>>>>> little liberal <strong>HYPOCRITE</strong> AND <strong>ERASE</strong> THAT BEFORE YOU <strong>REPLY</strong> and<br />
>>>>>>>> that will cofirm all doubt of what a <strong>HYPOCRITE</strong> you are<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> More of a complete idiot than a hypocrite considering the goof<br />
>>>>>>> believes that the federal debt is irrellevant to anything and<br />
>>>>>>> means nothing. Yeah yeah, sure sure, he preaches that the<br />
>>>>>>> government debt doesn&#8217;t matter as long as his liberal messiah is<br />
>>>>>>> in office but watch his opinion <strong>change</strong> after the election and a<br />
>>>>>>> Republican sits in the whitehouse.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> Yeah it like that oft misattributed remarks &#8220;a billion here, a<br />
>>>>>> billion there ans soon your talking real <strong>money</strong>&#8221; No debt is good<br />
>>>>>> debt unless it something you can reasonably pay back whether it be<br />
>>>>>> personal , business , state of national debt. Problem is with so<br />
>>>>>> many sucking at the federal teat<br />
>>>>>> deficit spending has become a peramnent thing. Imagine if you<br />
>>>>>> lived you personal always borrowing more than you can pay back<br />
>>>>>> where would you be, Thats where we are headed as a nation if thing<br />
>>>>>> don&#8217;t <strong>change</strong> Speaking of <strong>change</strong> remember thos promises of  and<br />
>>>>>> slogans of 4 years ago, Change Hope and Transparency. we got none<br />
>>>>>> in fact we got almost the opposite, now the sloagn is Forward. If<br />
>>>>>> past is prolog we a need to be very<br />
>>>>>> concerned.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Please, please take an English class.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Clair&#8217;s logic and economics are bad, too.<br />
>>> Wrong<br />
>>>> Home schooled?<br />
>>> Wrong<br />
>>>> Went to school in a state of the former confederacy?<br />
>>> Wrong<br />
>>>> ALL debt is NOT bad.<br />
>>> To quote Polonius to his son Laertes<br />
>>> Neither a borrower nor a lender be,<br />
>>> For loan oft loses both itself and friend,<br />
>>> And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.<br />
>>><br />
>>> National debt at the levels of the last foive years is very bad<br />
>>> Ever since the begining of the 110th congress the debt has been<br />
>>> rising at a<br />
>>> runaway rate<br />
>>> Only a horses <acronym title="ass"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym> would defend what the 110th and 111th congresses<br />
>>> and Obama have done to the debt And before you go off on bush rant he<br />
>>> was  in part resposible for letting the dems of the 110th run up the<br />
>>> tab<br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>> Debt and deficits are crises only when a Democrat is in the White<br />
>> House.<br />
>><br />
>> These were just fine when St <strong>Reagan</strong> of the spend and borrow school was<br />
>> president<br />
>> These were just fine when bush,jr had two unfunded wars (off budget)<br />
>><br />
>> What a bunch of hypocrites!<br />
>><br />
>><br />
> Massive debt is bad no matter who is  the Whitehouse but lets not forget<br />
> who controls writing budgets, the congess and who was in control of<br />
> congress During the recent upward movement of the debt the dems held<br />
> both or one house of congess when the republicsn cotrolled both houses<br />
> under clinton and bush the Debt to <strong>GDP</strong> ration trended down. Since the<br />
> start of 110Th, through the 112th(no budget congress) the dems<br />
> controlled both houses now the controol the sente. The same senate that<br />
> refused to bring the budget to the floor for a vote.<br />
></p>
<p>The debt in 1941 was a combination of things including savings<br />
bonds&#8230;..    It was NOT just a bunch of <strong>crazy</strong> over spending by<br />
<strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> <strong>POLITICIANS</strong> and people were readily using their own <strong>money</strong> to<br />
help the Nation. Today it&#8217;s the government stealing from people and<br />
telling them it isn&#8217;t their <strong>money</strong>.  The difference is about as wide a<br />
chasm as the Grand canyon.</p>
<p></clairbear></occupierdumberthandirt></friend></sid9></clairbearknowssidsux></sid9></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/12/federal-tax-receipts-are-lowest-they-have-been-since-1950-1-attachment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Victory Day or 9 May marks the capitulation of Germany to the Soviet Union in the Great Patriotic War&#8230;.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/12/victory-day-or-9-may-marks-the-capitulation-of-germany-to-the-soviet-union-in-the-great-patriotic-war/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/12/victory-day-or-9-may-marks-the-capitulation-of-germany-to-the-soviet-union-in-the-great-patriotic-war/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 01:30:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Baltic Republics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barry Bruyea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dhu Evil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dhu Yes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Georgia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Germany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GMT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liberation Day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mecklenburg Vorpommern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moscow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nick Stamenkovic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Sat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Remembrance Day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Victory Day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WWII]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31718</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/12/2012 6:11 AM, Dhu on Gate wrote: > On Sat, 12 May 2012 01:27:04 +0000, Gray Guest wrote: > >> Dhu on Gate wrote in >> news:l6brr.1111$x11.521 @&#038;*$?%newsfe21.iad: >> >>> On Fri, 11 May 2012 06:10:52 -0400, Barry Bruyea wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, 11 May 2012 09:13:06 GMT, Dhu on Gate >>>> wrote: [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/12/2012 6:<strong>11</strong> AM, Dhu on Gate wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Sat</strong>, 12 May 2012 01:27:04 +0000, Gray Guest wrote:<br />
><br />
>> Dhu on Gate <campbell @neotext.ca> wrote in<br />
>> news:l6brr.1111$x11.521<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>newsfe21.iad:<br />
>><br />
>>> On Fri, <strong>11</strong> May 2012 06:<strong>10</strong>:52 -0400, <strong>Barry Bruyea</strong> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> On Fri, <strong>11</strong> May 2012 09:13:06 <strong>GMT</strong>, Dhu on Gate </campbell><campbell @neotext.ca><br />
>>>> wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 16:58:34 -0400, <strong>Barry Bruyea</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 20:05:29 <strong>GMT</strong>, Dhu on Gate </campbell><campbell @neotext.ca><br />
>>>>>> wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> On Sun, 06 May 2012 22:58:54 -0700, _ G O D _ wrote:<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_Day_" >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_Day_</a>(9_May)<a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/countries_in_which_/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#Countries_in_which_</a><br />
>>>>>>>> 9_May_is_celebrated<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> <strong>Victory Day</strong> or 9 May marks the capitulation of <strong>Germany</strong><br />
>>>>>>>> to the Soviet <strong>Union</strong> in the Great Patriotic <strong>War</strong>. It was first<br />
>>>>>>>> inaugurated in the fifteen republics of the Soviet <strong>Union</strong>,<br />
>>>>>>>> following the signing of the surrender document late in the<br />
>>>>>>>> evening on 8 May 1945 after midnight, thus on 9 May, by<br />
>>>>>>>> <strong>Moscow</strong> Time. The Soviet government announced victory<br />
>>>>>>>> early on 9 May, after signing ceremony in Berlin.  Though<br />
>>>>>>>> the official inauguration happened in 1945, which means<br />
>>>>>>>> it has been celebrated since 1946, the holiday became a<br />
>>>>>>>> non-labour day only in 1965, only in some of the countries.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> This festival is celebrated to commemorate the 28000000<br />
>>>>>>>> children, parents, spouses and friends killed in the USSR<br />
>>>>>>>> in the Great Patriotic <strong>War</strong> for independence from <strong>Germany</strong>.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> In East <strong>Germany</strong>, a &#8220;<strong>Victory Day</strong>&#8221; on 9 May was an official<br />
>>>>>>>> holiday from 1975 until the end of the republic in 1990. Prior<br />
>>>>>>>> to that, <strong>Liberation Day</strong> was celebrated on 8 May, between<br />
>>>>>>>> 1950 and 1966, and again on the 40th anniversary in 1985.<br />
>>>>>>>> Since 2002, the German state Mecklenburg-Vorpommern<br />
>>>>>>>> has observed a commemoration day known as the &#8220;Day of<br />
>>>>>>>> Liberation from National <strong>Socialism</strong>, and the End of Second<br />
>>>>>>>> World <strong>War</strong>&#8220;.<br />
>>>>>>>> In 1988, before the dissolution of the Soviet <strong>Union</strong>, Victory<br />
>>>>>>>> Day ceased to be observed in Uzbekistan, but was partially<br />
>>>>>>>> restored in 1999 as <strong>Remembrance Day</strong>.  After separation<br />
>>>>>>>> from the Soviet <strong>Union</strong>, the <strong>Baltic Republics</strong> commemorate<br />
>>>>>>>> the end of the <strong>WWII</strong> on 8 May, the &#8220;Victory for <strong>Europe</strong> Day&#8221;<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> The celebration of <strong>Victory Day</strong> continued during subsequent<br />
>>>>>>>> years.  It became a topic of importance in cinema, literature,<br />
>>>>>>>> history lessons at school, the mass media, and the arts. The<br />
>>>>>>>> ritual of celebration gradually obtained a distinctive character<br />
>>>>>>>> with a number of similar elements: the ceremonial meetings,<br />
>>>>>>>> speeches, lectures, receptions and fireworks.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> Germans have not officially recognised 9 May as a holiday.<br />
>>>>>>>> However, celebration continue to take place in some areas<br />
>>>>>>>> of the former German Democratic Republic. Also, on 8 May,<br />
>>>>>>>> the German state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern since 2002<br />
>>>>>>>> has recognised the commemorative day Tag der Befreiung<br />
>>>>>>>> vom Nationalsozialismus und der Beendigung. Weltkrieges,<br />
>>>>>>>> a Day of Liberation from National <strong>Socialism</strong>, and the End of<br />
>>>>>>>> the Second World <strong>War</strong>.<br />
>>>>>>>> &#8211;<br />
>>>>>>>> _____________________________________________________<br />
>>>>>>>> <a href="http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml" >http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml</a><br />
>>>>>>>> I intend to last long enough to put out of business all<br />
>>>>>>>> <acronym title="COck"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> C&*$?%k</span></acronym>-suckers and other beneficiaries of the institutionalized<br />
>>>>>>>> slavery and genocide.<br />
>>>>>>>> &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;<br />
>>>>>>>> &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;- &#8220;The army that will defeat terrorism doesn&#8217;t<br />
>>>>>>>> wear uniforms, or drive Humvees, or calls in air-strikes. It<br />
>>>>>>>> doesn&#8217;t have a high command, or high security, or a high budget.<br />
>>>>>>>> The army that can defeat terrorism does battle quietly, clearing<br />
>>>>>>>> minefields and vaccinating children. It undermines military<br />
>>>>>>>> dictatorships and military lobbyists. It subverts sweatshops and<br />
>>>>>>>> special interests.Where people feel powerless, it helps them<br />
>>>>>>>> organize for change, and where people are powerful, it reminds them<br />
>>>>>>>> of their responsibility.&#8221;   ~~~~ Author Unknown ~~~~<br />
>>>>>>>> ___________________________________________________<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Yes.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> And congratulations again to our Russian allies on their victory<br />
>>>>>>> over racism and fascism.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Dhu<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> Yes, so they could practice their own &#8216;racism&#8217; and &#8216;fascism&#8217; of which<br />
>>>>>> they were equal or better than the Nazis and survived a hell of lot<br />
>>>>>> longer.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> I&#8217;ve lived in Russia.  It&#8217;s one of the few genuinely multi-ethnic<br />
>>>>> nations on the planet.  The USofA is another.  People in those places<br />
>>>>> actually worry and think about &#8220;racism&#8221; and bigotry.  Most other places<br />
>>>>> it&#8217;s just &#8220;common knowledge&#8221;.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Dhu<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> How did they &#8216;worry&#8217; about racism and bigotry?  Watching the trains<br />
>>>> leave for Siberia for 70 years?  Practicing ethnic cleansing in<br />
>>>> <strong>Georgia</strong> and Chechnya?  Destroying a whole class of people in the<br />
>>>> Ukraine?<br />
>>><br />
>>> Not to point fingers or anything, but the Trail of Tears was not a<br />
>>> Russian invention. The dislocations and distortions of newly<br />
>>> industrializing societies are not a happy passage.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Dhu<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>> The Trail of Tears, while a tragedy, is not even a footnote compare to the<br />
>> Ukranian genocide. Or the 10s of millions killed in the Soviet <strong>Union</strong> over<br />
>> 70 years.<br />
><br />
> Genocide is genocide, and raw numbers aren&#8217;t the issue.<br />
><br />
> Dhu<br />
></p>
<p>Evil is bad, more evil is worse.</p>
<p>Numbers may NOT be the only measure but they are significant.</p>
<p></campbell></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/12/victory-day-or-9-may-marks-the-capitulation-of-germany-to-the-soviet-union-in-the-great-patriotic-war/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Have you noticed that the House of Representatives is in the hands of paste-eating morons?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/12/have-you-noticed-that-the-house-of-representatives-is-in-the-hands-of-paste-eating-morons/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/12/have-you-noticed-that-the-house-of-representatives-is-in-the-hands-of-paste-eating-morons/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 May 2012 05:13:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alan Grayson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CPAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daniel Webster]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dick Lugar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eating]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FEMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fraulein Bachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FREEEEDDOOOOOOOOMMMM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RINO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve King]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thomas Jefferson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thomas Paine]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31704</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/12/2012 12:16 AM, clairbear wrote: > The boys wrote in news:joknjf$676$2 > @wieslauf.sub.de: > >> On 5/10/2012 7:50 PM, Sid9 wrote: >>> http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/congress-census-funding-8732568 >>> >>> Congress Doesn&#8217;t Need No Census from the People! >>> >>> By Charles P. Pierce >>> May 10 at 1:58PM >>> >>> Have you noticed that the House of Representatives [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/12/2012 12:16 AM, clairbear wrote:<br />
> The boys <action @gogetum.com> wrote in news:joknjf$676$2<br />
> @wieslauf.sub.de:<br />
><br />
>> On 5/<strong>10</strong>/2012 7:50 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
>>> <a href="http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/congress-census-funding-8732568" >http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/congress-census-funding-8732568</a><br />
>>><br />
>>> <strong>Congress</strong> Doesn&#8217;t Need No Census from the People!<br />
>>><br />
>>> By Charles P. Pierce<br />
>>> May <strong>10</strong> at 1:58PM<br />
>>><br />
>>> Have you noticed that the House of Representatives is in the hands of<br />
>>> paste-<strong>eating</strong> morons?<br />
>>><br />
>>> I&#8217;m sorry, but, what with <strong><acronym title="Dick"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> D&*$?%k</span></acronym> Lugar</strong>&#8216;s being retired by a bunch of<br />
>>> Hoosiers on Tuesday, all civility is lost to American politics.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Anyway, back to the paste-<strong>eating</strong> morons, and I think <strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong><br />
>>> would agree with me.<br />
>><br />
>> What you know about <strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong>, is what you see on a coin.<br />
>>><br />
>>> The House has decided that census means counting the people<br />
>>> one-two-three and that anything else is a violation of<br />
>>> <strong>FREEEEDDOOOOOOOOMMMM</strong>! that would have had the Founders spitting up<br />
> their<br />
>>> Madeira.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Except, of course, that this is the way Jefferson wanted the census<br />
> to<br />
>>> be done, but nothing he ever said or did counts except that &#8220;watering<br />
>>> the tree of liberty&#8221; business that Tim McVeigh believed made a<br />
> helluva<br />
>>> T-shirt to wear on his really big day&#8230;.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Republicans, acknowledging its usefulness, attacked the survey as an<br />
>>> unconstitutional invasion of privacy, arguing that the government has<br />
> no<br />
>>> business knowing how many flush toilets someone has, for instance.<br />
>>><br />
>>> &#8220;It would seem that these questions hardly fit the scope of what was<br />
>>> intended or required by the <strong>Constitution</strong>,&#8221; said Rep. <strong>Daniel Webster</strong><br />
>>> (R-Fla.), author of the <strong>amendment</strong>.<br />
>>><br />
>>> &#8220;This survey is inappropriate for taxpayer dollars,&#8221; Webster added.<br />
>>> &#8220;It&#8217;s the definition of a breach of personal privacy. It&#8217;s the<br />
> picture<br />
>>> of what&#8217;s wrong in Washington, D.C. It&#8217;s unconstitutional.&#8221;<br />
>>><br />
>>> (This is the latest in a long line of attacks on the census that<br />
> reached<br />
>>> high tide a while back when <strong>Fraulein Bachmann</strong> (R-Basel) speculated<br />
> that<br />
>>> it was being used for the eventual round-up of conservatives for<br />
>>> interment in <strong>FEMA</strong> camps.)<br />
>>><br />
>>> Webster is the guy for whom some folks in Florida traded Alan<br />
> Grayson,<br />
>>> but the <strong>Thomas Paine</strong> of the don&#8217;t-count-my-commodes revolution is<br />
>>> transcendent crackpot <strong>Steve King</strong> of Iowa, who&#8217;s told the annual bag<br />
> of<br />
>>> mixed nuts called <strong>CPAC</strong> that, &#8220;We have a nation of double-flushers<br />
> with<br />
>>> designer plungers because the Stasi police have taken away another<br />
> piece<br />
>>> of our liberty &#8230;<br />
>>><br />
>>> I want my liberty back!&#8221; King also chimed in yesterday.<br />
>>><br />
>>> &#8220;I think it&#8217;s important to have the information, but it&#8217;s important<br />
> that<br />
>>> people have <strong>freedom</strong> and liberty and we do not have an intrusive<br />
> federal<br />
>>> government that would impose a fine on people if they didn&#8217;t let the<br />
>>> information come out about whether they had a flush toilet.&#8221;<br />
>>><br />
>>> Why do I believe that, very often in his youth on the Iowa plains,<br />
> Steve<br />
>>> King walked into an outhouse and was baflled as to why he couldn&#8217;t<br />
> make<br />
>>> a phone call?<br />
>>><br />
>>> I&#8217;m telling you, if <strong><acronym title="Dick"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> D&*$?%k</span></acronym> Lugar</strong> hadn&#8217;t lost the other day, I&#8217;d be a<br />
> lot<br />
>>> nicer.<br />
>>><br />
>> Lugar lost because he was a <strong>RINO</strong>, and senile too.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
><br />
> It was time for him to go 30 plus years is way to long for anyone<br />
> democrat, independent or republican. Being inside the beltway that long<br />
> causes one to lose touch  and humility</p>
<p>Your premise is that he was turned into an <acronym title="asshole"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%e</span></acronym> by the government,<br />
rather than he was an <acronym title="asshole"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%e</span></acronym> from the get-go.</p>
<p></action></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/12/have-you-noticed-that-the-house-of-representatives-is-in-the-hands-of-paste-eating-morons/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pay with Cash to keep privacy alive &amp; tyranny away</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/pay-with-cash-to-keep-privacy-alive-tyranny-away/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/pay-with-cash-to-keep-privacy-alive-tyranny-away/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 04:34:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jos Boersema]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31692</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/10/2012 9:19 AM, Jos Boersema wrote: > > Quote: > Alex talks with Dr. Katherine Albrecht, an expert in the area of privacy > and technology. She is the founder of Consumers Against Supermarket > Privacy Invasion and Numbering and hosts &#8220;The Dr. Katherine Albrecht show&#8221; > on the GCN Radio network. > End [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/<strong>10</strong>/2012 9:19 AM, <strong>Jos Boersema</strong> wrote:<br />
> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/bOXRPijfNX0&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /><br />
> Quote:<br />
>   Alex talks with Dr. Katherine Albrecht, an expert in the area of privacy<br />
>   and technology. She is the founder of Consumers Against Supermarket<br />
>   Privacy Invasion and Numbering and hosts &#8220;The Dr. Katherine Albrecht show&#8221;<br />
>   on the GCN Radio network.<br />
> End quote.<br />
><br />
> Katherine says it is a good idea to pay with cash and not with cards.<br />
> Agreed, let&#8217;s try to boycot &#8216;plastic&#8217; as much as possible and move to<br />
> cash.<br />
><br />
Better yet is to Barter and trade for items and services.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/pay-with-cash-to-keep-privacy-alive-tyranny-away/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>says he&#8217;s asolutely comfortable with gay marriage.(Nasty)</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/says-hes-asolutely-comfortable-with-gay-marriage-nasty-4/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/says-hes-asolutely-comfortable-with-gay-marriage-nasty-4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 04:15:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Biden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eddie Haskell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[include]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mafia Family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NAZI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News2 Handler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PRISON]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31684</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/8/2012 10:56 PM, In a very dark China Blue, China Blue condition. wrote: > In article &#60;4FA9D239.5080408 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com>, > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: > >> On 5/8/2012 9:04 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote: >>> On 5/7/2012 6:29 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> On 5/7/2012 8:36 PM, Capt. Justice wrote: >>>>> Biden: says he&#8217;s asolutely comfortable with gay marriage. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/8/2012 <strong>10</strong>:56 PM, In a very dark <strong>China</strong> Blue, <strong>China</strong> Blue condition.<br />
wrote:<br />
> In article &lt;4FA9D239.5080408<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>,<br />
>  BeamMeUpScotty
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On 5/8/2012 9:04 PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
>>> On 5/7/2012 6:29 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> On 5/7/2012 8:36 PM, Capt. Justice wrote:<br />
>>>>> <strong>Biden</strong>: says he&#8217;s asolutely comfortable with gay marriage.<br />
>>>>>> . ( this would have to <strong>include</strong> his thinking<br />
>>>>>> its ok for men to kornhole men. )<br />
>>>>>> ( or women )<br />
>>>>> ..<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> <a href="http://sg1.msntv.msn.com/News2/Handler.ashx?url=http://firstread.msnbc.msn" >http://sg1.msntv.msn.com/News2/Handler.ashx?url=http://firstread.msnbc.msn</a><br />
>>>>> .com/_news/2012/05/06/11564304-biden-im-absolutely-comfortable-with-gay-ma<br />
>>>>> rriage?lit<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Maybe <strong>Biden</strong> is planning his &#8220;post&#8221; Obama administration life in <strong>PRISON</strong><br />
>>>> and he figures he&#8217;ll get married in prison to Bubba his cell mate who<br />
>>>> will be a <strong>NEO</strong> <strong>NAZI</strong> gang member&#8230;..    Obama and all the Chicago Mafia<br />
>>>> Family had to have put an idiot like <strong>Biden</strong> there as the fall guy, just<br />
>>>> in case their <strong>money</strong> laundering schemes were found out.<br />
>>><br />
>>> You&#8217;re getting more stupid every day, Beamer.  Have you been hanging out<br />
>>> with <strong>Eddie Haskell</strong>?<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Now you want to blame me for your lack of having a sense of humor.<br />
>> Blaming Bush didn&#8217;t work for this time?<br />
><br />
> For there to be a joke <strong>Biden</strong> would have to be</p>
<p>Yes he would&#8230;</p>
</thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/says-hes-asolutely-comfortable-with-gay-marriage-nasty-4/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Where are the jobs? Ask the patent trolls.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/where-are-the-jobs-ask-the-patent-trolls/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/where-are-the-jobs-ask-the-patent-trolls/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 04:02:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[future]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vivek Wadhwa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wright Brothers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31679</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/10/2012 11:54 PM, Leroy N. Soetoro wrote: > http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-innovations/where-are-the-jobs- > ask-the-patent-trolls/2012/05/07/gIQAdIE08T_story.html?tid=pm_national_pop > > By Vivek Wadhwa, Published: May 7 > > President Obama has been touting patents as a way to create jobs and > increase U.S. competitiveness. “These are jobs and businesses of the > future just waiting to be created,” he said [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/<strong>10</strong>/2012 <strong>11</strong>:54 PM, Leroy N. Soetoro wrote:<br />
> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-innovations/where-are-the-jobs-" >http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-innovations/where-are-the-jobs-</a><br />
> ask-the-patent-trolls/2012/05/07/gIQAdIE08T_story.html?tid=pm_national_pop<br />
><br />
> By <strong>Vivek Wadhwa</strong>, Published: May 7<br />
><br />
> <strong>President Obama</strong> has been touting patents as a way to create jobs and<br />
> increase U.S. competitiveness. “These are jobs and businesses of the<br />
> <strong>future</strong> just waiting to be created,” he said</p>
<p>When is Obama going to pay the <strong>Wright Brothers</strong> heirs their due for the<br />
invention of manned flight?   It seems government stole that bit of<br />
technology and has used it plenty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/where-are-the-jobs-ask-the-patent-trolls/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Where are the jobs? Ask the patent trolls.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/where-are-the-jobs-ask-the-patent-trolls/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/where-are-the-jobs-ask-the-patent-trolls/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 04:02:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[future]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vivek Wadhwa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wright Brothers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31678</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/10/2012 11:54 PM, Leroy N. Soetoro wrote: > http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-innovations/where-are-the-jobs- > ask-the-patent-trolls/2012/05/07/gIQAdIE08T_story.html?tid=pm_national_pop > > By Vivek Wadhwa, Published: May 7 > > President Obama has been touting patents as a way to create jobs and > increase U.S. competitiveness. “These are jobs and businesses of the > future just waiting to be created,” he said [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/<strong>10</strong>/2012 <strong>11</strong>:54 PM, Leroy N. Soetoro wrote:<br />
> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-innovations/where-are-the-jobs-" >http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-innovations/where-are-the-jobs-</a><br />
> ask-the-patent-trolls/2012/05/07/gIQAdIE08T_story.html?tid=pm_national_pop<br />
><br />
> By <strong>Vivek Wadhwa</strong>, Published: May 7<br />
><br />
> <strong>President Obama</strong> has been touting patents as a way to create jobs and<br />
> increase U.S. competitiveness. “These are jobs and businesses of the<br />
> <strong>future</strong> just waiting to be created,” he said</p>
<p>When is Obama going to pay the <strong>Wright Brothers</strong> heirs their due for the<br />
invention of manned flight?   It seems government stole that bit of<br />
technology and has used it plenty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/where-are-the-jobs-ask-the-patent-trolls/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Moral Infrastructure &#8211; The Occupy movement does away with rule of law.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/the-moral-infrastructure-the-occupy-movement-does-away-with-rule-of-law/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/the-moral-infrastructure-the-occupy-movement-does-away-with-rule-of-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 03:35:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Black Panthers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Border]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Equal Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thomas Sowell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[violence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31668</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/10/2012 10:32 PM, Ubiquitous wrote: > By Thomas Sowell > > The Occupy movement does away with rule of law. > > The &#8220;Occupy&#8221; movement, which the Obama administration and much of the > media have embraced, has implications that reach far beyond the passing > sensation it has created. > > The unwillingness [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/<strong>10</strong>/2012 <strong>10</strong>:32 PM, Ubiquitous wrote:<br />
> By <strong>Thomas Sowell</strong><br />
><br />
> The Occupy movement does away with <strong>rule</strong> of law.<br />
><br />
> The &#8220;Occupy&#8221; movement, which the Obama administration and much of the<br />
> media have embraced, has implications that reach far beyond the passing<br />
> sensation it has created.<br />
><br />
> The unwillingness of authorities to put a stop to their organized<br />
> disruptions of other people&#8217;s lives, their trespassing, vandalism and<br />
> <strong>violence</strong> is a de facto suspension, if not repeal, of the 14th<br />
> Amendment&#8217;s requirement that the government provide &#8220;equal protection of<br />
> the laws&#8221; to all its citizens.</p>
<p>Welcome to reality&#8230;  I&#8217;ve been telling you people that the whole Obama<br />
regime is violating the &#8220;equal under the law&#8221;  part of the constitution.<br />
Because they believe in &#8220;<strong>Social Justice</strong>&#8221; NOT &#8220;<strong>Equal Justice</strong>&#8221;  and the<br />
two can not co exist because <strong>Social Justice</strong> is the antithesis of Equal<br />
justice.</p>
<p>You have the <strong>Border</strong> problem with illegals that Obama refuses to equally<br />
enforce laws on.   You have <strong>Black Panthers</strong> that Obama refuses to enforce<br />
laws on.  And there are more&#8230;..</p>
<p>Putting it simply, Obama hates our constitution and is determined to<br />
undermine it and ignore it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/the-moral-infrastructure-the-occupy-movement-does-away-with-rule-of-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>$10,000 To Anyone Who Provides The College Transcripts of President Barack Obama</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/10000-to-anyone-who-provides-the-college-transcripts-of-president-barack-obama/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/10000-to-anyone-who-provides-the-college-transcripts-of-president-barack-obama/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 15:58:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Juris Diction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Barack]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31654</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/10/2012 8:44 AM, Juris Diction wrote: > In article > &#60;78f23a6099ba7a4952e4a85d7c77bbcb @&#038;*$?%msgid.frell.theremailer.net>, > &#8220;A. Munoz&#8221; wrote: > >> In article >> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; wrote: >>> >>> May 9, 2012 >> >> You gonna vote for gumby again? > > or for conservative delusional cockroaches? The guy in prison that beat Obama in one of the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/<strong>10</strong>/2012 8:44 AM, <strong>Juris Diction</strong> wrote:<br />
> In article<br />
> &lt;78f23a6099ba7a4952e4a85d7c77bbcb<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>msgid.frell.theremailer.net>,<br />
>  &#8220;A. Munoz&#8221; <amunoz @msn.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> In article <jofcd9 $chf$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dont-email.me><br />
>> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @ bellsouth.net> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>> May 9, 2012<br />
>><br />
>> You gonna vote for gumby again?<br />
><br />
> or for conservative delusional cockroaches?</p>
<p>The guy in prison that beat Obama in one of the primaries looks<br />
interesting&#8230;..</p>
<p>At least the guy in prison won&#8217;t be taking $4 million dollar vacations<br />
for the next 20 years.</p>
<p></sid9></jofcd9></amunoz></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/10/10000-to-anyone-who-provides-the-college-transcripts-of-president-barack-obama/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>11 Quotes That Show How Worried The Financial World Is About Europe Right Now</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/09/11-quotes-that-show-how-worried-the-financial-world-is-about-europe-right-now/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/09/11-quotes-that-show-how-worried-the-financial-world-is-about-europe-right-now/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 16:20:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[39450925]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AAA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brown Brothers Harriman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CHANGES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ECB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FL 5/3/12]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[French German]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Greece]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harvard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jamie Dimon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moshe Dedpeder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nick Stamenkovic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Panagiota Makri]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Schools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RIA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sydney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trayvon Hater]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tristan Cooper]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wall Street]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WWIII]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31614</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[... The recent elections in France and in Greece have thrown the global financial system into an uproar. Fear and worry are everywhere and nobody is quite sure what is going to happen next. All of the financial deals that Greece has made over the past few years may be null and void. Nobody is [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...<br />
The recent elections in <strong>France</strong> and in Greece have thrown the global<br />
financial system into an uproar.  Fear and worry are everywhere and<br />
nobody is quite sure what is going to happen next.  All of the financial<br />
deals that Greece has made over the past few years may be null and void.<br />
Nobody is going to know for sure until a new government is formed, and<br />
at this point it looks like that is not going to happen and that there<br />
will need to be new elections in June.  All of the financial deals that<br />
<strong>France</strong> has made over the past few years may be null and void as well.<br />
New French President Francois Hollande seems determined to take <strong>France</strong><br />
on a path away from austerity.  But can <strong>France</strong> really afford to keep<br />
spending <strong>money</strong> that it does not have?  <strong>France</strong> has already lost its <strong>AAA</strong><br />
credit rating and French bond yields have started to move up toward<br />
dangerous territory.  And Greek politicians are delusional if they think<br />
they have any other choice other than austerity.  Without European<br />
bailout <strong>money</strong> (which they won't get if they don't honor their current<br />
agreements), nobody is going to want to lend Greece a dime.</p>
<p>And all of this talk about "austerity" is kind of silly anyway.  It<br />
isn't as if either <strong>France</strong> or Greece was going to have a balanced budget<br />
any time soon.  Both nations were still running up huge amounts of debt<br />
even under the "austerity" budgets.</p>
<p>But the citizens of both nations have sent a clear message that they are<br />
not going to tolerate even a slowdown in government spending.  They want<br />
to go back to the debt-fueled prosperity of the last several decades,<br />
even if it makes their long-term financial problems a lot worse.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, as I mentioned earlier, Greece does not have that option.<br />
Without the bailout <strong>money</strong> that they are scheduled to get, Greece does<br />
not have a prayer of avoiding a disorderly default.  Private investors<br />
would have to be insane to lend Greece <strong>money</strong> if the bailout deal falls<br />
apart.  Greece desperately needs the help of the EU, the <strong>ECB</strong> and the IMF<br />
and the only way they are going to get it is if they abide by the terms<br />
of the agreements that have already been reached.</p>
<p>The only way that Greece can avoid austerity at this point would be to<br />
leave the euro.  Nobody would want to lend <strong>money</strong> to Greece under that<br />
scenario either, but Greece could choose to print huge amounts of their<br />
own national currency if they wanted to.</p>
<p>The situation is different in <strong>France</strong>.  Investors are still willing to<br />
lend to <strong>France</strong> at reasonable interest rates, but if <strong>France</strong> chooses to<br />
run up huge amounts of additional debt at some point they will end up<br />
just like Greece.</p>
<p>What is even more important in the short-term is the crumbling of the<br />
French/German alliance on European fiscal matters.  Angela Merkel and<br />
Nicolas Sarkozy were a united front, but now Merkel and Hollande are<br />
likely to have conflict after conflict.</p>
<p>Instead of moving in one clear direction, the eurozone is now fractured<br />
and tensions are rising.</p>
<p>So what comes next?</p>
<p>Well, investors are not certain what comes next and that has many of<br />
them deeply concerned.</p>
<p>The following are <strong>11</strong> quotes that show how worried the financial world is<br />
about Europe right now....</p>
<p><a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/1/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#1</a> Tres Knippa of Kenai Capital Management: "What is going on in Europe<br />
is an absolute disaster…the risk-on trade is not the place to be. I want<br />
to be out of equities and very, very defensive because the situation in<br />
Europe just got worse after those elections."</p>
<p><a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/2/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#2</a> Mark McCormick, currency strategist at <strong>Brown Brothers Harriman</strong>:<br />
"We’re going to have higher tensions, more uncertainty and most likely a<br />
weaker euro."</p>
<p><a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/3/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#3</a> <strong>Nick Stamenkovic</strong>, investment strategist at <strong>RIA</strong> Capital Markets in<br />
Edinburgh: "Investors are questioning whether Greece will be a part of<br />
the single currency at the end of this year."</p>
<p><a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/4/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#4</a> Jörg Asmussen, a European Central Bank executive board member:<br />
"Greece needs to be aware that there is no alternative to the agreed<br />
reform program if it wants to remain a member of the eurozone"</p>
<p><a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/5/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#5</a> <strong>Tristan Cooper</strong>, sovereign debt analyst at Fidelity Worldwide<br />
Investment: "A Greek eurozone exit is on the cards although the<br />
probability and timing of such an event is uncertain."</p>
<p><a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/6/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#6</a> Art Cashin: "Here’s the outlook on Greece from <strong>Wall Street</strong> watering<br />
holes. If a coalition government is formed or looks to be formed, global<br />
markets may rally. Any coalition is unlikely to make progress on goals,<br />
since austerity is political suicide. There will likely be another<br />
election around June <strong>10</strong>/17. A workable majority/plurality remains<br />
unlikely, so back to square one. Therefore, Greece will be unable to<br />
attain goals by the deadline (June 30). Lacking aid funds, pensions are<br />
suspended and government workers are laid off. Protestors take to the<br />
streets and government is forced to revert to drachma to avoid <strong>social</strong><br />
chaos. Pass the peanuts, please."</p>
<p><a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/7/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#7</a> John Noonan, Senior Forex Analyst with Thomson Reuters in <strong>Sydney</strong>:<br />
"Sentiment is very bearish, The euro is under a lot of pressure right<br />
now. I get the feeling that it’s going to be a nasty move lower for the<br />
euro finally"</p>
<p><a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/8/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#8</a> Kenneth S. Rogoff, a professor of economics at <strong>Harvard</strong>: "A Greek exit<br />
would underscore that there’s no realistic long-term plan for Europe,<br />
and it would lead to a chaotic endgame for the rest of the euro zone."</p>
<p><a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/9/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#9</a> Chris Tinker of Libra Investment Services: "It’s a binary decision.<br />
If Greece gets itself to the point where the European administration<br />
says, ‘We can’t play this game anymore,’ that starts a domino effect"</p>
<p>#<strong>10</strong> Nicolas Véron, a senior fellow at Bruegel: "<strong>France</strong> has very limited<br />
fiscal space and actually has to engage in fiscal consolidation"</p>
<p>#<strong>11</strong> 80-year-old Greek citizen <strong>Panagiota Makri</strong>: "I'm confused. I feel<br />
numb and confused. Only God can save us now"</p>
<p>All of this comes at a time when much of Europe is already descending<br />
into a new recession.  Economies all over Europe are contracting and<br />
<strong>unemployment</strong> rates are skyrocketing.  Until things start improving,<br />
there is going to continue to be a lot of civil unrest across Europe.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, things are not so great in the <strong>United States</strong> either.</p>
<p>JPMorgan Chase CEO <strong>Jamie Dimon</strong> claims that the U.S. economy is holding a<br />
"royal straight flush", but the only part of that he got right was the<br />
"flush" part.</p>
<p>There are 100 million working age Americans that do not have jobs, the<br />
middle class continues to shrink, the rising cost of food and the rising<br />
cost of gas are severely stretching the budgets of millions of American<br />
families and the federal government continues to run up gigantic amounts<br />
of debt.</p>
<p>When Europe descends into financial chaos, the <strong>United States</strong> is not<br />
going to escape it.  The financial crisis of 2008 deeply affected the<br />
entire globe, and so will the next great financial crisis.</p>
<p>Let us hope that we still have a little bit more time before the next<br />
great financial crisis strikes, but things in Europe are rapidly<br />
unraveling and at some point the dominoes are going to begin to fall.<br />
...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/09/11-quotes-that-show-how-worried-the-financial-world-is-about-europe-right-now/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Did you see where France will be Socialist run&#8230;.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/09/did-you-see-where-france-will-be-socialist-run-4/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/09/did-you-see-where-france-will-be-socialist-run-4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 15:20:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foreclosure Response]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Local Initiatives Support Corp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Miami]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mortgages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NOTHING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[owned]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Palm Beach]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Owers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rob Pitingolo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[share]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialist Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Florida]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[uk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Urban Institute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31608</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/6/2012 12:00 AM, Sid9 wrote: > > &#8220;somadisk&#8221; wrote in message > news:jo480k$udg$4 @&#038;*$?%dont-email.me&#8230; >> Sid9 wrote: >>> >>> &#8220;somadisk&#8221; wrote in message >>> news:jo3j4n$28t$4 @&#038;*$?%dont-email.me&#8230; >>>> Clave wrote: >>>>> &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221; wrote in >>>>> message news:4FA4719A.1080902 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230; >>>>>> On 5/4/2012 3:05 PM, Clave wrote: >>>>>>> &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221; >>>>>>> wrote in >>>>>>> message news:4FA42145.9070802 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230; >>>>>>>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/6/2012 12:00 AM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;somadisk&#8221; <bzl @nev.edr> wrote in message<br />
> news:jo480k$udg$4<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dont-email.me&#8230;<br />
>> Sid9 wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>> &#8220;somadisk&#8221; </bzl><bzl @nev.edr> wrote in message<br />
>>> news:jo3j4n$28t$4<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dont-email.me&#8230;<br />
>>>> Clave wrote:<br />
>>>>> &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221;
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in<br />
>>>>> message news:4FA4719A.1080902<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230;<br />
>>>>>> On 5/4/2012 3:05 PM, Clave wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221;</thendestroyeverything>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>>> wrote in<br />
>>>>>>> message news:4FA42145.9070802<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230;<br />
>>>>>>>> On 5/4/2012 2:30 PM, Clave wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> &#8220;somadisk&#8221;<bzl @nev.edr> wrote in message<br />
>>>>>>>>> news:jo15h5$mrm$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dont-email.me&#8230;<br />
>>>>>>>>>> Clave wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> the <strong>GOP</strong> has no interest in putting people back to<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> work,<br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> Why not?<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> While Obama&#8217;s in office, anything good for the country is bad for<br />
>>>>>>>>> the<br />
>>>>>>>>> <strong>GOP</strong>.<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Simple as that.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> Cutting the deficit would be good for the country and good for<br />
>>>>>>>> Republicans that have been promoting it for a long time.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> What utter pigshit. Like austerity is working so well everywhere<br />
>>>>>>> else.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Jim<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> It only needs to work here to be of value to us&#8230;<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Except it doesn&#8217;t work.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>> How would anyone know, given that we have not tried it?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Why are you terrified of not being able to borrow us into Chinese<br />
>>>> slavery?<br />
>>><br />
>>> Austerity has been tried and is a total failure.<br />
>><br />
>> The <strong>US</strong> has not tried austerity, you lie.<br />
>><br />
>>> Austerity means<br />
>><br />
>> It means you will have to decide which programs we can all afford.<br />
>> That&#8217;s why it terrifies you.<br />
><br />
> Austerity leads to recession and depression when the economy id not well.<br />
> See the examples in <strong>Spain</strong> and the <strong>UK</strong>&#8230;Conservatives did the damage.</p>
<p>Austerity is the result of recession and depression when the economy is<br />
not well. See the examples in <strong>Spain</strong> and the <strong>UK</strong>&#8230;Conservatives did<br />
<strong>NOTHING</strong> to damage the economy yet <strong>Socialist Spending</strong> has destroyed their<br />
economies.</p>
<p>You will have between 3 and <strong>10</strong> years of depressed housing markets, and<br />
higher <strong>taxes</strong> won&#8217;t sell any of those houses any faster&#8230;.</p>
<p>[" <strong>South Florida</strong> tops nation in distressed <strong>mortgages</strong><br />
<a href="http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/business/realestate/housekeys/blog/2012/05/south_florida_tops_nation_in_d_1.html" >http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/business/realestate/housekeys/blog/2012/05/south_florida_tops_nation_in_d_1.html</a><br />
By <strong>Paul Owers</strong> May 9, 2012 12:05 AM</p>
<p><strong>South Florida</strong> leads the nation in distressed home <strong>mortgages</strong>, signaling a<br />
lengthy recovery even if the housing market has hit bottom, as many<br />
experts say.</p>
<p>Nearly a quarter of home <strong>mortgages</strong> in <strong>Palm Beach</strong>, Broward and <strong>Miami</strong>-Dade<br />
counties are at least 90 days overdue or in foreclosure, according to<br />
data released Wednesday. The percentage has declined over the past year.</p>
<p>The report comes from Foreclosure-Response.org, a joint project of<br />
national nonprofit groups <strong>Local Initiatives Support Corp</strong>., Urban<br />
Institute and the Center for Housing Policy.</p>
<p>As of December, 23.6 percent of loans in the three counties are in the<br />
foreclosure process or seriously delinquent. That’s down from 24.6<br />
percent at year-end 2010.</p>
<p><strong>South Florida</strong> has topped the nation in the <strong>share</strong> of distressed homes for<br />
the past seven quarters.</p>
<p>With so many foreclosures in the pipeline, some analysts worry that<br />
bank-<strong>owned</strong> homes could flood the market and drive down prices. But many<br />
other observers expect values to remain stable because eager buyers,<br />
attracted in part by low interest rates, are competing for a limited<br />
supply of properties.</p>
<p>The large number of troubled loans is the result of jammed courts in<br />
states like Florida, where judges must approve foreclosures, according<br />
to the Foreclosure-Response.org report.</p>
<p>It takes an average of 861 days for a lender to repossess a property in<br />
Florida, says RealtyTrac Inc., a California foreclosure listing firm.</p>
<p>Florida and other states need to balance approving foreclosures in a<br />
more timely manner with giving struggling homeowners their due process,<br />
said <strong>Rob Pitingolo</strong>, a research assistant at the <strong>Urban Institute</strong>.</p>
<p>“It’s tough because we do want to make sure there are protections for<br />
borrowers,” he said. “But we also need to clear out the foreclosure<br />
inventory if we want to stabilize neighborhoods.”</p>
<p>Florida dominates the list of distressed <strong>mortgages</strong> nationwide."]</p>
<p></bzl></thendestroyeverything></bzl></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/09/did-you-see-where-france-will-be-socialist-run-4/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mitt Wants America&#8217;s 99-Percent [YOU] To Feel Europe&#8217;s PAIN!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/08/mitt-wants-americas-99-percent-you-to-feel-europes-pain-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/08/mitt-wants-americas-99-percent-you-to-feel-europes-pain-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 02:30:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AUSTERITY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editorial Opinion Graphics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eugene Robinson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Germany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Greece]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insightful Izzy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LOST]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAIN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31596</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/8/2012 8:59 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote: > On 5/8/2012 8:04 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> On 5/8/2012 10:30 AM, Insightful Izzy wrote: >>> http://img3.wpdigital.net/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/05/07/Editorial-Opinion/Graphics/toles05082012.jpg >>> >>> >>> ======================== >>> >>> &#8220;Austerity as a bridge to nowhere&#8221; >>> >>> >>> Op-Ed >>> By Eugene Robinson >>> May 7, 2012 >>> >>> >>> >>> ECONOMIC AUSTERITY is [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/8/2012 8:59 PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
> On 5/8/2012 8:04 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>> On 5/8/2012 <strong>10</strong>:30 AM, <strong>Insightful Izzy</strong> wrote:<br />
>>> <a href="http://img3.wpdigital.net/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/05/07/Editorial-Opinion/Graphics/toles05082012.jpg" >http://img3.wpdigital.net/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/05/07/Editorial-Opinion/Graphics/toles05082012.jpg</a><br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> ========================<br />
>>><br />
>>> &#8220;Austerity as a bridge to nowhere&#8221;<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> Op-Ed<br />
>>> By <strong>Eugene Robinson</strong><br />
>>> May 7,  2012<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> <strong>ECONOMIC</strong> <strong>AUSTERITY</strong> is a dangerous, self-defeating intellectual fad.<br />
>>> Perhaps I should say that’s what it was, given Sunday’s election<br />
>>> results in Europe. Perhaps I should also say good riddance.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Voters in <strong>France</strong>, <strong>Greece</strong> and even <strong>Germany</strong> — a hotbed of the austerity<br />
>>> cult — told their political leaders, in no uncertain terms, that<br />
>>> boosting economic growth is more important than cutting government<br />
>>> spending. Here in the <strong>United States</strong>, I hope that <strong>Democrats</strong>, at least,<br />
>>> were paying attention; I fear that the addled ideologues who control<br />
>>> the <strong>Republican Party</strong> will never get the message.<br />
>><br />
>> Do you remember the 2010 election when <strong>Democrats</strong> <strong>LOST</strong> 700 elections in<br />
>> all levels of government after the ObamaCare wild spending plan that 66%<br />
>> of Americans didn&#8217;t want&#8230;.  you know the one that Obama and <strong>Democrats</strong><br />
>> forced onto all Americans and will NOW tax ALL Americans to pay for it.<br />
><br />
> I remember the 2010 election as one where most Americans, being as<br />
> economically ignorant as you are, voted *against* their own interests.</p>
<p>The reason they voted that way is their own personal business, you do<br />
want &#8220;citizens&#8221; to vote as well as all the illegals and prison<br />
population, and the fact that Obama and <strong>Democrats</strong> were their target of<br />
the retribution is obvious.</p>
<p>The how they voted and the why they voted and who they voted for, is<br />
common knowledge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/08/mitt-wants-americas-99-percent-you-to-feel-europes-pain-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mitt Wants America&#8217;s 99-Percent [YOU] To Feel Europe&#8217;s PAIN!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/08/mitt-wants-americas-99-percent-you-to-feel-europes-pain/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/08/mitt-wants-americas-99-percent-you-to-feel-europes-pain/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 15:04:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AUSTERITY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deficit Gone Wild]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editorial Opinion Graphics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eugene Robinson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[future]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Germany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Greece]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insightful Izzy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LOST]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAIN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31566</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/8/2012 10:30 AM, Insightful Izzy wrote: > http://img3.wpdigital.net/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/05/07/Editorial-Opinion/Graphics/toles05082012.jpg > > ======================== > > &#8220;Austerity as a bridge to nowhere&#8221; > > > Op-Ed > By Eugene Robinson > May 7, 2012 > > > > ECONOMIC AUSTERITY is a dangerous, self-defeating intellectual fad. > Perhaps I should say that’s what it was, given Sunday’s [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/8/2012 <strong>10</strong>:30 AM, <strong>Insightful Izzy</strong> wrote:<br />
> <a href="http://img3.wpdigital.net/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/05/07/Editorial-Opinion/Graphics/toles05082012.jpg" >http://img3.wpdigital.net/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/05/07/Editorial-Opinion/Graphics/toles05082012.jpg</a><br />
><br />
> ========================<br />
><br />
> &#8220;Austerity as a bridge to nowhere&#8221;<br />
><br />
><br />
> Op-Ed<br />
> By <strong>Eugene Robinson</strong><br />
> May 7,  2012<br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
> <strong>ECONOMIC</strong> <strong>AUSTERITY</strong> is a dangerous, self-defeating intellectual fad.<br />
> Perhaps I should say that’s what it was, given Sunday’s election<br />
> results in Europe. Perhaps I should also say good riddance.<br />
><br />
> Voters in <strong>France</strong>, <strong>Greece</strong> and even <strong>Germany</strong> — a hotbed of the austerity<br />
> cult — told their political leaders, in no uncertain terms, that<br />
> boosting economic growth is more important than cutting government<br />
> spending. Here in the <strong>United States</strong>, I hope that <strong>Democrats</strong>, at least,<br />
> were paying attention; I fear that the addled ideologues who control<br />
> the <strong>Republican Party</strong> will never get the message.</p>
<p>Do you remember the 2010 election when <strong>Democrats</strong> <strong>LOST</strong> 700 elections in<br />
all levels of government after the ObamaCare wild spending plan that 66%<br />
of Americans didn&#8217;t want&#8230;.  you know the one that Obama and <strong>Democrats</strong><br />
forced onto all Americans and will NOW tax ALL Americans to pay for it.</p>
<p>Well it was a serious breach of continuity with voters and that forced<br />
<strong>Socialism</strong> has now cost the <strong>Democrats</strong> many many seats of <strong>power</strong> that they<br />
held.  It will cost them more and while few people would look forward to<br />
austerity,  most understand the need for stopping Obama and <strong>Democrats</strong><br />
from their &#8220;Spending Gone Wild&#8221; which leads to the &#8220;<strong>Deficit Gone Wild</strong>&#8221;<br />
and that is creating our <strong>future</strong> austerity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/08/mitt-wants-americas-99-percent-you-to-feel-europes-pain/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Beauty Of Fascism As A Political/Economic/Social Ideology</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/07/the-beauty-of-fascism-as-a-politicaleconomicsocial-ideology/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/07/the-beauty-of-fascism-as-a-politicaleconomicsocial-ideology/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 02:01:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[libertarians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RIGHT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TWIST]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31550</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/7/2012 9:42 PM, Topaz wrote: > On Mon, 07 May 2012 14:19:10 -0700, P&#038;*$?%s > wrote: > > >> What a crock of c&#038;*$?%p. Nice piece of propaganda that is utter garbage. >> Let&#8217;s dissect, shall we? Yes! >> >> &#8220;Under Fascism, the government will not approve of any business activity >> unless that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/7/2012 9:42 PM, Topaz wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 07 May 2012 14:19:<strong>10</strong> -0700, <acronym title="Peter Franks"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> P&*$?%s</span></acronym> <none @none.com><br />
> wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
>> What a crock of <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>.  Nice piece of propaganda that is utter garbage.<br />
>> Let&#8217;s dissect, <strong>shall</strong> we?  Yes!<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;Under Fascism, the government will not approve of any business activity<br />
>> unless that business has a positive impact on the nation as a whole and<br />
>> the people of the nation&#8230;&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> So, exactly who or what decides what is and is not a &#8220;positive impact&#8221;?<br />
><br />
> Selling heroin is not a positive impact. Libertarians must allow that<br />
> according to their own principles. Only Fascism makes for a great<br />
> nation.</p>
<p>Fascism is totalitarian and Libertarians are against government tyranny<br />
and for personal <strong>freedom</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>SO</strong> given the choice between not selling/buying Heroin freely and<br />
Fascism, <strong>libertarians</strong> would accept the fact they can&#8217;t buy/sell heroin.</p>
<p>Life is rarely so perfect that you don&#8217;t have to compromise.</p>
<p>Fascism is just Socialism with a <strong>RIGHT</strong> <strong>HAND</strong> <strong>TWIST</strong>.</p>
<p></none></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/07/the-beauty-of-fascism-as-a-politicaleconomicsocial-ideology/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Asia stocks plunge after Europe elections, US data&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/07/asia-stocks-plunge-after-europe-elections-us-data/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/07/asia-stocks-plunge-after-europe-elections-us-data/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 16:22:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Asia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Associated Press]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BANGKOK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Germany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Greece]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islamic Dog Eater]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thailand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31512</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/7/2012 10:51 AM, Nickname unavailable wrote: > On May 7, 5:40 am, Islamic Dog Eater wrote: >> Only zee Fwench would double down on Socialism. Associated Press: >> &#8220;Asia stocks plunge after Europe elections, US data&#8221; >> >> 5/6/2012 11:21:04 PM >> >> BANGKOK, Thailand &#8212; Asian stock markets were pummeled Monday by >> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/7/2012 <strong>10</strong>:51 AM, Nickname unavailable wrote:<br />
> On May 7, 5:40 am, <strong>Islamic Dog Eater</strong> <z222 ...@london.com> wrote:<br />
>> Only zee Fwench would double down on <strong>Socialism</strong>. <strong>Associated Press</strong>:<br />
>> &#8220;<strong>Asia</strong> stocks plunge after <strong>Europe</strong> elections, <strong>US</strong> data&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> 5/6/2012 <strong>11</strong>:21:04 PM<br />
>><br />
>> <strong>BANGKOK</strong>, <strong>Thailand</strong> &#8212; Asian stock markets were pummeled Monday by<br />
>> weekend election results in <strong>Greece</strong> and France that heightened<br />
>> uncertainty about <strong>Europe</strong>&#8216;s ability to solve its debt crisis.<br />
><br />
>  <strong>france</strong> has been run by conservatives since 1993. the economy tanked<br />
> under their watch, so you blame the ones out of <strong>power</strong> for 19 years for<br />
> the conservative debacles, typical.</p>
<p>Sarkozy was NOT very conservative&#8230;..  but he may NOT have been a<br />
absolute Socialist.  Wasn&#8217;t <strong>Spain</strong> really Socialist right up till it&#8217;s<br />
trouble? Most of <strong>Europe</strong> has been on a Socialist bent for decades.</p>
<p><strong>Europe</strong> is falling for the Socialist lies and they&#8217;ll now spend more<br />
borrowed <strong>money</strong> than what was spent to create this mess.  In the end the<br />
<strong>Socialists</strong> will collapse the entire world <strong>system</strong> of capitalism.</p>
<p>Asian markets got it right, all you can do is prepare for the inevitable<br />
collapse of <strong>Socialism</strong>.  Which is what they started to do.<br />
It &#8220;may&#8221; be time to convert assets and run to the far corners of<br />
civilization.</p>
<p>It will be total and world wide.  Last time we had a tiny little country<br />
of <strong>Germany</strong> that collapsed the world into chaos and this time it&#8217;ll be<br />
led by France and <strong>Greece</strong> and most of <strong>Europe</strong>.</p>
<p></z222></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/07/asia-stocks-plunge-after-europe-elections-us-data/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Overlooking Renewable Energy = 21st Century Equivalent of Starving Jamestown Settlers Overlooking Chesapeake Bay Oysters</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/07/overlooking-renewable-energy-21st-century-equivalent-of-starving-jamestown-settlers-overlooking-chesapeake-bay-oysters/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/07/overlooking-renewable-energy-21st-century-equivalent-of-starving-jamestown-settlers-overlooking-chesapeake-bay-oysters/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 14:19:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[41]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[demand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31494</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/6/2012 10:41 PM, James wrote: > &#8220;Bret Cahill&#8221; wrote in message > news:fc59a1d1-1971-42f3-aa2b-5894daaef4fc @&#038;*$?%23g2000yqo.googlegroups.com >> Every people in every era seems to do something so dumb it&#8217;s almost >> suicidal. >> >> >> Bret Cahill > > No one has overlooked renewable energy. Like liberals everywhere, the > idea has no conclusion. Liberals make [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/6/2012 <strong>10</strong>:<strong>41</strong> PM, James wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Bret Cahill&#8221; <bretcahill @peoplepc.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:fc59a1d1-1971-42f3-aa2b-5894daaef4fc<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>23g2000yqo.googlegroups.com<br />
>> Every people in every era seems to do something so dumb it&#8217;s almost<br />
>> suicidal.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Bret Cahill<br />
><br />
> No one has overlooked renewable energy. Like liberals everywhere, the<br />
> idea has no conclusion. Liberals make it up as they go, whether there<br />
> are solutions or not. Todays windmills and solar <strong>power</strong> could never<br />
> replace the <strong>demand</strong> for <strong>power</strong> but liberals believe that someday,<br />
> technology will solve all questions and, like Nancy <strong>Pelosi</strong>, we have to<br />
> do it to find out the details. They (libs) should get off their lazy<br />
> <acronym title="asses"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym> and figure out the problems that will occur and how they could be<br />
> handled, but nooooooo, we&#8217;ll decide that later.</p>
<p>Windmills don&#8217;t create enough energy to be self reproducing&#8230;&#8230;  we<br />
can use oil to get more oil, we can&#8217;t use a wind generator to build<br />
another wind generator, that takes oil.</p>
<p></bretcahill></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/07/overlooking-renewable-energy-21st-century-equivalent-of-starving-jamestown-settlers-overlooking-chesapeake-bay-oysters/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why TBers (Tea Bag Tire Biters) Aren&#8217;t Waiting Around for Tampa</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/07/why-tbers-tea-bag-tire-biters-arent-waiting-around-for-tampa/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/07/why-tbers-tea-bag-tire-biters-arent-waiting-around-for-tampa/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 14:13:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richard Steel]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31490</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/6/2012 10:01 PM, Richard Steel wrote: > On May 6, 10:25 am, Bret Cahill wrote: >>>>>>>> Nothing&#8217;s blowing up but the farts that are building up in that anal >>>>>>>> cavity of yours. Repugnant hot gas, no doubt. >>>>>>> In six months, the Democrats will desperately need those Catholic >>>>>>> votes. >>>>>> Wishful hallucinating. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/6/2012 <strong>10</strong>:01 PM, <strong>Richard Steel</strong> wrote:<br />
> On May 6, <strong>10</strong>:25 am, Bret Cahill <bretcah ...@peoplepc.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> Nothing&#8217;s blowing up but the farts that are building up in that anal<br />
>>>>>>>> cavity of yours.  Repugnant hot gas, no doubt.<br />
>>>>>>> In six months, the <strong>Democrats</strong> will desperately need those Catholic<br />
>>>>>>> votes.<br />
>>>>>> Wishful hallucinating.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> In 2008, <strong>Barack Obama</strong> won the Catholic vote by nine points,<br />
>><br />
>>>> And in 2012 <strong>Barack Obama</strong> is stuck at a 60% chance of being reelected.<br />
>><br />
>>>> <a href="https://data.intrade.com/graphing/jsp/closingPricesForm.jsp?contractI..." >https://data.intrade.com/graphing/jsp/closingPricesForm.jsp?contractI&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>>>> And spree shooting wingers know this.<br />
>><br />
>>> Really?  You&#8217;re counting on intrade betters six months out?<br />
>><br />
>>> What was it that <strong>PT</strong> Barnum said about &#8220;Born Every Minute?<br />
><br />
>> Sounds like you can clean up just by putting some <strong>money</strong> on Romney but<br />
>> you aren&#8217;t.<br />
><br />
>> Why?<br />
><br />
>> There are only two reasons you aren&#8217;t betting on Romney:<br />
><br />
>> 1.  You don&#8217;t think Romney will win.<br />
><br />
>> 2.  You are too doggie poopie stoopid to have any <strong>money</strong>.<br />
><br />
>> Now which one is it?<br />
><br />
> 3.  I don&#8217;t put excess <strong>money</strong> into silly betting pools.  I send it to<br />
> Republican candidates.<br />
><br />
Liberals are greedy&#8230;.    the rest of us want to make things better for<br />
all Americans.</p>
<p></bretcah></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/07/why-tbers-tea-bag-tire-biters-arent-waiting-around-for-tampa/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>WHAT IS YOUR PURPOSE?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/05/what-is-your-purpose/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/05/what-is-your-purpose/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 03:02:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dr King]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Martin Luther]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitchell Holman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MLK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RFK]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31452</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/5/2012 5:54 PM, ConsR @&#038;*$?%minority.gov wrote: > &#8220;A Moose in Love&#8221; wrote in message > news:c22be9db-0bdb-4445-aa30-ccd831a21d9d @&#038;*$?%m15g2000vbh.googlegroups.com&#8230; > On May 4, 10:26 pm, Mitchell Holman wrote: >> &#8220;SaPeIsMa&#8221; wrote innews:Lc-dnTcsIsPn1znSnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d @&#038;*$?%bright.net: >> >>> RFK shot by an Arab also a Democrat >> >> Sirhan Sirhan was a Democrat? >> >> Post your proof. >> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/5/2012 5:54 PM, <a href="mailto:ConsR<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>minority.gov">ConsR<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>minority.gov</a> wrote:<br />
> &#8220;A Moose in Love&#8221;
<parkstreetbooboo @gmail.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:c22be9db-0bdb-4445-aa30-ccd831a21d9d<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>m15g2000vbh.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
> On May 4, <strong>10</strong>:26 pm, <strong>Mitchell Holman</strong> <nomailcomcast .net> wrote:<br />
>> &#8220;SaPeIsMa&#8221; <sapei ...@HotMail.com> wrote innews:Lc-dnTcsIsPn1znSnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>bright.net:<br />
>><br />
>>> <strong>RFK</strong> shot by an Arab also a Democrat<br />
>><br />
>> Sirhan Sirhan was a Democrat?<br />
>><br />
>> Post your proof.<br />
>><br />
>>> <strong>MLK</strong> (Republican) &#8211; shot by a Democrat<br />
>><br />
>> <strong>Martin Luther</strong> King was a Republican?<br />
>><br />
>> Post your proof.</p>
<p>One is that he didn&#8217;t believe in <strong>ABORTION</strong>.</p>
<p>Two is he did believe in measuring a man by his character.</p>
<p>Three is he believed in a God and the Bible.</p>
<p>Was Dr king promoting gay sex or NOT? I just can&#8217;t recall.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s three or four off the top of my head that suggest he was more in<br />
line with Republicans.</p>
<p>We know <strong>Democrats</strong> hate the religious &#8220;Right&#8221;&#8230;.   They are all stupid<br />
religious fools, correct?</p>
<p><strong>Democrats</strong> as a party were opposed to ending discrimination and couldn&#8217;t<br />
muster the votes to pass the 1964 civil rights act.  <strong>Dr King</strong> was for<br />
ending discrimination wasn&#8217;t he&#8230;</p>
<p></sapei></nomailcomcast></parkstreetbooboo>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/05/what-is-your-purpose/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama caves to Chinese</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/04/obama-caves-to-chinese/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/04/obama-caves-to-chinese/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2012 14:33:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bin Laden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31376</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/3/2012 8:10 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote: > On 5/3/2012 9:36 AM, Algonquin J. Mcafee wrote: >> Why did Obama reject Mr. Chen&#8217;s plea for asylum in our Chinese embassy >> and turn Chen out into the custody of the Chinese authorities who will >> kill him? > > He didn&#8217;t. Obama sent Hillary over [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/3/2012 8:<strong>10</strong> PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
> On 5/3/2012 9:36 AM, Algonquin J. Mcafee wrote:<br />
>> Why did Obama reject Mr. Chen&#8217;s plea for asylum in our Chinese embassy<br />
>> and turn Chen out into the custody of the Chinese authorities who will<br />
>> kill him?<br />
><br />
> He didn&#8217;t.</p>
<p>Obama sent Hillary over to shove the man out the door of the embassy.</p>
<p>But hey, Obama fired the death shot to kill <strong>Bin Laden</strong> so it&#8217;s all cool.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/04/obama-caves-to-chinese/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A brilliant article shows that the Founding Fathers not only supported mandates, they passed laws imposing them. Take that, Scalia!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/03/a-brilliant-article-shows-that-the-founding-fathers-not-only-supported-mandates-they-passed-laws-imposing-them-take-that-scalia/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/03/a-brilliant-article-shows-that-the-founding-fathers-not-only-supported-mandates-they-passed-laws-imposing-them-take-that-scalia/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 17:52:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Founding Fathers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Thu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[racist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialist Communists Nations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yoorghis Jurgis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[YOUTH]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31340</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[> On 5/3/2012 9:59 AM, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: >> On Thu, 03 May 2012 00:32:42 -0400, emoneyjoe >> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 02 May 2012 22:12:10 -0600, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 02 May 2012 18:45:43 -0700, linuxgal >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Now scumbag liberals want to destroy the right of he [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>> On 5/3/2012 9:59 AM, <a href="mailto:Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net">Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
>> <strong>On Thu</strong>, 03 May 2012 00:32:42 -0400, emoneyjoe<emoneyjoe @iglou.com><br />
>> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> On Wed, 02 May 2012 22:12:<strong>10</strong> -0600, <a href="mailto:Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net">Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> On Wed, 02 May 2012 18:45:<strong>43</strong> -0700, linuxgal
<linuxgal @cleanposts.com>
>>>> wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>> Now scumbag liberals want to destroy the right of he people to<br />
>>>>>> keep and bear<br />
>>>>>> arms.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Bring it on.  Put one liberal on this side of the street, another<br />
>>>>> one on<br />
>>>>> the other side, and let them go door-to-door demanding the people turn<br />
>>>>> over their arms.  See how far they get.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> That&#8217;s pretty dumb<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The proper way is like the old western frontier towns did.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> You incorporate a town, elect a city council, pass <strong>gun</strong> laws, and if<br />
>>>> the population of gunloons don&#8217;t like it&#8212;-you hire enforcers like<br />
>>>> the Earps, Hickock, etc.<br />
>>><br />
>>>         Wearing brown shirts?<br />
>><br />
>> Brown shirts are associated with conservative, rightwing,<br />
>> militaristic, ultranationalistic, <strong>racist</strong>, anti-immigrant, people,<br />
>> JoeLoon</p>
<p><strong>Socialist Communists Nations</strong> commonly have government run <strong>YOUTH</strong> groups<br />
that are mandatory to indoctrinate the youth&#8230;.  just which government<br />
mandated group have the right wing Americans put in place?</p>
</linuxgal></emoneyjoe></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/03/a-brilliant-article-shows-that-the-founding-fathers-not-only-supported-mandates-they-passed-laws-imposing-them-take-that-scalia/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>5 Dead in Shooting at Phoenix-Area Home</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/03/5-dead-in-shooting-at-phoenix-area-home/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/03/5-dead-in-shooting-at-phoenix-area-home/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 17:46:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[include]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RNC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[THOUSANDS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31338</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/3/2012 11:36 AM, Billary wrote: > On May 3, 10:57 am, Nickname unavailable wrote: >> On May 3, 9:55 am, Billary wrote: >> >>> On May 3, 1:52 am, Bret Cahill wrote: >> >>>>> May 2, 2012 >> >>>> Don&#8217;t go to Tampa this summer but if you must go, wear lots of Kevlar [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/3/2012 <strong>11</strong>:36 AM, Billary wrote:<br />
> On May 3, <strong>10</strong>:57 am, Nickname unavailable <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote:<br />
>> On May 3, 9:55 am, Billary <billaryclinton2 ...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> On May 3, 1:52 am, Bret Cahill <bretcah ...@peoplepc.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>> May 2, 2012<br />
>><br />
>>>> Don&#8217;t go to Tampa this summer but if you must go, wear lots of Kevlar<br />
>>>> and sit by the door.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Bret Cahill<br />
>><br />
>>> You&#8217;re an idiot. I live in Tampa and I will be at the <strong>RNC</strong>. No worries.<br />
>><br />
>>  you must hold stock in the manufacturer of kevlar:))))<br />
><br />
> No I carry a <strong>gun</strong> everyday. As do <strong>THOUSANDS</strong> of other Floridians. And I<br />
> don&#8217;t worry about them. Because they are not common criminals. They<br />
> are citizens concerned for their safety just like me.</p>
<p>The State law should be modified to <strong>include</strong> all violent and insane<br />
criminals &#8220;NOT&#8221; *all felons*, all the violent offenders convicted should<br />
forfeit their ability to own a <strong>gun</strong> or any weapons including forfeit<br />
their license to drive cars.   Or everyone should carry.</p>
<p></bretcah></billaryclinton2></vide></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/03/5-dead-in-shooting-at-phoenix-area-home/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Economic Paradox No One Wants to Talk About</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/03/the-economic-paradox-no-one-wants-to-talk-about/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/03/the-economic-paradox-no-one-wants-to-talk-about/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 15:56:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economic]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31316</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/2/2012 10:35 PM, hippy dippy dude > wrote: > Who would have thought in 08 we would have an eight dollar McDonalds > meal or four dollar a gallon gas or elimination of profit sharing and > pensions? > Who would have thought we have people in Washington doing their > damnedest to turn [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/2/2012 <strong>10</strong>:35 PM, hippy dippy dude > wrote:<br />
> Who would have thought in 08 we would have an eight dollar McDonalds<br />
> meal or four dollar a gallon gas or elimination of profit sharing and<br />
> pensions?<br />
> Who would have thought we have people in Washington doing their<br />
> damnedest to turn us into a global 3rd world economy?<br />
><br />
> <a href="http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/46413" >http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/46413</a></p>
<p>Who, That would be me&#8230;.  I&#8217;ve been telling you this was going to<br />
happen&#8230; I see what Obama is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/03/the-economic-paradox-no-one-wants-to-talk-about/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hundred Flowers Campaign and Anti-Rightist Campaign &gt;&gt;&gt;  Mao style &#8220;GREAT LEAP FORWARD&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/03/hundred-flowers-campaign-and-anti-rightist-campaign-mao-style-great-leap-forward/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/03/hundred-flowers-campaign-and-anti-rightist-campaign-mao-style-great-leap-forward/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 15:51:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flowers Campaign]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FORWARD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GREAT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEAP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mao]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialist Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31314</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/2/2012 10:23 PM, linuxgal wrote: > Clave wrote: >> &#8220;linuxgal&#8221; wrote in message >> news:nrSdnXfDFMyWQjzSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d @&#038;*$?%giganews.com&#8230; >>> Clave wrote: >>> >>>> Oh, right &#8212; as long as Obama&#8217;s in office, anything good for the >>>> country is bad for the GOP, so they&#8217;ll let the country go to hell >>>> rather than put people [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/2/2012 <strong>10</strong>:<strong>23</strong> PM, linuxgal wrote:<br />
> Clave wrote:<br />
>> &#8220;linuxgal&#8221;
<linuxgal @cleanposts.com> wrote in message<br />
>> news:nrSdnXfDFMyWQjzSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>giganews.com&#8230;<br />
>>> Clave wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> Oh, right &#8212; as long as Obama&#8217;s in office, anything good for the<br />
>>>> country is bad for the <strong>GOP</strong>, so they&#8217;ll let the country go to hell<br />
>>>> rather than put people back to work.<br />
>>> Politicians don&#8217;t put people to work, unless you&#8217;re talking about<br />
>>> government jobs.   Producers put people to work.  So all we really<br />
>>> need is for politicians to get the hell out of the way.<br />
>><br />
>> What history-mocking horseshit.<br />
>><br />
>> Where are all the jobs from the Bush tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks?<br />
><br />
> <strong>China</strong>.</p>
<p>They are hiding from <strong>Socialist Obama</strong> and friends.</p>
<p>Why stick your head up in a <strong>Mao</strong> style &#8220;<strong>GREAT</strong> <strong>LEAP</strong> <strong>FORWARD</strong>&#8220;,  When people<br />
did they ended up losing everything.</p>
<p>*Hundred <strong>Flowers Campaign</strong> and Anti-Rightist Campaign*<br />
["In 1957 <strong>Mao</strong> responded to the tensions in the Party by promoting free<br />
speech and criticism under the 100 <strong>Flowers Campaign</strong>. In retrospect, some<br />
have come to argue that this was a ploy to allow critics of the regime,<br />
primarily intellectuals but also low ranking members of the party<br />
critical of the agricultural policies, to identify themselves.[9]&#8220;]<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward#Hundred_Flowers_Campaign_and_Anti-Rightist_Campaign" >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward#Hundred_Flowers_Campaign_and_Anti-Rightist_Campaign</a></p>
<p>We see how the <strong>Socialists</strong> work when they take over and collectivize<br />
farms and businesses and how they flush out their enemies&#8230;..   This<br />
style fits Obama perfectly, Obama is Socialist scum that can&#8217;t be<br />
trusted, every thing Obama tells you is a <strong>LIE</strong>.</p>
</linuxgal>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/03/hundred-flowers-campaign-and-anti-rightist-campaign-mao-style-great-leap-forward/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rich people work harder than Sid9</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/rich-people-work-harder-than-sid9/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/rich-people-work-harder-than-sid9/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 22:55:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[37]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Gates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cuba]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eddie Haskell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Golly Ya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mellon Scaife]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MILLION]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Orazio Attanasio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Venezuela]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Buffet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wealth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31300</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/2/2012 4:37 PM, Bret Cahill wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Golly! Ya think? >> >>>>>>>>>>> The proggies are not going to like this one. Understand that >>>>>>>>>>> their >>>>>>>>>>> entire existence relies on the concept that evil rich people >>>>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>>> somehow >>>>>>>>>>> acquired their wealth through illegitimate means and are >>>>>>>>>>> therefore >>>>>>>>>>> obligated to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/2/2012 4:<strong>37</strong> PM, Bret Cahill wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> Golly! Ya think?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> The proggies are not going to like this one. Understand that<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> their<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> entire existence relies on the concept that evil rich people<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> have<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> somehow<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> acquired their <strong>wealth</strong> through illegitimate means and are<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> therefore<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> obligated to give some to those who are less capable of<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> acquiring<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> it<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> themselves.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> So a new study has revealed that higher educated, and therefore<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> higher<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> earning, people spend more time working and less time on leisure<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> than<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> poor people. In this paper by <strong>Orazio Attanasio</strong>, Erik Hurst and<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> Luigi<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> Pistaferri, they define leisure as &#8220;time spent watching <strong>TV</strong>,<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> socializing,<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> playing games, talking on the phone, reading personal email,<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> enjoying<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> entertainment and hobbies and other activities.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> They found an expanding &#8220;leisure gap&#8221; over the last twenty years<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> between<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> highly-educated and less-educated people: &#8220;Low-educated men saw<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> their<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> leisure hours grow to 39.1 hours in 2003-2007, from 36.6 hours<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> in<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> 1985.<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> Highly-educated men saw their leisure hours shrink to 33.2 hours<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> from<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> 34.4 hours.&#8221; The phenomenon occurred with women as well.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> In other words, those evil rich people, for the most part, are<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> working<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> for that <strong>money</strong> that you otherwise feel entitled to. Rather than<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> using<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> the police <strong>power</strong> of government to take that <strong>money</strong> from others,<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> you<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> could<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> simply . graduate from high school, go to a trade school or get<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> a<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> college<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> education! In fact, just graduating from high school, getting a<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> job (any<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> job) and getting married before having kids is the surest way to<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> avoid<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> poverty. Work hard and you may even become one of those durn<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> rich<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> people<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> yourself.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> Speaking of getting married, I also read recently that the<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> number<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> of<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> married households has fallen below 50% for the first time in<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> history.<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> Is it any coincidence that this happens to coincide with the<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> statistic<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> that over 50% of Americans no longer pay any income <strong>taxes</strong>? Just<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> a<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> thought for you to consider .<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> Yap. Typical conservative spin.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> The rich HAVE NOT &#8220;acquired their <strong>wealth</strong> through *illegitimate*<br />
>>>>>>>>>> means,&#8221; they DID it legally. The problem is, on top of everything<br />
>>>>>>>>>> they get extra breaks that ordinary people do not get. That is<br />
>>>>>>>>>> way<br />
>>>>>>>>>> rich people (with a conscience) like <strong>Bill Gates</strong> and Warren<br />
>>>>>>>>>> Buffett,<br />
>>>>>>>>>> have said publicly that they do not need the lower tax rates.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> I expected a huge whine about how the rich got it given to them by<br />
>>>>>>>>> &#8220;breaks&#8221;.<br />
>>>>>>>>> Well &#8220;ordinary&#8221; folks have the same breaks available.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Your example, <strong>Bill Gates</strong>, is excellent. Bill was interested in the<br />
>>>>>>>>> budding<br />
>>>>>>>>> technology in junior high and started working at a job when he was<br />
>>>>>>>>> in<br />
>>>>>>>>> high<br />
>>>>>>>>> school. He had the magical &#8220;<strong>10</strong>,000 hours&#8221; under his belt before<br />
>>>>>>>>> going<br />
>>>>>>>>> to<br />
>>>>>>>>> college. He worked his <acronym title="ass"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym> off and really didn&#8217;t take advantage of<br />
>>>>>>>>> family<br />
>>>>>>>>> <strong>wealth</strong>. In short he worked his <acronym title="ass"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym> off.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> I once was competing for a job with a guy who was willing to do<br />
>>>>>>>>> things such<br />
>>>>>>>>> as make 2 or 3 round trips from the west coast to the east coast<br />
>>>>>>>>> per<br />
>>>>>>>>> week,<br />
>>>>>>>>> and still put in a full work week in the office. He ended up rich.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> The myth that the rich don&#8217;t work is indeed a myth.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> its not a myth, many of them are not self made.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> Doesn&#8217;t make a fiddler&#8217;s damn. One should be allowed to leave <strong>money</strong><br />
>>>>>>>> that they have earned to their children and that incentive to<br />
>>>>>>>> produce<br />
>>>>>>>> <strong>wealth</strong> benefits everyone, you greed and envy driven third-world<br />
>>>>>>>> socialist. What I&#8217;ll never understand is why you whining little<br />
>>>>>>>> prick<br />
>>>>>>>> cowards don&#8217;t go live under you wish in <strong>Cuba</strong> or <strong>Venezuela</strong>.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> -<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong><br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> The inheritance tax is a joke.<br />
>>>>>>> It didn’t impoverish <strong>HW</strong> Bush.<br />
>>>>>>> It didn’t impoverish any of the Kennedys<br />
>>>>>>> It didn’t impoverish Romney<br />
>>>>>>> It didn’t impoverish <strong>Mellon Scaife</strong><br />
>>>>>>> It didn’t impoverish the Harrimans<br />
>>>>>>> etc, etc, etc<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Most people aren&#8217;t that rich, stupid. People should be able to leave<br />
>>>>>> what they have earned to their loved ones and not have it confiscated<br />
>>>>>> by<br />
>>>>>> the government. It&#8217;s only moral. Something that as a greed driven<br />
>>>>>> democrat you couldn&#8217;t understand.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> -<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong><br />
>><br />
>>>>> Hey stupid, &#8220;Most people aren&#8217;t that rich&#8221; don&#8217;t pay any inheritance<br />
>>>>> tax.<br />
>>>>> There are huge exemptions in the law, stupid.<br />
>>>>> There&#8217;s a $5.12 exemption before any tax is calculated, plus you can<br />
>>>>> give<br />
>>>>> away lots of <strong>money</strong> tax free, to your heirs, while you are alive.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> You are an endless fountain of ignorance!<br />
>><br />
>>>> That should be $5.12 <strong>MILLION</strong>&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>>> Which could cost a family farm or business, which is irrelevant anyway. No<br />
>>> amount of <strong>money</strong> that has been earned and taxed already should be<br />
>>> confiscated<br />
>>> by the government. It&#8217;s downright immoral, you fascist authoritarian.<br />
>><br />
>>> Now, try and concentrate for 4:22 minutes while a real American explains<br />
>>> it<br />
>>> to you:<br />
>><br />
>>> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MRpEV2tmYz4&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /><br />
>><br />
>>> -<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong><br />
>>> it seems you are repeating over and over again, completely<br />
>>> discredited conservative talking points.<br />
>><br />
>> No retort.<br />
><br />
> Maybe you think this is better:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;How did I know that you would be posting something insanely stupid? &#8221;<br />
><br />
> Anyway you dodged the question:<br />
><br />
> How do you manage to stay off of Forbes&#8217; list when you are smarter<br />
> than <strong>Warren Buffet</strong>?<br />
><br />
><br />
> Bret Cahill</p>
<p>He probably pays his <strong>taxes</strong> while <strong>Warren Buffet</strong> owes millions&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/rich-people-work-harder-than-sid9/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tecknomage Is An Immoral Loser And A Liar</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/tecknomage-is-an-immoral-loser-and-a-liar/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/tecknomage-is-an-immoral-loser-and-a-liar/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 22:47:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Begins Bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DOJ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eddie Haskell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ET]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EVENTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fannie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freddie Mac]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FREE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Golly Ya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IBD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John McCain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Justice Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mortgages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Orazio Attanasio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wealth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31298</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/2/2012 4:02 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote: > On May 2, 10:14 am, &#8220;Eddie Haskell&#8221; wrote: >> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message >> >> news:eae3377b-25de-4131-89ee-9eba408b46f8 @&#038;*$?%k7g2000pbo.googlegroups.com&#8230; >> On May 1, 5:07 pm, &#8220;Eddie Haskell&#8221; wrote: >> >> >> >>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message >> >>> news:78dc41d7-3242-4f68-bf0e-15614170eb2d @&#038;*$?%g38g2000yqh.googlegroups.com&#8230;. >>> On May 1, 11:15 am, &#8220;Eddie [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/2/2012 4:02 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote:<br />
> On May 2, <strong>10</strong>:14 am, &#8220;<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong>&#8221; <uyn ...@szmoplm.com> wrote:<br />
>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>> news:eae3377b-25de-4131-89ee-9eba408b46f8<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>k7g2000pbo.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>> On May 1, 5:07 pm, &#8220;<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong>&#8221; <uyn ...@szmoplm.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>>> news:78dc41d7-3242-4f68-bf0e-15614170eb2d<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>g38g2000yqh.googlegroups.com&#8230;.<br />
>>> On May 1, 11:15 am, &#8220;<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong>&#8221; <uyn ...@szmoplm.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> &#8220;Tecknomage&#8221; <teckn ...@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>>>> news:osmvp7p13mbm7hagk4bf5uhvbjv9cqo8g6<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>>>>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 13:00:00 -0400, Neal Boortz <boo ...@WSB.com><br />
>>>>> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Golly! Ya think?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> The proggies are not going to like this one. Understand that their<br />
>>>>>> entire existence relies on the concept that evil rich people have<br />
>>>>>> somehow<br />
>>>>>> acquired their <strong>wealth</strong> through illegitimate means and are therefore<br />
>>>>>> obligated to give some to those who are less capable of acquiring it<br />
>>>>>> themselves.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> So a new study has revealed that higher educated, and therefore<br />
>>>>>> higher<br />
>>>>>> earning, people spend more time working and less time on leisure than<br />
>>>>>> poor people. In this paper by <strong>Orazio Attanasio</strong>, Erik Hurst and Luigi<br />
>>>>>> Pistaferri, they define leisure as &#8220;time spent watching TV,<br />
>>>>>> socializing,<br />
>>>>>> playing games, talking on the phone, reading personal email, enjoying<br />
>>>>>> entertainment and hobbies and other activities.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> They found an expanding &#8220;leisure gap&#8221; over the last twenty years<br />
>>>>>> between<br />
>>>>>> highly-educated and less-educated people: &#8220;Low-educated men saw their<br />
>>>>>> leisure hours grow to 39.1 hours in 2003-2007, from 36.6 hours in<br />
>>>>>> 1985.<br />
>>>>>> Highly-educated men saw their leisure hours shrink to 33.2 hours from<br />
>>>>>> 34.4 hours.&#8221; The phenomenon occurred with women as well.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> In other words, those evil rich people, for the most part, are<br />
>>>>>> working<br />
>>>>>> for that <strong>money</strong> that you otherwise feel entitled to. Rather than using<br />
>>>>>> the police power of government to take that <strong>money</strong> from others, you<br />
>>>>>> could<br />
>>>>>> simply . graduate from high school, go to a trade school or get a<br />
>>>>>> college<br />
>>>>>> education! In fact, just graduating from high school, getting a job<br />
>>>>>> (any<br />
>>>>>> job) and getting married before having kids is the surest way to<br />
>>>>>> avoid<br />
>>>>>> poverty. Work hard and you may even become one of those durn rich<br />
>>>>>> people<br />
>>>>>> yourself.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Speaking of getting married, I also read recently that the number of<br />
>>>>>> married households has fallen below 50% for the first time in<br />
>>>>>> history.<br />
>>>>>> Is it any coincidence that this happens to coincide with the<br />
>>>>>> statistic<br />
>>>>>> that over 50% of Americans no longer pay any income <strong>taxes</strong>? Just a<br />
>>>>>> thought for you to consider .<br />
>><br />
>>>>> Yap. Typical conservative spin.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> The rich HAVE NOT &#8220;acquired their <strong>wealth</strong> through *illegitimate*<br />
>>>>> means,&#8221; they DID it legally. The problem is, on top of everything<br />
>>>>> they get extra breaks that ordinary people do not get. That is way<br />
>>>>> rich people (with a conscience) like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett,<br />
>>>>> have said publicly that they do not need the lower tax rates.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> &#8220;A Closer Look at Taxes on the Rich&#8221;<br />
>>>>> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/16/business/buffett-calls-on-congress-..." >http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/16/business/buffett-calls-on-congress-&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>>>>> &#8220;Warren E. Buffett, the billionaire investor known as the Oracle of<br />
>>>>> Omaha, pushed the issue to the forefront this week by urging members<br />
>>>>> of the new Congressional supercommittee on deficit reduction to stop<br />
>>>>> &#8220;coddling&#8221; him and other affluent Americans and raise their <strong>taxes</strong>.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>>>> Of course, maybe Bill and Warren aren&#8217;t the &#8220;rich&#8221; you are talking<br />
>>>>> about? OR maybe their just liberal, communist, pinkos in your mind.<br />
>><br />
>>>> The rich pay the vast majority of all income <strong>taxes</strong> while you pay<br />
>>>> virtually<br />
>>>> none and are being carried by them, and raising the capital gains rate<br />
>>>> will<br />
>>>> lower revenues and go <acronym title="fuck"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> f&*$?%k</span></acronym> yourself, you stupid immoral <acronym title="fucking"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> f&*$?%g</span></acronym> loser..<br />
>><br />
>>>> -<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong><br />
>><br />
>>> &#8220;So if you are a big bank or financial institution, you&#8217;re no longer<br />
>>> allowed<br />
>>> to make risky bets with your customers&#8217; deposits. &#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>> -Hussein, State of the Union, 2012.<br />
>><br />
>>> &#8220;Holder Launches Witch Hunt Against Biased Banks&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>> 07/08/2011 06:51 PM <strong>ET</strong><br />
>><br />
>>> &#8220;In what could be a repeat of the easy-lending cycle that led to the<br />
>>> housing<br />
>>> crisis, the <strong>Justice Department</strong> has asked several banks to relax their<br />
>>> mortgage underwriting standards and approve loans for minorities with poor<br />
>>> credit as part of a new crackdown on alleged discrimination, according to<br />
>>> court documents reviewed by <strong>IBD</strong>.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>> &#8220;Prosecutions have already generated more than $20 million in loan<br />
>>> set-asides and other subsidies from banks that have settled out of court<br />
>>> rather than battle the federal government and risk being branded racist..<br />
>>> An<br />
>>> additional 60 banks are under investigation, a <strong>DOJ</strong> spokeswoman says.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>> <a href="http://news.investors.com/Article/577794/201107081851/DOJ-Begins-Bank..." >http://news.investors.com/Article/577794/201107081851/DOJ-Begins-Bank&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>>> -<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong><br />
>>>  gee, i am glad you have such a good understanding of to big to fail.<br />
>><br />
>> Yeah, it&#8217;s called getting the government to buy up risky loans from banks<br />
>> and lending institutions so they will make them and then blaming the &#8220;rich&#8221;<br />
>> and &#8220;wall street&#8221; when it all blows up in the democrats faces.<br />
>><br />
>>> yet, the wealthy appear to be paying a bigger share than they really<br />
>>> are:)<br />
>><br />
>> No, the wealthy are paying more than people realize while the bottom 50% are<br />
>> paying less than people understand thanks to fascist DNC propaganda and<br />
>> lies.<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;<strong>Fannie</strong> Mae and <strong>Freddie Mac</strong> buy <strong>mortgages</strong> from lenders and bundle them into<br />
>> securities; that provides lenders the funds to lend more&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;In 1992, <strong>Congress</strong> mandated that <strong>Fannie</strong> and Freddie increase their purchases<br />
>> of <strong>mortgages</strong> for low-income and medium-income borrowers. Operating under<br />
>> that requirement, <strong>Fannie</strong> Mae, in particular, has been aggressive and<br />
>> creative in stimulating minority gains.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;The two companies are now required to devote 42% of their portfolios to<br />
>> loans for low- and moderate-income borrowers&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;Although <strong>Fannie</strong> Mae actually has exceeded its target since 1994, it is<br />
>> resisting any hike. It argues that a higher target would only produce more<br />
>> loan defaults by pressuring banks to accept unsafe borrowers.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/1999/may/31/news/mn-42807" >http://articles.latimes.com/1999/may/31/news/mn-42807</a><br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory<br />
>> overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a<br />
>> decade ago.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency<br />
>> would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of<br />
>> <strong>Fannie</strong> Mae and <strong>Freddie Mac</strong>, the government-sponsored companies that are the<br />
>> two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://tinyurl.com/6lp5qu" >http://tinyurl.com/6lp5qu</a><br />
>><br />
>> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/M8LA8hPgQtI&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /><br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie..." >http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Lr1M1T2Y314&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /><br />
>><br />
>> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_MGT_cSi7Rs&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /><br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;McCain Letter Demanded 2006 Action on <strong>Fannie</strong> and Freddie&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;Sen. <strong>John McCain</strong>&#8216;s 2006 demand for regulatory action on <strong>Fannie</strong> Mae and<br />
>> <strong>Freddie Mac</strong> could have prevented current financial crisis, as HUMAN <strong>EVENTS</strong><br />
>> learned from the letter shown in full text below.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28973" >http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28973</a><br />
>><br />
>> Unlike Bush and McCain, as senator, Obama did nothing, other than earn the<br />
>> distinction of becoming the second largest recipient of F&#038;F contributions in<br />
>> the entire congress, even in his short stint there.<br />
>><br />
>> Bill <strong>Clinton</strong> himself said it best:<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;I think the responsibility the Democrats have may rest more in resisting<br />
>> any efforts by Republicans in the <strong>Congress</strong> or by me when I was President to<br />
>> put some standards and tighten up a little on <strong>Fannie</strong> Mae and <strong>Freddie Mac</strong>.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> -Bill <strong>Clinton</strong><br />
>><br />
>> &#8221;These two entities &#8212; <strong>Fannie</strong> Mae and <strong>Freddie Mac</strong> &#8212; are not facing any<br />
>> kind of financial crisis,&#8221; said Representative Barney Frank of<br />
>> Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee.<br />
>> &#8221;The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on<br />
>> these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.&#8221;<br />
><br />
>  liar. the private sector were the ones who made the loans in a <strong>FREE</strong><br />
> MARKET, and it was the private sector that bundled them, and sold them<br />
> off to unsuspecting suckers in the  <strong>FREE</strong> MARKET.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Lr1M1T2Y314&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p></boo></teckn></uyn></vide></uyn></vide></uyn></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/tecknomage-is-an-immoral-loser-and-a-liar/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can you trust Wikipedia &#8230; &#8220;Forward&#8221;   &gt;&gt;&gt; &#8220;FORWARD&#8221; TO CENTRAL PLANNING&#8230;.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/can-you-trust-wikipedia-forward-forward-to-central-planning/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/can-you-trust-wikipedia-forward-forward-to-central-planning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 18:53:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[37]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Biden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CENTRAL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FORWARD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Great Leap]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[include]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mao]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MSNBC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PLANNING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Progressive-Socialist]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31290</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/2/2012 2:34 PM, wy wrote: > On May 2, 2:02 pm, jane wrote: >> On May 2, 1:07 pm, wy wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On May 2, 11:47 am, jane wrote: >> >>>> On May 2, 11:37 am, wy wrote: >> >>>>> On May 2, 11:24 am, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/2/2012 2:34 PM, wy wrote:<br />
> On May 2, 2:02 pm, jane <jane .pla...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>> On May 2, 1:07 pm, wy <w ...@myself.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> On May 2, <strong>11</strong>:47 am, jane <jane .pla...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> On May 2, <strong>11</strong>:<strong>37</strong> am, wy <w ...@myself.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>> On May 2, <strong>11</strong>:24 am, &#8220;jane.playne&#8221; <jane .pla...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> On 5/2/2012 <strong>11</strong>:<strong>10</strong>, wy wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> On May 2, <strong>11</strong>:07 am, &#8220;jane.playne&#8221;</jane><jane .pla...@gmail.com>  wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> The other day, you could do a Wikipedia search on the word &#8220;Forward&#8221; and<br />
>>>>>>>> get a long list of general topics including: Sports, Physics,<br />
>>>>>>>> Literature, Politics, etc.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> Under Politics you could find entries including:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> Forward (generic name of socialist publications)<br />
>>>>>>>> Forward (Obama-<strong>Biden</strong> Campaign Slogan)<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> Do a Wikipedia search today and those two topics are missing[1]&#8230; WHY?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> You can still find those pages[2][3] IF you know where to look, but you<br />
>>>>>>>> won&#8217;t find them with the Wikipedia search.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> You do realize that anybody can edit those Wiki entries or move them<br />
>>>>>>> around to wherever, don&#8217;t you?  Yes, even you can do it.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Yes, I can modify the page itself, but can you modify the search results?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> I can go <a href="tohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_" >tohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_</a>(Obama-Biden_Campaign_Slogan) and<br />
>>>>>> there is an &#8220;edit&#8221; button. BUT if you go to the search page, there is no<br />
>>>>>> &#8220;edit&#8221; button.  If you go to the &#8220;view source&#8221; button, there is a<br />
>>>>>> message, &#8220;This page is protected.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>>>> The page that&#8217;s protected that you&#8217;re referring to is Wiki&#8217;s home<br />
>>>>> page.  I guess there&#8217;s a reason why they don&#8217;t want anyone but<br />
>>>>> administrators messing with that page.  Wake up already.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> That&#8217;s why<br />
>>>>>>> when relying on Wiki, you try to corroborate the info in it with<br />
>>>>>>> legitimate sources first before you open your mouth.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> But I find it funny that you&#8217;re even looking for a definition of<br />
>>>>>>> &#8220;forward&#8221;.  How backward is that?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> Citations:<br />
>>>>>>>> 1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward<br />
>>>>>>>> 2.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_(generic_name_of_socialist_publi&#8230;)<br />
>>>>>>>> 3.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_(Obama-Biden_Campaign_Slogan)<br />
>><br />
>>>> NO, not the home page, but the search results page.<br />
>>>> 1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward<br />
>><br />
>>>> That is the page where the reference to,<br />
>>>> Forward (generic name of socialist publications) &#038;<br />
>>>> Forward (Obama-<strong>Biden</strong> Campaign Slogan)<br />
>>>> were located.  The page where those two items are missing today.<br />
>><br />
>>>> If that page is protected, then why were those two items missing<br />
>>>> today?<br />
>><br />
>>> Anybody can switch those pages around, just register yourself on Wiki<br />
>>> and you become an instant editor.  And once you make changes, some<br />
>>> other registered user just might think it would be fun to make changes<br />
>>> on what you changed, and so on and so on.  The site is in perpetual<br />
>>> <strong>change</strong> mode and not always for accuracy, especially when those with no<br />
>>> credentials, and that would <strong>include</strong> you or even me as members, are<br />
>>> basically creating and changing entries.  That&#8217;s why Wiki should never<br />
>>> be a primary source for anything or why you should corroborate what<br />
>>> you see on it with legitimate sources elsewhere.<br />
>><br />
>> Your last line is exactly what I am saying.  I know a college<br />
>> professor who does not accept citations from wikipedia because the<br />
>> page can <strong>change</strong>.<br />
>><br />
>> As another poster has noted, the links on the search results page are<br />
>> back again.<br />
><br />
> So your Repugnant-induced paranoid conspiratorial suspicions are<br />
> unfounded.  Happy?<br />
></p>
<p><strong>Mao</strong> used &#8220;<strong>Great Leap</strong> Forward&#8221;<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward" >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward</a></p>
<p>Progressive-Socialist <strong>MSNBC</strong> is using &#8220;Lean Forward&#8221;</p>
<p>Obama uses &#8220;Forward&#8221;</p>
<p>If Obama was NOT wanting to be shown that he is in line with this<br />
Socialist thinking he would NOT have used &#8220;Forward&#8221;  just as he would<br />
NOT use negative racial terms if he didn&#8217;t want to be known as a Racist.</p>
<p>The common theme is   &#8220;<strong>FORWARD</strong> TO <strong>CENTRAL</strong> <strong>PLANNING</strong>&#8220;&#8230;.</p>
<p></jane></w></jane></w></jane></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/can-you-trust-wikipedia-forward-forward-to-central-planning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can you trust Wikipedia &#8230; &#8220;Forward&#8221; or  Mao&#8217;s  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/can-you-trust-wikipedia-forward-or-maos-httpen-wikipedia-orgwikigreat_leap_forward/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/can-you-trust-wikipedia-forward-or-maos-httpen-wikipedia-orgwikigreat_leap_forward/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 18:49:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[37]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Biden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CENTRAL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FORWARD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Great Leap]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[include]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mao]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MSNBC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PLANNING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Progressive-Socialist]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31288</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/2/2012 2:34 PM, wy wrote: > On May 2, 2:02 pm, jane wrote: >> On May 2, 1:07 pm, wy wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On May 2, 11:47 am, jane wrote: >> >>>> On May 2, 11:37 am, wy wrote: >> >>>>> On May 2, 11:24 am, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/2/2012 2:34 PM, wy wrote:<br />
> On May 2, 2:02 pm, jane <jane .pla...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>> On May 2, 1:07 pm, wy <w ...@myself.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> On May 2, <strong>11</strong>:47 am, jane <jane .pla...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> On May 2, <strong>11</strong>:<strong>37</strong> am, wy <w ...@myself.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>> On May 2, <strong>11</strong>:24 am, &#8220;jane.playne&#8221; <jane .pla...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> On 5/2/2012 <strong>11</strong>:<strong>10</strong>, wy wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> On May 2, <strong>11</strong>:07 am, &#8220;jane.playne&#8221;</jane><jane .pla...@gmail.com>  wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> The other day, you could do a Wikipedia search on the word &#8220;Forward&#8221; and<br />
>>>>>>>> get a long list of general topics including: Sports, Physics,<br />
>>>>>>>> Literature, Politics, etc.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> Under Politics you could find entries including:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> Forward (generic name of socialist publications)<br />
>>>>>>>> Forward (Obama-<strong>Biden</strong> Campaign Slogan)<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> Do a Wikipedia search today and those two topics are missing[1]&#8230; WHY?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> You can still find those pages[2][3] IF you know where to look, but you<br />
>>>>>>>> won&#8217;t find them with the Wikipedia search.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> You do realize that anybody can edit those Wiki entries or move them<br />
>>>>>>> around to wherever, don&#8217;t you?  Yes, even you can do it.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Yes, I can modify the page itself, but can you modify the search results?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> I can go <a href="tohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_" >tohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_</a>(Obama-Biden_Campaign_Slogan) and<br />
>>>>>> there is an &#8220;edit&#8221; button. BUT if you go to the search page, there is no<br />
>>>>>> &#8220;edit&#8221; button.  If you go to the &#8220;view source&#8221; button, there is a<br />
>>>>>> message, &#8220;This page is protected.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>>>> The page that&#8217;s protected that you&#8217;re referring to is Wiki&#8217;s home<br />
>>>>> page.  I guess there&#8217;s a reason why they don&#8217;t want anyone but<br />
>>>>> administrators messing with that page.  Wake up already.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> That&#8217;s why<br />
>>>>>>> when relying on Wiki, you try to corroborate the info in it with<br />
>>>>>>> legitimate sources first before you open your mouth.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> But I find it funny that you&#8217;re even looking for a definition of<br />
>>>>>>> &#8220;forward&#8221;.  How backward is that?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> Citations:<br />
>>>>>>>> 1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward<br />
>>>>>>>> 2.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_(generic_name_of_socialist_publi&#8230;)<br />
>>>>>>>> 3.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_(Obama-Biden_Campaign_Slogan)<br />
>><br />
>>>> NO, not the home page, but the search results page.<br />
>>>> 1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward<br />
>><br />
>>>> That is the page where the reference to,<br />
>>>> Forward (generic name of socialist publications) &#038;<br />
>>>> Forward (Obama-<strong>Biden</strong> Campaign Slogan)<br />
>>>> were located.  The page where those two items are missing today.<br />
>><br />
>>>> If that page is protected, then why were those two items missing<br />
>>>> today?<br />
>><br />
>>> Anybody can switch those pages around, just register yourself on Wiki<br />
>>> and you become an instant editor.  And once you make changes, some<br />
>>> other registered user just might think it would be fun to make changes<br />
>>> on what you changed, and so on and so on.  The site is in perpetual<br />
>>> <strong>change</strong> mode and not always for accuracy, especially when those with no<br />
>>> credentials, and that would <strong>include</strong> you or even me as members, are<br />
>>> basically creating and changing entries.  That&#8217;s why Wiki should never<br />
>>> be a primary source for anything or why you should corroborate what<br />
>>> you see on it with legitimate sources elsewhere.<br />
>><br />
>> Your last line is exactly what I am saying.  I know a college<br />
>> professor who does not accept citations from wikipedia because the<br />
>> page can <strong>change</strong>.<br />
>><br />
>> As another poster has noted, the links on the search results page are<br />
>> back again.<br />
><br />
> So your Repugnant-induced paranoid conspiratorial suspicions are<br />
> unfounded.  Happy?<br />
></p>
<p><strong>Mao</strong> used &#8220;<strong>Great Leap</strong> Forward&#8221;<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward" >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward</a></p>
<p>Progressive-Socialist <strong>MSNBC</strong> is using &#8220;Lean Forward&#8221;</p>
<p>Obama uses &#8220;Forward&#8221;</p>
<p>If Obama was NOT wanting to be shown that he is in line with this<br />
Socialist thinking he would NOT have used &#8220;Forward&#8221;  just as he would<br />
NOT use negative racial terms if he didn&#8217;t want to be known as a Racist.</p>
<p>The common theme is   &#8220;<strong>FORWARD</strong> TO <strong>CENTRAL</strong> <strong>PLANNING</strong>&#8220;&#8230;.</p>
<p></jane></w></jane></w></jane></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/can-you-trust-wikipedia-forward-or-maos-httpen-wikipedia-orgwikigreat_leap_forward/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Austerity It has yet to really be implemented&#8230;.  but it will soon be done,without any choice, as more governments run out of other peoples money.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/austerity-it-has-yet-to-really-be-implemented-but-it-will-soon-be-donewithout-any-choice-as-more-governments-run-out-of-other-peoples-money/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/austerity-it-has-yet-to-really-be-implemented-but-it-will-soon-be-donewithout-any-choice-as-more-governments-run-out-of-other-peoples-money/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 17:32:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[future]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[uk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wal Mart]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31278</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/1/2012 10:19 PM, Sid9 wrote: > > &#8220;linuxgal&#8221; wrote in message > news:UIydnWbZGoBACz3SnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d @&#038;*$?%giganews.com&#8230; >> Nickname unavailable wrote: >>> On May 1, 7:57 pm, linuxgal wrote: >>>> Sid9 wrote: >>>> >>>>> The cure for Spain and the UK was NOT austerity. >>>> More government spending, more debt, that&#8217;s the ticket. >>> >>> yet, anyone [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/1/2012 <strong>10</strong>:19 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;linuxgal&#8221;
<linuxgal @cleanposts.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:UIydnWbZGoBACz3SnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>giganews.com&#8230;<br />
>> Nickname unavailable wrote:<br />
>>> On May 1, 7:57 pm, linuxgal
<linux ...@cleanposts.com> wrote:<br />
>>>> Sid9 wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> The cure for <strong>Spain</strong> and the <strong>UK</strong> was NOT austerity.<br />
>>>> More government spending, more debt, that&#8217;s the ticket.<br />
>>><br />
>>>  yet, anyone with even the most basic understanding of capitalism<br />
>>> knows it takes <strong>money</strong> to make <strong>money</strong>. so have fun explaining away the<br />
>>> fact that countries that stimulated are growing, countries that<br />
>>> slashed spending are contracting, and there debts are exploding.<br />
>><br />
>> You have to look at economics in thermodynamic terms.   Debt is simply<br />
>> applying <strong>future</strong> earnings at a single point in time for leverage.  Very<br />
>> few people could generate the cash flow-rate otherwise to get a car or<br />
>> a house.  But too many Wal-Mart people (and Wal-Mart countries too, it<br />
>> seems) think a credit card is found <strong>money</strong>.<br />
> ..<br />
> ..<br />
> ..<br />
> Austerity has failed.</p>
<p>It has yet to really be implemented&#8230;.  but it will soon be done<br />
without any choice, as more governments run out of other peoples <strong>money</strong>.</p>
</linux></linuxgal>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/02/austerity-it-has-yet-to-really-be-implemented-but-it-will-soon-be-donewithout-any-choice-as-more-governments-run-out-of-other-peoples-money/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>COMING MAY DAY MAYHEM BY OBAMA SUPPORTERS&#8230;.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/01/coming-may-day-mayhem-by-obama-supporters/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/01/coming-may-day-mayhem-by-obama-supporters/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 23:37:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[American Water Works Association]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bats Slingshots]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chlorine Institute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CLEAR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Coleman Fuel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DAY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Generators Good]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Honey Syrups]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Katrina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Occupy Cleveland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pepper Spray]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Portable Toilets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rice Beans Wheat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tess Pennington]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Filters Purifiers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31238</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/1/2012 6:32 PM, Padraigh ProAmerica wrote: > Five members of Occupy Cleveland tried to blow up a bridge. Thwarted by > the FBI. I posted this yesterday, when I read it I thought of today being MAY DAY and I figured the Occupy and communist rabble would try to stop all truck traffic to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/1/2012 6:32 PM, Padraigh ProAmerica wrote:<br />
> Five members of <strong>Occupy Cleveland</strong> tried to blow up a bridge. Thwarted by<br />
> the FBI.</p>
<p>I posted this yesterday, when I read it I thought of today being MAY <strong>DAY</strong><br />
and I figured the Occupy and communist rabble would try to stop all<br />
truck traffic to hurt America&#8217;s capitalist <strong>system</strong>&#8230;..    all they would<br />
need to do is knock out some key tunnels and bridges.   I&#8217;m sure they&#8217;ll<br />
look for a way to protest and tie up trucking later in the summer or<br />
after Obama loses.</p>
<p>Whether Obama wins or loses there will be Change&#8230;.  and NO HOPE for<br />
anyone if he wins.</p>
<p>["...A Timeline Showing the Deterioration of Major Industries Following<br />
a Truck Stoppage</p>
<p>The first 24 hours</p>
<p>• Delivery of medical supplies to the affected area will cease.<br />
• Hospitals will run out of basic supplies such as syringes and<br />
catheters within hours. Radiopharmaceuticals will deteriorate and become<br />
unusable.<br />
• Service stations will begin to run out of fuel.<br />
• Manufacturers using just-in-time manufacturing will develop component<br />
shortages.<br />
• U.S. mail and other package delivery will cease.</p>
<p>Within one day</p>
<p>• Food shortages will begin to develop.<br />
• Automobile fuel availability and delivery will dwindle, leading to<br />
skyrocketing prices and long lines at the gas pumps.<br />
• Without manufacturing components and trucks for product delivery,<br />
assembly lines will shut down, putting thousands out of work.</p>
<p>Within two to three days</p>
<p>• Food shortages will escalate, especially in the face of hoarding and<br />
consumer panic.<br />
• Supplies of essentials—such as bottled water, powdered milk, and<br />
canned meat—at major retailers will disappear.<br />
• ATMs will run out of cash and banks will be unable to process<br />
transactions.<br />
• Service stations will completely run out of fuel for autos and trucks.<br />
• Garbage will start piling up in urban and suburban areas.<br />
• Container ships will sit idle in ports and rail transport will be<br />
disrupted, eventually coming to a standstill.</p>
<p>Within a week</p>
<p>• Automobile travel will cease due to the lack of fuel. Without autos<br />
and busses, many people will not be able to get to work, shop for<br />
groceries, or access medical care.<br />
• Hospitals will begin to exhaust oxygen supplies.</p>
<p>Within two weeks</p>
<p>• The nation’s clean water supply will begin to run dry.</p>
<p>Within four weeks</p>
<p>• The nation will exhaust its clean water supply and water will be safe<br />
for drinking only after boiling. As a result gastrointestinal illnesses<br />
will increase, further taxing an already weakened health care <strong>system</strong>.</p>
<p>This timeline presents only the primary effects of a freeze on truck<br />
travel. Secondary effects must be considered as well, such as inability<br />
to maintain telecommunications service, reduced law enforcement,<br />
<strong>increased</strong> crime, <strong>increased</strong> illness and injury, higher death rates, and<br />
likely, civil unrest.</p>
<p>*****</p>
<p>Earlier in the report, the reasons why America's water supply would be<br />
in such jeopardy are described in greater detail....</p>
<p>According to the <strong>American Water Works Association</strong>, Americans drink more<br />
than one billion glasses of tap water per day. For safety and security<br />
reasons, most water supply plants maintain a larger inventory of<br />
supplies than the typical business. However, the amount of chemical<br />
storage varies significantly and is site specific. According to the<br />
<strong>Chlorine Institute</strong>, most water treatment facilities receive chlorine in<br />
cylinders (150 pounds and one ton cylinders) that are delivered by motor<br />
carriers. On average, trucks deliver purification chemicals to water<br />
supply plants every seven to 14 days. Without these chemicals, water<br />
cannot be purified and made safe for drinking. Without truck deliveries<br />
of purification chemicals, water supply plants will run out of drinkable<br />
water in 14 to 28 days. Once the water supply is drained, water will be<br />
deemed safe for drinking only when boiled. Lack of clean drinking water<br />
will lead to <strong>increased</strong> gastrointestinal and other illnesses, further<br />
taxing an already weakened healthcare <strong>system</strong>.<br />
Can you see why I always recommend that you make sure that you and your<br />
family have access to fresh water and a way to purify it?</p>
<p>This report should be very sobering for all of us.</p>
<p>What would you and your family do if you had no food, no clean water and<br />
the stores were shut down because their supplies were gone?</p>
<p>An article by <strong>Tess Pennington</strong> entitled "Emergency Items: What Will<br />
Disappear First" contains a list of 100 things that are likely to<br />
disappear from store shelves first.  The following are the first <strong>10</strong><br />
things on her list....</p>
<p>1. Generators (Good ones cost dearly. Gas storage, risky. Noisy…target of<br />
thieves; maintenance etc.)<br />
2. Water Filters/Purifiers<br />
3. <strong>Portable Toilets</strong><br />
4. Seasoned Firewood. Wood takes about 6 – 12 months to become dried,<br />
for home<br />
uses.<br />
5. Lamp Oil, Wicks, Lamps (First Choice: Buy <strong>CLEAR</strong> oil. If scarce, stockpile<br />
ANY!)<br />
6. <strong>Coleman Fuel</strong>. Impossible to stockpile too much.<br />
7. Guns, Ammunition, <strong>Pepper Spray</strong>, Knives, Clubs, Bats &#038; Slingshots.<br />
8. Hand-can openers, &#038; hand egg beaters, whisks.<br />
9. Honey/Syrups/white, brown sugar<br />
<strong>10</strong>. Rice – Beans – Wheat</p>
<p>You can find the rest of the list right here.</p>
<p>Most Americans just assume that they will always be able to run out to<br />
the supermarket or to Wal-Mart and buy anything that they need.</p>
<p>But if the trucks stop running that will <strong>change</strong> almost overnight.</p>
<p>After reading the information above, does anyone out there still believe<br />
that preppers are crazy?</p>
<p>The truth is that there are good, solid reasons why millions of<br />
Americans have been storing up food, water filters and other supplies.</p>
<p>Our world is becoming increasingly unstable, and all of us need to get<br />
educated about how to prepare for the difficult years that are coming.</p>
<p>One nightmarish event can <strong>change</strong> everything that we take for granted in<br />
a single moment.</p>
<p>Just remember what happened after Hurricane <strong>Katrina</strong>.  Even though that<br />
was only a regional disaster, millions of people had their lives<br />
completely turned upside down by that tragedy.</p>
<p>Don't make the mistake of assuming that just because the U.S. has always<br />
known tremendous peace and prosperity since World <strong>War</strong> II that things<br />
will always be that way.</p>
<p>Our lives will only continue to be "normal" as long as the trucks<br />
continue running.</p>
<p>When the trucks stop running in America, there will be mass chaos.</p>
<p>Are you prepared for that?..."]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/05/01/coming-may-day-mayhem-by-obama-supporters/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are you prepared for Obama 2.0  or maybe a post Obama world.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/are-you-prepared-for-obama-2-0-or-maybe-a-post-obama-world/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/are-you-prepared-for-obama-2-0-or-maybe-a-post-obama-world/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 03:06:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bats Slingshots]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chlorine Institute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Coleman Fuel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crazy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Honey Syrups]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Katrina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamp Oil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamps First Choice Buy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pepper Spray]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Portable Toilets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rice Beans Wheat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Seasoned Firewood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wal Mart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Filters Purifiers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31222</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If Obama wins or loses there will be Change&#8230;. and NO HOPE for anyone if he wins. ["...A Timeline Showing the Deterioration of Major Industries Following a Truck Stoppage The first 24 hours • Delivery of medical supplies to the affected area will cease. • Hospitals will run out of basic supplies such as syringes [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If Obama wins or loses there will be Change&#8230;.  and NO HOPE for anyone<br />
if he wins.</p>
<p>["...A Timeline Showing the Deterioration of Major Industries Following<br />
a Truck Stoppage</p>
<p>The first 24 hours</p>
<p>• Delivery of medical supplies to the affected area will cease.<br />
• Hospitals will run out of basic supplies such as syringes and<br />
catheters within hours. Radiopharmaceuticals will deteriorate and become<br />
unusable.<br />
• Service stations will begin to run out of fuel.<br />
• Manufacturers using just-in-time manufacturing will develop component<br />
shortages.<br />
• U.S. mail and other package delivery will cease.</p>
<p>Within one day</p>
<p>• Food shortages will begin to develop.<br />
• Automobile fuel availability and delivery will dwindle, leading to<br />
skyrocketing prices and long lines at the gas pumps.<br />
• Without manufacturing components and trucks for product delivery,<br />
assembly lines will shut down, putting thousands out of work.</p>
<p>Within two to three days</p>
<p>• Food shortages will escalate, especially in the face of hoarding and<br />
consumer panic.<br />
• Supplies of essentials—such as bottled water, powdered milk, and<br />
canned meat—at major retailers will disappear.<br />
• ATMs will run out of cash and banks will be unable to process<br />
transactions.<br />
• Service stations will completely run out of fuel for autos and trucks.<br />
• Garbage will start piling up in urban and suburban areas.<br />
• Container ships will sit idle in ports and rail transport will be<br />
disrupted, eventually coming to a standstill.</p>
<p>Within a week</p>
<p>• Automobile travel will cease due to the lack of fuel. Without autos<br />
and busses, many people will not be able to get to work, shop for<br />
groceries, or access medical care.<br />
• Hospitals will begin to exhaust oxygen supplies.</p>
<p>Within two weeks</p>
<p>• The nation’s clean water supply will begin to run dry.</p>
<p>Within four weeks</p>
<p>• The nation will exhaust its clean water supply and water will be safe<br />
for drinking only after boiling. As a result gastrointestinal illnesses<br />
will increase, further taxing an already weakened health care <strong>system</strong>.</p>
<p>This timeline presents only the primary effects of a freeze on truck<br />
travel. Secondary effects must be considered as well, such as inability<br />
to maintain telecommunications service, reduced law enforcement,<br />
<strong>increased</strong> crime, <strong>increased</strong> illness and injury, higher death rates, and<br />
likely, civil unrest.</p>
<p>*****</p>
<p>Earlier in the report, the reasons why America's water supply would be<br />
in such jeopardy are described in greater detail....</p>
<p>According to the American Water Works Association, Americans drink more<br />
than one billion glasses of tap water per day. For safety and security<br />
reasons, most water supply plants maintain a larger inventory of<br />
supplies than the typical business. However, the amount of chemical<br />
storage varies significantly and is site specific. According to the<br />
<strong>Chlorine Institute</strong>, most water treatment facilities receive chlorine in<br />
cylinders (150 pounds and one ton cylinders) that are delivered by motor<br />
carriers. On average, trucks deliver purification chemicals to water<br />
supply plants every seven to 14 days. Without these chemicals, water<br />
cannot be purified and made safe for drinking. Without truck deliveries<br />
of purification chemicals, water supply plants will run out of drinkable<br />
water in 14 to 28 days. Once the water supply is drained, water will be<br />
deemed safe for drinking only when boiled. Lack of clean drinking water<br />
will lead to <strong>increased</strong> gastrointestinal and other illnesses, further<br />
taxing an already weakened healthcare <strong>system</strong>.<br />
Can you see why I always recommend that you make sure that you and your<br />
family have access to fresh water and a way to purify it?</p>
<p>This report should be very sobering for all of us.</p>
<p>What would you and your family do if you had no food, no clean water and<br />
the stores were shut down because their supplies were gone?</p>
<p>An article by Tess Pennington entitled "Emergency Items: What Will<br />
Disappear First" contains a list of 100 things that are likely to<br />
disappear from store shelves first.  The following are the first <strong>10</strong><br />
things on her list....</p>
<p>1. Generators (Good ones cost dearly. Gas storage, risky. Noisy…target of<br />
thieves; maintenance etc.)<br />
2. Water Filters/Purifiers<br />
3. <strong>Portable Toilets</strong><br />
4. <strong>Seasoned Firewood</strong>. Wood takes about 6 – 12 months to become dried,<br />
for home<br />
uses.<br />
5. <strong>Lamp Oil</strong>, Wicks, Lamps (First Choice: Buy CLEAR oil. If scarce, stockpile<br />
ANY!)<br />
6. <strong>Coleman Fuel</strong>. Impossible to stockpile too much.<br />
7. Guns, Ammunition, <strong>Pepper Spray</strong>, Knives, Clubs, Bats &#038; Slingshots.<br />
8. Hand-can openers, &#038; <strong>hand</strong> egg beaters, whisks.<br />
9. Honey/Syrups/white, brown sugar<br />
<strong>10</strong>. Rice – Beans – Wheat</p>
<p>You can find the rest of the list right here.</p>
<p>Most Americans just assume that they will always be able to run out to<br />
the supermarket or to Wal-Mart and buy anything that they need.</p>
<p>But if the trucks stop running that will <strong>change</strong> almost overnight.</p>
<p>After reading the information above, does anyone out there still believe<br />
that preppers are <strong>crazy</strong>?</p>
<p>The truth is that there are good, solid reasons why millions of<br />
Americans have been storing up food, water filters and other supplies.</p>
<p>Our world is becoming increasingly unstable, and all of us need to get<br />
educated about how to prepare for the difficult years that are coming.</p>
<p>One nightmarish event can <strong>change</strong> everything that we take for granted in<br />
a single moment.</p>
<p>Just remember what happened after Hurricane <strong>Katrina</strong>.  Even though that<br />
was only a regional disaster, millions of people had their lives<br />
completely turned upside down by that tragedy.</p>
<p>Don't make the mistake of assuming that just because the U.S. has always<br />
known tremendous peace and prosperity since World <strong>War</strong> II that things<br />
will always be that way.</p>
<p>Our lives will only continue to be "normal" as long as the trucks<br />
continue running.</p>
<p>When the trucks stop running in America, there will be mass chaos.</p>
<p>Are you prepared for that?..."]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/are-you-prepared-for-obama-2-0-or-maybe-a-post-obama-world/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hussein Admits &#8220;Stimulus&#8221; Didn&#8217;t Work. Blames Republicans For Voting Against It.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/hussein-admits-stimulus-didnt-work-blames-republicans-for-voting-against-it/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/hussein-admits-stimulus-didnt-work-blames-republicans-for-voting-against-it/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 00:53:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AFL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eddie Haskell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Matt Shovel Ready]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mohegan Indian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Barack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Queen Nancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SHIT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Texas Watchdog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unconstitutional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WASHINGTON]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31212</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/30/2012 6:13 PM, wy wrote: > On Apr 30, 5:06 pm, &#8220;Eddie Haskell&#8221; wrote: >> &#8220;wy&#8221; wrote in message >> >> news:95d2e7c5-2854-4625-a4c5-0e782e50cb5e @&#038;*$?%i18g2000vbx.googlegroups.com&#8230; >> On Apr 30, 2:44 pm, jane wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Apr 30, 2:32 pm, Matt wrote: >> >>>> On Apr 30, 12:29 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/30/2012 6:13 PM, wy wrote:<br />
> On Apr 30, 5:06 pm, &#8220;<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong>&#8221; <uyn ...@szmoplm.com> wrote:<br />
>> &#8220;wy&#8221; <w ...@myself.com> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>> news:95d2e7c5-2854-4625-a4c5-0e782e50cb5e<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>i18g2000vbx.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>> On Apr 30, 2:44 pm, jane <jane .pla...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> On Apr 30, 2:32 pm, Matt <matttel ...@sprynet.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> On Apr 30, 12:29 pm, jane <jane .pla...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>> On Apr 30, 12:<strong>23</strong> pm, Matt <matttel ...@sprynet.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> On Apr 30, 9:59 am, jane <jane .pla...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> On Apr 30, <strong>11</strong>:39 am, Matt <matttel ...@sprynet.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> On Apr 30, 9:36 am, wy <w ...@myself.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 30, <strong>11</strong>:30 am, &#8220;<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong>&#8221; <uyn ...@szmoplm.com><br />
>>>>>>>>> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> A trillion dollar &#8220;stimulus&#8221; and infrastructure is falling<br />
>>>>>>>>>> apart and it&#8217;s<br />
>>>>>>>>>> all the republican&#8217;s fault. The only thing more ridiculous<br />
>>>>>>>>>> and pathetic than<br />
>>>>>>>>>> Hussein are the idiots in this country that still support<br />
>>>>>>>>>> him.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> &#8220;<strong>WASHINGTON</strong> (<strong>AP</strong>) &#8211; President <strong>Barack Obama</strong> is rallying union<br />
>>>>>>>>>> workers by<br />
>>>>>>>>>> painting a bleak portrait of America&#8217;s infrastructure. He<br />
>>>>>>>>>> blames Republicans<br />
>>>>>>>>>> for focusing on tax cutting rather than creating jobs by<br />
>>>>>>>>>> updating and<br />
>>>>>>>>>> rebuilding highways, railroads and airports.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> &#8220;Obama tells the Building and Construction Trades Department<br />
>>>>>>>>>> of the <strong>AFL</strong>-<strong>CIO</strong><br />
>>>>>>>>>> that U.S. highways are clogged, railroads are no longer the<br />
>>>>>>>>>> fastest in the<br />
>>>>>>>>>> world and airports are congested. Yet, he says, Republicans<br />
>>>>>>>>>> have repeatedly<br />
>>>>>>>>>> voted against his initiatives to create jobs by spending on<br />
>>>>>>>>>> construction<br />
>>>>>>>>>> projects.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, we voted against the &#8220;stimulus&#8221; but it passed anyway,<br />
>>>>>>>>>> you lying sack<br />
>>>>>>>>>> of <strong><acronym title="SHIT"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> S&*$?%T</span></acronym></strong>. Now, where&#8217;s my goddamn trillion dollars?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> You think it&#8217;ll only take a trillion to fix the<br />
>>>>>>>>> infrastructure? Try<br />
>>>>>>>>> $5 trillion, maybe $<strong>10</strong> trillion instead &#8211; if you&#8217;re lucky.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> More. Considerably more. Think about how long it has been since<br />
>>>>>>>> we<br />
>>>>>>>> spent anything<br />
>>>>>>>> on infrastructure, and then figure what we spent per year when<br />
>>>>>>>> things<br />
>>>>>>>> were good.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> Matt<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> &#8220;Shovel-Ready Was Not as, uh, Shovel-Ready as We Expected&#8221; -<br />
>>>>>>> Barack<br />
>>>>>>> &#8220;no excuses&#8221; Obama<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Ok, and?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> You think we don&#8217;t need to spend on our infrastructure?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Matt<br />
>><br />
>>>>> Do you mean infrastructure like replacing windows on a visitors center<br />
>>>>> that is has been closed and will remained closed because they have no<br />
>>>>> use for the building?<br />
>>>>> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/djA-JYaBvvg&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /><br />
>><br />
>>>> No.<br />
>><br />
>>> That was stimulus <strong>money</strong>; <strong>money</strong> that was supposed to be spent on shovel<br />
>>> ready jobs.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> OR do you mean the tattoo removal machine for <strong>Queen Nancy</strong>&#8216;s district?<br />
>><br />
>>>> No.<br />
>><br />
>>> That was stimulus <strong>money</strong>; <strong>money</strong> that was supposed to be spent on shovel<br />
>>> ready jobs.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> OR do you mean the millions to the <strong>Mohegan Indian</strong> tribe, which runs<br />
>>>>> one of the highest grossing casinos in the country?<br />
>><br />
>>>> Doesn&#8217;t apply.<br />
>><br />
>>> That was stimulus <strong>money</strong>; <strong>money</strong> that was supposed to be spent on shovel<br />
>>> ready jobs.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> OR do you mean a million for a puppet theater in Minnesota?<br />
>><br />
>>>> Nope.<br />
>><br />
>>> That was stimulus <strong>money</strong>; <strong>money</strong> that was supposed to be spent on shovel<br />
>>> ready jobs.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> OR do you mean $22.3 million in stimulus <strong>money</strong> to weatherize 53 homes<br />
>>>>> for poor families in Houston, Texas &#8211; but a new report from Texas<br />
>>>>> Watchdog says that the weatherization work was performed so badly that<br />
>>>>> 33 of the 53 homes will need to be completely redone?<br />
>><br />
>>> That was stimulus <strong>money</strong>; <strong>money</strong> that was supposed to be spent on shovel<br />
>>> ready jobs.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> &#8230; and on&#8230; and on &#8230; and on.<br />
>><br />
>>>> you do realize that most of the projects you list are in Republican<br />
>>>> regions with<br />
>>>> Republican representatives?<br />
>><br />
>>>> Matt<br />
>><br />
>>> All of those were stimulus <strong>money</strong>; <strong>money</strong> that was supposed to be spent<br />
>>> on shovel ready jobs.<br />
>><br />
>>> I am not a republican.<br />
>>> You&#8217;re full of <acronym title="shit"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> s&*$?%t</span></acronym>.  You&#8217;re as much of a Repugnant Republican as<br />
>>> Hitler was a totalitarian.  You reek of Repugnant language and<br />
>>> thought.  There&#8217;s not an unbiased, unskewed, neutral, independent or<br />
>>> even compromising hair on your body or in it.  You are gleefully and<br />
>>> orgasmically right wingnut, left, right and center of that right<br />
>>> wingnutism &#8211; it all screams unmistakably in what you say and how you<br />
>>> say it.<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;That was a year and a half ago.  If nothing is moving as fast as it<br />
>> should, it&#8217;s very likely because Repugnants refuse to let it move at<br />
>> all.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> -Wy, touting the Hussein agenda, with the caveat that anything wrong with it<br />
>> is probably the republicans fault.<br />
><br />
> Considering that things were moving along at a breakneck speed when<br />
> the Dems controlled <strong>Congress</strong> compared to how things are now moving<br />
> with Repugnants, then yeah, the obvious equation is right there.  Boy,<br />
> you&#8217;re stupid.</p>
<p>Your measure of success is how many &#8220;unwanted unfunded <strong>regulations</strong>&#8221; and<br />
laws are passed through congress?</p>
<p>That would put the <strong>Democrats</strong> in front of all others&#8230;..  I don&#8217;t think<br />
very many other American VOTERS consider passing unwanted and<br />
<strong>unconstitutional</strong> laws as a successful congress.</p>
<p></uyn></w></matttel></jane></matttel></jane></matttel></jane></w></uyn></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/hussein-admits-stimulus-didnt-work-blames-republicans-for-voting-against-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dogs</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/dogs/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/dogs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 18:30:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SUV]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31184</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/30/2012 10:20 AM, Lifsabsurd wrote: > My wife is the retired manager of an animal hospital. We both agree > that we would rather see someone carry a dog in a crate tied to the > top of an SUV than to have one for breakfast. Obama jokes about it. > Obama is a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/30/2012 <strong>10</strong>:20 AM, Lifsabsurd wrote:<br />
> My wife is the retired manager of an animal hospital.  We both agree<br />
> that we would rather see someone carry a dog in a crate tied to the<br />
> top of an <strong>SUV</strong> than to have one for breakfast.  Obama jokes about it.<br />
> Obama is a sick motherfucker.</p>
<p>Dogs are going to be part of how the <strong>Democrats</strong> cure world hunger&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/dogs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obamacare to cause the return of over $1 billion to consumersand businesses!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/obamacare-to-cause-the-return-of-over-1-billion-to-consumersand-businesses/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/obamacare-to-cause-the-return-of-over-1-billion-to-consumersand-businesses/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 18:15:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BANKS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[demand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31180</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/30/2012 2:04 PM, jim wrote: > > > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> >> On 4/30/2012 8:33 AM, jim wrote: >>> >>> >>> Gary Forbis wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> With fractional reserve banking, time deposis can be >>>> lent out without any reserve but demand deposits have >>>> a reserve requirement, currently 10%. This means when [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/30/2012 2:04 PM, jim wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>><br />
>> On 4/30/2012 8:33 AM, jim wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> Gary Forbis wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> With fractional reserve banking, time deposis can be<br />
>>>> lent out without any reserve but <strong>demand</strong> deposits have<br />
>>>> a reserve requirement, currently <strong>10</strong>%.  This means when<br />
>>>> my employer desposits my <strong>money</strong> in my checking<br />
>>>> account the bank can lend 90% of it to some third<br />
>>>> partiy.<br />
>>><br />
>>> This is a pretty meaningless model for how banks actually work.<br />
>>> Reserve requirement is not something a loan officer<br />
>>> even thinks about when making a loan.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Banks lending is not constrained by reserve requirement.<br />
>><br />
>> Where do <strong>BANKS</strong> get the <strong>money</strong> they are lending?<br />
><br />
><br />
> They don&#8217;t get the <strong>money</strong> they are lending from anywhere.<br />
> A loan of $1000 increases the deposits in the banking <strong>system</strong><br />
> by $1000.<br />
> The promissory note is an new asset and the deposit is a<br />
> new liability.<br />
> The balance sheet of the banks expands with each loan.</p>
<p>That would be a Ponzi scheme&#8230;  by definition it would be a Ponzi that<br />
will fail when enough people miss a payment.</p>
<p>It is all dependent on new investment making new <strong>money</strong> but there is no<br />
<strong>money</strong> until it has been paid, but the problem is no <strong>money</strong> was ever<br />
printed (put into circulation) to pay it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/obamacare-to-cause-the-return-of-over-1-billion-to-consumersand-businesses/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obamacare to cause the return of over $1 billion to consumers and businesses! *YOU ACT AS IF EACH PERSON WILL BE GETTING A CHECK IN THE MAIL*</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/obamacare-to-cause-the-return-of-over-1-billion-to-consumers-and-businesses-you-act-as-if-each-person-will-be-getting-a-check-in-the-mail-3/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/obamacare-to-cause-the-return-of-over-1-billion-to-consumers-and-businesses-you-act-as-if-each-person-will-be-getting-a-check-in-the-mail-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 17:31:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CHECK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DONT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GETTING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Heritage Foundation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Sun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Originated Plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PPACA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[THATS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unconstitutional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WANT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/30/2012 12:10 PM, Sid9 wrote: > > &#8220;clairbear&#8221; wrote in message > news:XnsA0456C3B84992clairbear @&#038;*$?%216.196.97.142&#8230; >> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; wrote in news:jnm5ci$k1p$1 @&#038;*$?%dont-email.me: >> >>> >>> &#8220;Vandar&#8221; wrote in message >>> news:jnlrd7$eg2$1 @&#038;*$?%news.albasani.net&#8230; >>>> Gary Forbis wrote: >>>>> On Apr 29, 5:10 pm, emoneyjoe wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 16:43:29 -0400, &#8220;Sid9&#8243; >>>>>> wrote: [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/30/2012 12:<strong>10</strong> PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;clairbear&#8221; <clairbear @msn.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:XnsA0456C3B84992clairbear<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>216.196.97.142&#8230;<br />
>> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @ bellsouth.net> wrote in news:jnm5ci$k1p$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dont-email.me:<br />
>><br />
>>><br />
>>> &#8220;Vandar&#8221; <vandar69 @yahoo.com> wrote in message<br />
>>> news:jnlrd7$eg2$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>news.albasani.net&#8230;<br />
>>>> Gary Forbis wrote:<br />
>>>>> On Apr 29, 5:<strong>10</strong> pm, emoneyjoe <emoney ...@iglou.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> <strong>On Sun</strong>, 29 Apr 2012 16:<strong>43</strong>:29 -0400, &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @ bellsouth.net><br />
>>>>>> wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> &#8220;Vandar&#8221; <vanda ...@yahoo.com> wrote in message<br />
>>>>>>> news:jnk7h8$hgb$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>news.albasani.net&#8230;<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> Gary <strong>DW</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> In article <jnjboj $km...@news.albasani.net>, Vandar says&#8230;<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> Gary <strong>DW</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> In article <jnhovf $q9...@news.albasani.net>, Vandar says&#8230;<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> wy wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 28, 4:46 pm, Vandar <vanda ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gary <strong>DW</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <jnh6uk $md...@news.albasani.net>, Vandar<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> says&#8230;<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gary <strong>DW</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <jnh0mg $96...@news.albasani.net>, Vandar<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> says&#8230;<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <a href="mailto:Yoorg...@Jurgis.net">Yoorg&#8230;@Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 <strong>23</strong>:27:52 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2012 <strong>10</strong>:<strong>43</strong> PM, <a href="mailto:Yoorg...@Jurgis.net">Yoorg&#8230;@Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 19:18:28 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </thendestroyeveryth>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GIven Madoff, the Derivities scandal, the Housing<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bubble,<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fannie/freddie pillage&#8212;<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All these together don&#8217;t add up to the Insurance and<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ObamaCare swindle<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Obama and <strong>Democrats</strong> have undertaken.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Utter nonsense<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> States have not yet implemented <strong>HC</strong> Reform to any<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> degree<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The &#8220;swindle&#8221; is because providers and Insurance<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> companies are<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not required to comply<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That&#8217;s why taxpayers pay $5 per aspirin, or $1200 for<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a wheel<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chair<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That&#8217;s ongoing because Your republicans allowed the<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Insurance<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and <strong>HC</strong><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> industries to write the legislation, and Republicans<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are blocking and<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using courts to stop reform<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Moron.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nothing has been blocked&#8230;<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All is well with ObamaCare and all the price increases<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are thanks to<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ObamaCare.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> &#8220;<strong>Obamacare</strong>&#8221; is a <acronym title="fucking"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> f&*$?%g</span></acronym> REPUBLICAN <strong>Originated Plan</strong> you<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moron.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No it isn&#8217;t.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who exactly was the originator then?<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Half a dozen Senators decided what to include and they had<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lackeys<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> write it up.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The plan originated from the <strong>Heritage Foundation</strong>,<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vandar.  Stop playing little games.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The plan the <strong>Heritage Foundation</strong> outlined in the late 80s<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> isn&#8217;t the<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as <strong>Obamacare</strong>. Sure, there was an individual mandate aspect,<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but <strong>Obamacare</strong> is much more than that.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Come up with other differences between Heritage and<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <strong>Obamacare</strong>. Come<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on, I dare ya.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> I&#8217;m not your monkey. Do your own research.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> Translation:  &#8220;I don&#8217;t have a clue.&#8221;<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> Reality: You just want to make blanket statements with no basis<br />
>>>>>>>>>> in fact.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> You opposed the Heritage plan and think <strong>Obamacare</strong> is great<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> What a lying <acronym title="asshole"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%e</span></acronym>.  I <strong>DONT</strong> think <strong>Obamacare</strong> is great&#8230; because<br />
>>>>>>>>> it doesn&#8217;t have a public option.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> If people like you would stop voting for Republicans, the<br />
>>>>>>>>> American people<br />
>>>>>>>>> would get one.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> <strong>THATS</strong> WHAT WE <strong>WANT</strong>.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Instead we got the mandate BECAUSE of people like you.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> You got the mandate because of people like Obama, <strong>Pelosi</strong>, <strong>Reid</strong>,<br />
>>>>>>>> and the rest of the clowns who voted for it. If they didn&#8217;t vote<br />
>>>>>>>> for it, you wouldn&#8217;t have it.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Its your baby, you diaper it.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> &#8220;It takes a village&#8221;.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> while arguing<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> that they are the same thing. But when it&#8217;s pointed out that<br />
>>>>>>>>>> most people<br />
>>>>>>>>>> don&#8217;t like <strong>Obamacare</strong>, you blame Republicans for it.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Yes.  If one (or is it two?) Republicans hadn&#8217;t threatened<br />
>>>>>>>>> fillibuster,<br />
>>>>>>>>> there would have been an up and down vote.  Which meant there<br />
>>>>>>>>> would have<br />
>>>>>>>>> been the public option that the House passed. THAT THE PEOPLE<br />
>>>>>>>>> WANTED.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> So all a single Republican needs to do is threaten to do something<br />
>>>>>>>> and the<br />
>>>>>>>> <strong>Democrats</strong> will fold like a cheap suit?<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Let me guess&#8230; you think that ALL bills need 60 votes in the<br />
>>>>>>>>> Senate to<br />
>>>>>>>>> pass?  And its ALWAYS been this way??<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> Not at all.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> If the Obama can&#8217;t get 60 votes in the Senate a bill is dead.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>        Are you saying a filibuster prevents any bill<br />
>>>>>> from being voted on?<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Republicans march lock step with no regard to the merits of what<br />
>>>>>>> needs to be<br />
>>>>>>> done.<br />
>>>>>>> McConnell call the shot.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>       Does that mean he has more power and<br />
>>>>>> influence than the president?<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Interestingly the President can only veto but if a bill has 60% of<br />
>>>>> the house and senate congress can override a veto.  So&#8230;<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> 2/3, not 60%. And it depends on the type of veto.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> A bill must be veto proof before it can reach the President&#8217;s desk<br />
>>>>> in today&#8217;s Republican obstructionism.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> 60% is filibuster-proof, not veto-proof. The <strong>PPACA</strong> had the former,<br />
>>>> but not the latter.<br />
>>>><br />
>>> .<br />
>>> .<br />
>>> .<br />
>>> Not to worry.<br />
>>> Nothing comes out of the McConnell&#8217;s Republican Senate that Obama<br />
>>> might sign or veto.<br />
>>> Republicans march in lockstep with only one goal in mind: defeat<br />
>>> Obama&#8230;America be damned!<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>> How bad is it getting when the republican start playing the favorite<br />
>> gam of the dems. The unwillingness of the dems to bring the republicans<br />
>> into the debate is one of the hallmarks of Obama&#8217;s administration<br />
>> Forshame on the republicans for want to defeat such a great leader<br />
><br />
> Liar.<br />
> Obama gave up too much to Republicans to get <strong>Obamacare</strong> passed&#8230;..</p>
<p>ObamaCare got NO Republican votes&#8230;.  NOT even one.</p>
<p>The only way to get the Republicans to vote &#8220;yea&#8221; on ObamaCare was to<br />
have a vote to get rid of it.</p>
<p>There was nothing you could do to get Republicans to vote &#8220;for&#8221;<br />
ObamaCare because Republicans know it is <strong>unconstitutional</strong> and they don&#8217;t<br />
want to be run out of office for violating the constitution like the<br />
<strong>Democrats</strong> have experienced and will experience in the future&#8230;.  I will<br />
work hard for &#8220;and fund anyone&#8221; running against anyone that voted for<br />
ObamaCare.</p>
<p>> Then they turned their brains off and voted against it.</p>
<p>NO&#8230;  they never voted for it&#8230;.</p>
<p>> He was sandbagged by racists that hate the color of his skin</p>
<p>Last cry of a worthless Liberal that can&#8217;t comprehend the FACTS and your<br />
autism is in full on mode and now the Tourette&#8217;s it triggered and you<br />
start calling people racists and any other nasty foul thing in your<br />
small little diseased mind.   Just keep telling yourself you are<br />
superior to all the rest of us and you and only you have the education<br />
and the answers&#8230;.</p>
</thendestroyeveryth></jnh0mg></jnh6uk></vanda></jnhovf></jnjboj></vanda></sid9></emoney></vandar69></sid9></clairbear></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/obamacare-to-cause-the-return-of-over-1-billion-to-consumers-and-businesses-you-act-as-if-each-person-will-be-getting-a-check-in-the-mail-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obamacare to cause the return of over $1 billion to consumers and  businesses!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/obamacare-to-cause-the-return-of-over-1-billion-to-consumers-and-businesses-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/obamacare-to-cause-the-return-of-over-1-billion-to-consumers-and-businesses-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 17:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BANKS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[demand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31162</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/30/2012 8:33 AM, jim wrote: > > > Gary Forbis wrote: > >> >> With fractional reserve banking, time deposis can be >> lent out without any reserve but demand deposits have >> a reserve requirement, currently 10%. This means when >> my employer desposits my money in my checking >> account the bank [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/30/2012 8:33 AM, jim wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> Gary Forbis wrote:<br />
><br />
>><br />
>> With fractional reserve banking, time deposis can be<br />
>> lent out without any reserve but <strong>demand</strong> deposits have<br />
>> a reserve requirement, currently <strong>10</strong>%.  This means when<br />
>> my employer desposits my <strong>money</strong> in my checking<br />
>> account the bank can lend 90% of it to some third<br />
>> partiy.<br />
><br />
> This is a pretty meaningless model for how banks actually work.<br />
> Reserve requirement is not something a loan officer<br />
> even thinks about when making a loan.<br />
><br />
> Banks lending is not constrained by reserve requirement.</p>
<p>Where do <strong>BANKS</strong> get the <strong>money</strong> they are lending?</p>
<p>> At no time has the federal reserve ever refused to create<br />
> reserves to match what ever level of lending banks engage in.</p>
<p>Are you saying that The <strong>FED</strong> is the place that a Bank gets all its <strong>money</strong><br />
to lend?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/30/obamacare-to-cause-the-return-of-over-1-billion-to-consumers-and-businesses-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obamacare to cause the return of over $1 billion to consumers and businesses!        *YOU ACT AS IF EACH PERSON WILL BE GETTING A CHECK IN THE MAIL*</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/27/obamacare-to-cause-the-return-of-over-1-billion-to-consumers-and-businesses-you-act-as-if-each-person-will-be-getting-a-check-in-the-mail/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/27/obamacare-to-cause-the-return-of-over-1-billion-to-consumers-and-businesses-you-act-as-if-each-person-will-be-getting-a-check-in-the-mail/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:13:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CHECK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GETTING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LAW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MAIL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PERSON]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAXPAYERS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31084</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/26/2012 10:52 PM, Sid9 wrote: > > &#8220;clairbear&#8221; wrote in message > news:XnsA041C5C3C371Bclairbear @&#038;*$?%216.196.97.142&#8230; >> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; wrote in news:jnc991$eja$1 @&#038;*$?%dont-email.me: >> >>> >>> &#8220;clairbear&#8221; wrote in message >>> news:XnsA04197A1EBA35clairbear @&#038;*$?%216.196.97.142&#8230; >>>> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; wrote in news:jnbovq$663$1 @&#038;*$?%dont-email.me: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Report: Health Care Law Rebates to Top $1B >>>> >>>> And just where is the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/26/2012 <strong>10</strong>:52 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;clairbear&#8221; <clairbear @msn.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:XnsA041C5C3C371Bclairbear<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>216.196.97.142&#8230;<br />
>> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @ bellsouth.net> wrote in news:jnc991$eja$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dont-email.me:<br />
>><br />
>>><br />
>>> &#8220;clairbear&#8221; <clairbear @msn.com> wrote in message<br />
>>> news:XnsA04197A1EBA35clairbear<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>216.196.97.142&#8230;<br />
>>>> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @ bellsouth.net> wrote in news:jnbovq$663$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dont-email.me:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Report: <strong>Health Care</strong> Law Rebates to Top $1B<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> And just where is the <strong>money</strong> coming from  The <strong>TAXPAYERS</strong> there is no free<br />
>>>> lunch you senile old fool<br />
>>><br />
>>> Out of <strong>insurance</strong> companies profits.<br />
>>> Try reading the law instead of being a knee jerk<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>> Gee <strong>insurance</strong> companies make a profit What a bunch of evil capitalist<br />
>> <acronym title="bastards"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> b&*$?%s</span></acronym><br />
> ,<br />
> ,<br />
><br />
> They&#8217;re evil crooks if they don’t spend 80% of YOUR premium on YOUR<br />
> healthcare instead of for executive salaries!</p>
<p>So the solution is to have government crooks run the crooked <strong>insurance</strong><br />
industry?</p>
<p>> If they fail to spend YOUR premium on healthcare YOU get part of your<br />
> premium back.</p>
<p>Whose to say it wasn&#8217;t a year that they had less chance of melanoma due<br />
to less sun spots and isn&#8217;t <strong>insurance</strong> supposed to spread the risk&#8230;.</p>
<p>So then in 3 years they have more cancer due to a high number of sun<br />
spots and they lose <strong>money</strong> or make almost nothing, does the government<br />
then tell the <strong>insurance</strong> to charge you a &#8220;cancer surcharge&#8221; of 19% of<br />
your policy?</p>
<p>><br />
> Even rednecks can understand that!<br />
></p>
<p>I don&#8217;t like <strong>insurance</strong>, I don&#8217;t buy <strong>insurance</strong> and you explained it, they<br />
are thieves and the politicians are thieves and changing thieves in<br />
charge will fix nothing.</p>
<p>> That&#8217;s part of <strong>Obamacare</strong> already in force by <strong>LAW</strong></p>
<p>And it will help who? Aren&#8217;t 80% of all Heath Insurance company policies<br />
and paid for by the employers? So the rebate is to the employers isn&#8217;t it?</p>
<p>*YOU <strong>ACT</strong> AS IF EACH <strong>PERSON</strong> WILL BE <strong>GETTING</strong> A <strong>CHECK</strong> IN THE <strong>MAIL</strong>*</p>
<p>That is NOT going to happen.</p>
<p></sid9></clairbear></sid9></clairbear></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/27/obamacare-to-cause-the-return-of-over-1-billion-to-consumers-and-businesses-you-act-as-if-each-person-will-be-getting-a-check-in-the-mail/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>5 New Lies That The Federal Reserve Is Telling The American People</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/27/5-new-lies-that-the-federal-reserve-is-telling-the-american-people/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/27/5-new-lies-that-the-federal-reserve-is-telling-the-american-people/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:02:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama Tax Increases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Turbo Tax Ted Geithner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31082</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/26/2012 10:48 PM, Gary Forbis wrote: > On Apr 26, 6:30 pm, linuxgal wrote: >> Bret Cahill wrote: >>>> 5 New Lies That The Federal Reserve Is Telling The American People >> >>>> The Federal Reserve says that everything is going to be okay. >> >>>> The Fed says that unemployment is going to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/26/2012 <strong>10</strong>:48 PM, Gary Forbis wrote:<br />
> On Apr 26, 6:30 pm, linuxgal
<linux ...@cleanposts.com> wrote:<br />
>> Bret Cahill wrote:<br />
>>>> 5 New Lies That The <strong>Federal</strong> Reserve Is Telling The American People<br />
>><br />
>>>> The <strong>Federal</strong> Reserve says that everything is going to be okay.<br />
>><br />
>>>> The Fed says that <strong>unemployment</strong> is going to go down, inflation is going<br />
>>>> to remain low and economic growth is going to steadily increase.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Do you believe them this time?<br />
>><br />
>>> Not w/o tax hikes on the rich.<br />
>><br />
>> <strong>Turbo Tax Ted Geithner</strong> says there&#8217;s a fiscal cliff the country is about<br />
>> to plunge over if <strong>Congress</strong> doesn&#8217;t act before January 1, 2013.  He&#8217;s<br />
>> talking, of course, about the <strong>Obama Tax Increases</strong>.<br />
><br />
> What?  You mean not renewing the unpaid for Bush tax cut for a<br />
> second time?  While I think the middle income tax cut</p>
<p>What about the unpaid for ObamaCare and unpaid for education and unpaid<br />
for Solyndra loans?   And the unpaid for <strong>GM</strong> stock and loan guarantees?</p>
<p>> should be<br />
> made permanent I&#8217;d rather all be shot down than all be extended.<br />
> I don&#8217;t think it would hit the middle income as bad as many think<br />
> and the revenues are needed.</p>
<p>Revenue can&#8217;t fix a spending problem and the <strong>Federal</strong> government has a<br />
spending problem, they spend on items they are delegated powers of the<br />
<strong>Federal</strong> Government.</p>
</linux>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/27/5-new-lies-that-the-federal-reserve-is-telling-the-american-people/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama may have lost a big bloc of votes for 2012 , both legal and illegal. US/Mexican migration reverses and &#8220;Obama Solves Illegal Immigration by Destroying the Economy &#8220;</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/26/obama-may-have-lost-a-big-bloc-of-votes-for-2012-both-legal-and-illegal-usmexican-migration-reverses-and-obama-solves-illegal-immigration-by-destroying-the-economy/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/26/obama-may-have-lost-a-big-bloc-of-votes-for-2012-both-legal-and-illegal-usmexican-migration-reverses-and-obama-solves-illegal-immigration-by-destroying-the-economy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 22:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pew Hispanic Center]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31078</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/26/2012 6:10 AM, ???????? wrote: > On Apr 24, 10:15 am, ???????? wrote: >> Obama may have lost a big bloc of votes, both legal and illegal. Net >> migration in the US from and to Mexico has reversed for the first time >> in 40 years thanx to Obama >> >> &#8220;&#8230;the net [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/26/2012 6:<strong>10</strong> AM, ???????? wrote:<br />
> On Apr 24, <strong>10</strong>:15 am, ???????? <zuckerl ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>> Obama may have lost a big bloc of votes, both legal and illegal. Net<br />
>> migration in the <strong>US</strong> from and to <strong>Mexico</strong> has reversed for the first time<br />
>> in 40 years thanx to Obama<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;&#8230;the net migration flow from <strong>Mexico</strong> to the <strong>United States</strong> has stopped<br />
>> —and may have reversed, according to a new analysis by the Pew<br />
>> Hispanic Center of multiple government data sets from both<br />
>> countries&#8230;.&#8221;<br />
><br />
> Obama Solves Illegal Immigration by Destroying the Economy<br />
><br />
> <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/obama-solves-illegal-immigration-destroying-economy-163400282.html" >http://news.yahoo.com/obama-solves-illegal-immigration-destroying-economy-163400282.html</a></p>
<p>Even Americans are dropping their citizenship in increasing numbers.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know that Obama &#8220;solved&#8221; the immigration problem&#8230;  but he has<br />
created a new reason to NOT want to be an American.</p>
<p></zuckerl></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/26/obama-may-have-lost-a-big-bloc-of-votes-for-2012-both-legal-and-illegal-usmexican-migration-reverses-and-obama-solves-illegal-immigration-by-destroying-the-economy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;&#8221;&quot;Jobless Claims Stay Elevated as Labor Market Gains Stall  &#8211;  Bad News For America Is Bad News For Obozo</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/26/jobless-claims-stay-elevated-as-labor-market-gains-stall-bad-news-for-america-is-bad-news-for-obozo/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/26/jobless-claims-stay-elevated-as-labor-market-gains-stall-bad-news-for-america-is-bad-news-for-obozo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 22:27:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Buggers Little Boys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DETROIT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FUDGED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HEALING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeep Grand Cherokee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NUMBERS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stock Market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Working]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31072</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/26/2012 1:47 PM, Ray Fischer Buggers Little Boys wrote: > More Bad News For Obozo: > Jobless Claims Stay Elevated as Labor Market Gains Stall > New U.S. claims for unemployment benefits fell slightly last week but > a trend reading rose to its highest since January, the latest sign of > a weaker [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/26/2012 1:47 PM, Ray Fischer <strong>Buggers Little Boys</strong> wrote:<br />
> More Bad News For Obozo:<br />
> Jobless Claims Stay Elevated as Labor Market Gains Stall<br />
> New U.S. claims for <strong>unemployment</strong> benefits fell slightly last week but<br />
> a trend reading rose to its highest since January, the latest sign of<br />
> a weaker pace of healing</p>
<p>There NEVER WAS ANY <strong>HEALING</strong> it was all a scam and Obama has been using<br />
<strong>FUDGED</strong> <strong>NUMBERS</strong>.</p>
<p>Who is holding up the &#8220;<strong>Stock Market</strong>&#8221;  tax payers, you end up bidding<br />
your own stocks up with tax dollars from Obama, and then buy stocks for<br />
more than they rare worth&#8230;..   What a bunch of saps you are.</p>
<p>> in the still-struggling labor market.<br />
> The four-week moving average for new claims, a closely followed<br />
> measure of labor market trends, rose 6,250 to 381,750, its highest<br />
> since the week that ended Jan. 7.<br />
> <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/47186701" >http://www.cnbc.com/id/47186701</a><br />
> Well, Obozo IS The Presidunce</p>
<p>Obama already laughed at all his supporters when he said &#8220;there were no<br />
shovel ready jobs&#8221;  and Obama has good reason to laugh, he has all the<br />
democrats fooled.</p>
<p>> &#8212;&#8211;<br />
> How&#8217;s That Hopey-Changey Thing <strong>Working</strong> Out For You?<br />
><br />
> On Apr 26, <strong>10</strong>:15 am, <a href="mailto:b...@panix.com">b&#8230;@panix.com</a> (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:<br />
>>  |<br />
>>  | <strong>DETROIT</strong> (<strong>AP</strong>) &#8212; Chrysler had its best quarterly profit in<br />
>>  | 13 years. Not bad for a company that almost died three<br />
>>  | years ago.<br />
>>  |<br />
>>  | The company earned $473 million in the first quarter,<br />
>>  | mainly on the back of strong U.S. sales, which rose 39<br />
>>  | percent from January through March. Customers snapped up<br />
>>  | Ram pickups, <strong>Jeep Grand Cherokee</strong> SUVs and Chrysler 200<br />
>>  | sedans.<br />
>>  | &#8230;<br />
>> <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/chrysler-posts-best-quarterly-profit-062519432...." >http://news.yahoo.com/chrysler-posts-best-quarterly-profit-062519432&#8230;.</a><br />
>><br />
>> Why do Republicans hate America?<br />
>><br />
>>     &#8211;bks<br />
></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/26/jobless-claims-stay-elevated-as-labor-market-gains-stall-bad-news-for-america-is-bad-news-for-obozo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How muchshitdoes it take in YOUR bowl of ice cream to ruin the whole bowl?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/25/how-muchshitdoes-it-take-in-your-bowl-of-ice-cream-to-ruin-the-whole-bowl/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/25/how-muchshitdoes-it-take-in-your-bowl-of-ice-cream-to-ruin-the-whole-bowl/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:34:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[A0 A0lend]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commerce Clause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PROMOTE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[QUOTE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reinvestment Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rockinghorse Winner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31046</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/25/2012 12:44 AM, Nickname unavailable wrote: > On Apr 24, 8:53 pm, Rockinghorse Winner wrote: >> Nickname unavailable writes: >>> On Apr 24, 1:39=A0pm, P&#038;*$?%s wrote: >>>> On 4/24/2012 10:48 AM, jim wrote: >> >>>>> P&#038;*$?%s wrote: >> >>>>>> On 4/23/2012 5:17 PM, jim wrote: >> >>>>>>> P&#038;*$?%s wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> http://traigerlaw.com/publications/The_community_reinvestment_act_of= >>> _&#8230; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/25/2012 12:44 AM, Nickname unavailable wrote:<br />
> On Apr 24, 8:53 pm, <strong>Rockinghorse Winner</strong> <rwin ...@badass.edu> wrote:<br />
>> Nickname unavailable <vide ...@tcq.net> writes:<br />
>>> On Apr 24, 1:39=A0pm, <acronym title="Peter Franks"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> P&*$?%s</span></acronym> <n ...@none.com> wrote:<br />
>>>> On 4/24/2012 <strong>10</strong>:48 AM, jim wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>> <acronym title="Peter Franks"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> P&*$?%s</span></acronym> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> On 4/<strong>23</strong>/2012 5:17 PM, jim wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> <acronym title="Peter Franks"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> P&*$?%s</span></acronym> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> <a href="http://traigerlaw.com/publications/The_community_reinvestment_act_of=" >http://traigerlaw.com/publications/The_community_reinvestment_act_of=</a><br />
>>> _&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> The government is not responsible, even less authorized, to spur<br />
>>>>>>>> lending, period.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> The purpose of the Community <strong>Reinvestment Act</strong> is not to<br />
>>>>>>> spur lending. The purpose is to prevent banks from taking<br />
>>>>>>> deposits from low income neighborhoods and then refusing to<br />
>>>>>>> =A0 =A0lend the <strong>money</strong> back to those community.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> Banks are chartered by the government to take deposits<br />
>>>>>>> and make loans. If they don&#8217;t want to perform the functions<br />
>>>>>>> that they are chartered to perform in a given community<br />
>>>>>>> then they have no business opening a branch in that community.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> =A0 =A0From YOUR <strong>QUOTE</strong>: &#8220;Indeed, policy makers<br />
>>>>>> should consider looking to the <strong>CRA</strong> for guidance on how the<br />
>>>>>> government can spur responsible lending to other qualified<br />
>>>>>> borrowers.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>>>> yes they are saying <strong>CRA</strong> is a model for responsible lending.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> Another way to say it is;<br />
>>>>> if the government wants to discourage irresponsible lending<br />
>>>>> to other qualified borrowers, they should look to <strong>CRA</strong> as a model.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> There was plenty of irresponsible lending by banks before 2008.<br />
>>>>> and had the same rules and <strong>regulations</strong> been applied to other<br />
>>>>> borrowers that were applied to <strong>CRA</strong> loans much of that irresponsible<br />
>>>>> lending would not have occurred.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> The purpose of <strong>CRA</strong> has always been to prevent banks<br />
>>>>> from taking deposits from a community and then refusing<br />
>>>>> to make loans in that community.<br />
>><br />
>>>> If the people of that community don&#8217;t like that, then the people of the<br />
>>>> community should start their own bank and lend the <strong>money</strong> back to<br />
>>>> themselves. =A0The <strong>CRA</strong> is unjustified legislation.<br />
>>> yet, the cra had nothing to do with the housing bubble. and the cra<br />
>>> is appropriate regulatory legislation. however the deregulation of<br />
>>> banking is the real problem in the world today. its why the founders<br />
>>> despised conservatism, and created a constitution with broad powers to<br />
>>> regulate, tax, legislate, and to promote and provide for the <strong>welfare</strong><br />
>>> of america.<br />
>><br />
>> They are not broad; they are sharply defined and _limited._<br />
>><br />
>> Terry<br />
>><br />
><br />
><br />
>  the lifespan of the sun is limited also, but it gives off lots of<br />
> light and heat for the whole solar <strong>system</strong>. the only limits, are what<br />
> is considered constitutional, and what is not. the founders despised<br />
> conservatism.<br />
><br />
> the <strong>Constitution</strong> created a robust central authority:stating in the<br />
> preamble the explicit responsibility of the government to promote the<br />
> general Welfare:The document also granted the federal government broad<br />
> domestic powers including authority to regulate interstate commerce,<br />
> the so-called <strong>Commerce Clause</strong><br />
><br />
><br />
></p>
<p>The preamble suggests what the constitution in its entirety is intended<br />
to accomplish&#8230;..   It delegates NO powers to the Federal Government.</p>
<p>Also the word *<strong>PROMOTE</strong>* that was used, means to encourage NOT to<br />
actually supply.   <strong>SO</strong> it is saying that &#8220;as a whole&#8221; the document should<br />
NOT provide general <strong>welfare</strong> but should only help encourage it.</p>
<p>As for the commerce clause, it has been abused and &#8220;over used&#8221; since the<br />
<strong>power</strong> is only to &#8220;regulate&#8221; commerce between the States and the Indian<br />
Nations and the other foreign Nations.</p>
<p>That is NOT broad powers, that is limited powers&#8230;.  they limited the<br />
<strong>FEDERAL</strong> government on purpose.  As they did throughout the entire<br />
constitution.</p>
<p></n></vide></rwin></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/25/how-muchshitdoes-it-take-in-your-bowl-of-ice-cream-to-ruin-the-whole-bowl/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS NEVER CHANGE &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;deficit between 1947 and 2008&gt;&gt;&gt;  was less than Obama Deficit spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/24/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-13/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/24/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-13/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:26:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[37]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeff Strickland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Rosenbluth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBAMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WILD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31020</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/23/2012 8:37 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote: > On 4/20/2012 6:09 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> On 4/20/2012 8:58 PM, Josh wrote: >>> On 4/20/2012 7:20 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote: >>>> >>>> &#8220;Josh&#8221; wrote in message >>>> news:jmsme4$i4s$1 @&#038;*$?%josh.motzarella.org&#8230; >>>>> On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote: >>>>>>> On 4/20/2012 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/<strong>23</strong>/2012 8:<strong>37</strong> PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
> On 4/20/2012 6:09 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>> On 4/20/2012 8:58 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>> On 4/20/2012 7:20 PM, <strong>Jeff Strickland</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> &#8220;Josh&#8221;<user @nowhere.com>  wrote in message<br />
>>>> news:jmsme4$i4s$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>josh.motzarella.org&#8230;<br />
>>>>> On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:32 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, <strong>Josh Rosenbluth</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com>  wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> Spending went down as a % of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010 and 2011 relative to a<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget). Your confusion (and<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> all of<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using 2008<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> as the<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> baseline year to evaluate Obama. 2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s last<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> budget.<br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion<br />
>>>>>>>>>> dollars<br />
>>>>>>>>>> became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that<br />
>>>>>>>>>> cutting<br />
>>>>>>>>>> that<br />
>>>>>>>>>> by 1% is an accomplishment?<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget): deficit $1.4T<br />
>>>>>>>>> 2010 and 2011 (Obama): deficit $1.3T<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Why do you keep saying that Obama <strong>increased</strong> Bush&#8217;s $1T to $2T?<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2011/07/25/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/debt%20changes%20under%20bush%20obama.jpg?uuid=qZCizrbZEeCYzBMQCYwsyQ" >http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2011/07/25/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/debt%20changes%20under%20bush%20obama.jpg?uuid=qZCizrbZEeCYzBMQCYwsyQ</a><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> That link claims the spending increases under Obama are much smaller<br />
>>>>>>> than they were under Bush.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> Thanks for Noticing, even you catch the <strong>WILD</strong> Liberal lies&#8230;.. Now<br />
>>>>>> the<br />
>>>>>> question is why did Obama propose 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES to cover<br />
>>>>>> his<br />
>>>>>> 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> SPENDING?<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> The <strong>Federal</strong>/National debt is up from $9 trillion at the Obama<br />
>>>>>> coronation<br />
>>>>>> to $16 trillion in 3.5 years? If that isn&#8217;t debt what is it? That is<br />
>>>>>> roughly $7 trillion of <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>OBAMA</strong> <strong>DEBT</strong>. That amounts to an average<br />
>>>>>> of $2<br />
>>>>>> trillion per year in the last 3.5 years. Bush was in office 8 years,<br />
>>>>>> had he run the debt up 2 trillion a year it would have been 16<br />
>>>>>> trillion<br />
>>>>>> and Obama&#8217;s would NOW be at $<strong>23</strong> trillion in debt.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> I can only conclude you are too stupid to understand why 2009 is the<br />
>>>>> last Bush budget year, since you keep ignoring that fact.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> It doesn&#8217;t matter. The debt under Obama is greater than under Bush, and<br />
>>>> by a huge percentage. Let&#8217;s give the 2009 budget to Bush. Let&#8217;s give<br />
>>>> him<br />
>>>> the 2010 budget while we are passing stuff around. Obama STILL has<br />
>>>> ballooned the national debt.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Obama is making a claim, and by extension you are making it too,<br />
>>>> that he<br />
>>>> was divorced and the judge told him to pay his wife&#8217;s credit card bill,<br />
>>>> and told her to stop using it. He is bitching today that he inherited a<br />
>>>> balance of $<strong>10</strong>,000 but now it is $25,000, and unmanageable. THEN he<br />
>>>> attempts to make the claim that it&#8217;s ALL her fault.<br />
>>><br />
>>> I have made only one claim:  that the claim that the deficit went up<br />
>>> 100% under Obama is false.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> I believe I have proven that Obama is increasing the deficit by about $2<br />
>> trillion a year on average<br />
><br />
> Simply a lie.  The deficit doesn&#8217;t even approach $2 trillion, so he<br />
> can&#8217;t possibly be increasing it by $2 trillion a year.  Keep those lies<br />
> coming, Beamer.</p>
<p>Then you tell us all how much the National debt has risen since Obama&#8217;s<br />
inauguration day&#8230;. once you get that put on paper, then divide it by<br />
3.5 years Obama has been president, then post that number here and tell<br />
us how much the deficit is on average for the Obama Presidency.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m Not even talking about QE2 and QE3 yet but we can go there next and<br />
add that cost to the numbers you post.</p>
</thendestroyeveryth></user></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/24/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-13/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS NEVER CHANGE &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;deficit between 1947 and 2008&gt;&gt;&gt; was less than Obama Deficit spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/24/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-12/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/24/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-12/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:20:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[41]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Billion Medicare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CONSERVATIVE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DIVIDEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GROW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeff Strickland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBAMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBTW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PEACE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WILD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31018</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/23/2012 8:22 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote: > On Apr 23, 11:11 am, &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; wrote: >> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message >> >> news:4d789092-c5fa-4986-ab43-2919127223f2 @&#038;*$?%m13g2000yqi.googlegroups.com&#8230; >> On Apr 21, 10:41 am, &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; wrote: >> >> >> >>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message >> >>> news:27b36a16-338b-499e-99f2-95ea035ba907 @&#038;*$?%p6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com&#8230; >>> On Apr 20, 8:24 pm, &#8220;Jeff [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/<strong>23</strong>/2012 8:22 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote:<br />
> On Apr <strong>23</strong>, <strong>11</strong>:<strong>11</strong> am, &#8220;<strong>Jeff Strickland</strong>&#8221; <crwlrj ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>> news:4d789092-c5fa-4986-ab43-2919127223f2<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>m13g2000yqi.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>> On Apr 21, <strong>10</strong>:<strong>41</strong> am, &#8220;<strong>Jeff Strickland</strong>&#8221; <crwlrj ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>>> news:27b36a16-338b-499e-99f2-95ea035ba907<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>p6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>>> On Apr 20, 8:24 pm, &#8220;<strong>Jeff Strickland</strong>&#8221; <crwlrj ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>>>> news:0b8617a9-d46b-4dd5-95f3-e08a007d66a2<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>i18g2000vbx.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>>>> On Apr 20, 6:20 pm, &#8220;<strong>Jeff Strickland</strong>&#8221; <crwlrj ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>> &#8220;Josh&#8221; <u ...@nowhere.com> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>>>>> news:jmsme4$i4s$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>josh.motzarella.org&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:32 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> Spending went down as a % of GDP in 2010 and 2011 relative to<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> a<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget). Your confusion (and all<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> of<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using 2008 as<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> the<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> baseline year to evaluate Obama. 2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> last<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> budget.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> dollars<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> cutting<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> that<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> by 1% is an accomplishment?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget): deficit $1.4T<br />
>>>>>>>>>> 2010 and 2011 (Obama): deficit $1.3T<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> Why do you keep saying that Obama increased Bush&#8217;s $1T to $2T?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/..." >http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> That link claims the spending increases under Obama are much<br />
>>>>>>>> smaller<br />
>>>>>>>> than they were under Bush.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> Thanks for Noticing, even you catch the <strong>WILD</strong> Liberal lies&#8230;.. Now<br />
>>>>>>> the<br />
>>>>>>> question is why did Obama propose 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES to<br />
>>>>>>> cover<br />
>>>>>>> his<br />
>>>>>>> 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> SPENDING?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> The Federal/National debt is up from $9 trillion at the Obama<br />
>>>>>>> coronation<br />
>>>>>>> to $16 trillion in 3.5 years? If that isn&#8217;t debt what is it? That<br />
>>>>>>> is<br />
>>>>>>> roughly $7 trillion of <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>OBAMA</strong> <strong>DEBT</strong>. That amounts to an average<br />
>>>>>>> of<br />
>>>>>>> $2<br />
>>>>>>> trillion per year in the last 3.5 years. Bush was in office 8<br />
>>>>>>> years,<br />
>>>>>>> had he run the debt up 2 trillion a year it would have been 16<br />
>>>>>>> trillion<br />
>>>>>>> and Obama&#8217;s would NOW be at $<strong>23</strong> trillion in debt.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> I can only conclude you are too stupid to understand why 2009 is the<br />
>>>>>> last<br />
>>>>>> Bush budget year, since you keep ignoring that fact.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> It doesn&#8217;t matter. The debt under Obama is greater than under Bush,<br />
>>>>> and<br />
>>>>> by<br />
>>>>> a<br />
>>>>> huge percentage. Let&#8217;s give the 2009 budget to Bush. Let&#8217;s give him<br />
>>>>> the<br />
>>>>> 2010<br />
>>>>> budget while we are passing stuff around. Obama STILL has ballooned<br />
>>>>> the<br />
>>>>> national debt.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> Obama is making a claim, and by extension you are making it too, that<br />
>>>>> he<br />
>>>>> was<br />
>>>>> divorced and the judge told him to pay his wife&#8217;s credit card bill,<br />
>>>>> and<br />
>>>>> told<br />
>>>>> her to stop using it. He is bitching today that he inherited a balance<br />
>>>>> of<br />
>>>>> $<strong>10</strong>,000 but now it is $25,000, and unmanageable. THEN he attempts to<br />
>>>>> make<br />
>>>>> the claim that it&#8217;s ALL her fault.<br />
>><br />
>>>> the debt from drunken sailor spending, and out right crank policies,<br />
>>>> does not disappear the very next day after a election. if you put a<br />
>>>> idiot in power, and most conservatives are. do not be to surprised if<br />
>>>> you have to live with the results for decades to come.<br />
>><br />
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<br />
>><br />
>>>> It might not disappear, but the debt also does not <strong>GROW</strong>.<br />
>><br />
>>> sure it does. ever hear of interest. debt must be serviced. plus<br />
>>> handing obama a blown out economy, two bungled wars, a unfunded<br />
>>> medicare mandate, and two unfunded tax cuts for wealthy parasites, and<br />
>>> its a witches brew.<br />
>><br />
>>>> IF Obama was making a claim that he inheretted a bizzillion dollar debt,<br />
>>>> and<br />
>>>> the best he could do is shave a few hundred million, then fine. He&#8217;s<br />
>>>> giving<br />
>>>> it his best shot, and that&#8217;s all he can do. BUT he inheretted a<br />
>>>> bizillion<br />
>>>> dollar debt and now it is a two bizillion dollar debt. It&#8217;s really four<br />
>>>> bizilion, but why quibble over details?<br />
>><br />
>>> he was handed much more, see above.<br />
>><br />
>>> <strong>OBTW</strong>, as you remove poor people from the tax rolls, due to the<br />
>>> fact that the wealthy are absorbing just about every red cent left in<br />
>>> america. the percentage of taxes they pay, will appear larger, because<br />
>>> so many have been removed from the tax rolls, and because the wealthy<br />
>>> make so much more now.<br />
>><br />
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<br />
>><br />
>>> If YOU pay your bills, the debt gets smaller. Same thing for the<br />
>>> government.<br />
>><br />
>>  and that is exactly what is happening, debt to gdp is dropping.<br />
>><br />
>>> If you keep buying furniture, big screens, new cars, dig a pool in the<br />
>>> yard,<br />
>>> and so on, your debt grows whether you pay your bills or not. Same thing<br />
>>> for<br />
>>> government.<br />
>><br />
>>  then maybe bush should have cleaned things up, before handing the<br />
>> bill to obama.<br />
>><br />
>>> ObamaCare, bank bailouts, car companies, and so on, all cause the debt to<br />
>>> grow. Obama is making the claim, and you are perpetuating it, that he took<br />
>>> control of whatever debt there was, and now that it is several times<br />
>>> greater, he&#8217;s blaming the guy he got it from.<br />
>><br />
>>> You are fed a line of <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>, and you swallow hook, line, and sinker.<br />
>><br />
>>  i do not think to much of obama, he is to conservative. but i also<br />
>> understand what he was handed. you either do not understand that, or<br />
>> you are dishonest.<br />
>><br />
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<br />
>> Obama is TO (sic) <strong>CONSERVATIVE</strong>?! Seriously?<br />
>><br />
>> I know precisely what was handed to him, and I&#8217;ve explained it to you<br />
>> several times already. I dumbed it down for easy understanding, and changed<br />
>> the wars into furniture and TV sets, but I know what he was handed, and what<br />
>> he will be passing off to the next poor <acronym title="bastard"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> b&*$?%d</span></acronym> that takes the job &#8211;<br />
>> looking like Romney as of now.<br />
>><br />
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<br />
>><br />
>>> The unfunded wars notwithstanding, they cost no more today than they did 3<br />
>>> years ago, so there is nothing changed there. The tax cuts spur<br />
>>> investment,<br />
>>> which creates jobs for which the income taxes are collected at a lower<br />
>>> rate<br />
>>> from a much larger pool and therefore make the receipts go up. But that<br />
>>> ignores the fact that the top <strong>10</strong>% of income earners pay 70% of all income<br />
>>> taxes collected, and the bottom 40+% of income earners pay no tax at all.<br />
>><br />
>>  bush never counted it as part of the budget. and you stepped right<br />
>> into it. it was bushs wars, he never paid for them. now the bill is<br />
>> coming due.<br />
>><br />
>>> If the debt remained flat, then Obama could make his claim that he<br />
>>> inheritted a bucket of <acronym title="shit"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> s&*$?%t</span></acronym> that he has trouble dealing with. But the<br />
>>> facts<br />
>>> are that while he may have inheritted a bucket of <acronym title="shit"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> s&*$?%t</span></acronym>, he now has a truck<br />
>>> load of <acronym title="shit"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> s&*$?%t</span></acronym>, and he filled most of the truck by himself.<br />
>><br />
>>  and debt to gdp is falling. put the blame where it belongs, square in<br />
>> the hands of the tax cut and spend conservatives.<br />
><br />
>  then if you understand that bush handed obama a unfunded medicare<br />
> mandate,</p>
<p>Obama cut Medicare by 500 Billion</p>
<p>[" Medicare spending continues to go up year after year. The health care<br />
bill tries to identify ways to save <strong>money</strong>, and so the $500 billion<br />
figure comes from the difference over <strong>10</strong> years between anticipated<br />
Medicare spending (what is known as “the baseline”) and the changes the<br />
law makes to reduce spending. First of all, under the health care bill,<br />
Medicare spending continues to go up year after year. The health care<br />
bill tries to identify ways to save <strong>money</strong>, and so the $500 billion<br />
figure comes from the difference over <strong>10</strong> years between anticipated<br />
Medicare spending (what is known as “the baseline”) and the changes the<br />
law makes to reduce spending. "]</p>
<p>> two bungled unpaid for wars, two unfunded tax breaks for<br />
> wealthy parasites, and a blown out economy, then obama cannot pay that<br />
> off, even in eight short years. i bet others will have to pay, as<br />
> clinton did for reagans drunken sailor spending and borrowing twelve<br />
> years later:)))))</p>
<p>Clinton enjoyed the &#8220;<strong>PEACE</strong> <strong>DIVIDEND</strong>&#8221;  from <strong>Reagan</strong> actually ending the<br />
cold war and that allowed the Military to cut bases and personnel.</p>
<p>Clinton should have been kissing <strong>Reagan</strong>&#8216;s feet.</p>
</thendestroyeveryth></u></crwlrj></vide></crwlrj></vide></crwlrj></vide></crwlrj></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/24/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-12/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If you know you&#8217;re supporting totalitarians then you&#8217;re scum and if you don&#8217;t know it you&#8217;re an idiot.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/if-you-know-youre-supporting-totalitarians-then-youre-scum-and-if-you-dont-know-it-youre-an-idiot/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/if-you-know-youre-supporting-totalitarians-then-youre-scum-and-if-you-dont-know-it-youre-an-idiot/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:22:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[41]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GROW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeff Strickland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Rosenbluth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEXT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBAMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBTW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PRESIDENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPENDING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WHITE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WILD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31006</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/23/2012 12:48 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: > On 4/23/2012 12:11 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote: >> >> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message >> news:4d789092-c5fa-4986-ab43-2919127223f2 @&#038;*$?%m13g2000yqi.googlegroups.com&#8230; >> On Apr 21, 10:41 am, &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; wrote: >>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message >>> >>> news:27b36a16-338b-499e-99f2-95ea035ba907 @&#038;*$?%p6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com&#8230; >>> On Apr 20, 8:24 pm, &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; wrote: >>> >>> >>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/<strong>23</strong>/2012 12:48 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
> On 4/<strong>23</strong>/2012 12:<strong>11</strong> PM, <strong>Jeff Strickland</strong> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <video61 @tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>> news:4d789092-c5fa-4986-ab43-2919127223f2<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>m13g2000yqi.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>> On Apr 21, <strong>10</strong>:<strong>41</strong> am, &#8220;<strong>Jeff Strickland</strong>&#8221; <crwlrj ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>>><br />
>>> news:27b36a16-338b-499e-99f2-95ea035ba907<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>p6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>>> On Apr 20, 8:24 pm, &#8220;<strong>Jeff Strickland</strong>&#8221; <crwlrj ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>>><br />
>>>> news:0b8617a9-d46b-4dd5-95f3-e08a007d66a2<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>i18g2000vbx.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>>><br />
>>>> On Apr 20, 6:20 pm, &#8220;<strong>Jeff Strickland</strong>&#8221; <crwlrj ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>>> &#8220;Josh&#8221; <u ...@nowhere.com> wrote in message<br />
>>><br />
>>>>> news:jmsme4$i4s$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>josh.motzarella.org&#8230;<br />
>>><br />
>>>>>> On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:32 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, <strong>Josh Rosenbluth</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> Spending went down as a % of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010 and 2011 relative<br />
>>> to > > >>>>>>> a<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget). Your confusion (and<br />
>>> all<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> of<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using<br />
>>> 2008 as<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> the<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> baseline year to evaluate Obama. 2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> last<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> budget.<br />
>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> dollars<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> cutting<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> that<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> by 1% is an accomplishment?<br />
>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget): deficit $1.4T<br />
>>>>>>>>>> 2010 and 2011 (Obama): deficit $1.3T<br />
>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> Why do you keep saying that Obama <strong>increased</strong> Bush&#8217;s $1T to $2T?<br />
>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/..." >http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/&#8230;</a><br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>>>>>>> That link claims the spending increases under Obama are much ><br />
>>>>>>> smaller<br />
>>>>>>>> than they were under Bush.<br />
>>><br />
>>>>>>> Thanks for Noticing, even you catch the <strong>WILD</strong> Liberal lies&#8230;.. Now<br />
>>>>>>> the<br />
>>>>>>> question is why did Obama propose 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>TAXES</strong> to<br />
>>>>>>> cover<br />
>>>>>>> his<br />
>>>>>>> 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>SPENDING</strong>?<br />
>>><br />
>>>>>>> The Federal/National debt is up from $9 trillion at the Obama<br />
>>>>>>> coronation<br />
>>>>>>> to $16 trillion in 3.5 years? If that isn&#8217;t debt what is it?<br />
>>> That > > >> is<br />
>>>>>>> roughly $7 trillion of <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>OBAMA</strong> <strong>DEBT</strong>. That amounts to an<br />
>>> average > > >> of<br />
>>>>>>> $2<br />
>>>>>>> trillion per year in the last 3.5 years. Bush was in office 8 ><br />
>>>>>> years,<br />
>>>>>>> had he run the debt up 2 trillion a year it would have been 16<br />
>>>>>>> trillion<br />
>>>>>>> and Obama&#8217;s would NOW be at $<strong>23</strong> trillion in debt.<br />
>>><br />
>>>>>> I can only conclude you are too stupid to understand why 2009 is<br />
>>> the<br />
>>>>>> last<br />
>>>>>> Bush budget year, since you keep ignoring that fact.<br />
>>><br />
>>>>> It doesn&#8217;t matter. The debt under Obama is greater than under<br />
>>> Bush, > > and<br />
>>>>> by<br />
>>>>> a<br />
>>>>> huge percentage. Let&#8217;s give the 2009 budget to Bush. Let&#8217;s give<br />
>>> him > > the<br />
>>>>> 2010<br />
>>>>> budget while we are passing stuff around. Obama STILL has<br />
>>> ballooned > > the<br />
>>>>> national debt.<br />
>>><br />
>>>>> Obama is making a claim, and by extension you are making it too,<br />
>>> that > > he<br />
>>>>> was<br />
>>>>> divorced and the judge told him to pay his wife&#8217;s credit card<br />
>>> bill, > > and<br />
>>>>> told<br />
>>>>> her to stop using it. He is bitching today that he inherited a<br />
>>> balance<br />
>>>>> of<br />
>>>>> $<strong>10</strong>,000 but now it is $25,000, and unmanageable. THEN he attempts to<br />
>>>>> make<br />
>>>>> the claim that it&#8217;s ALL her fault.<br />
>>><br />
>>>> the debt from drunken sailor spending, and out right crank policies,<br />
>>>> does not disappear the very next day after a election. if you put a<br />
>>>> idiot in power, and most conservatives are. do not be to surprised if<br />
>>>> you have to live with the results for decades to come.<br />
>>><br />
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<br />
>>><br />
>>>> It might not disappear, but the debt also does not <strong>GROW</strong>.<br />
>>><br />
>>> sure it does. ever hear of interest. debt must be serviced. plus<br />
>>> handing obama a blown out economy, two bungled wars, a unfunded<br />
>>> medicare mandate, and two unfunded tax cuts for wealthy parasites, and<br />
>>> its a witches brew.<br />
>>><br />
>>>> IF Obama was making a claim that he inheretted a bizzillion dollar<br />
>>> debt,<br />
>>>> and<br />
>>>> the best he could do is shave a few hundred million, then fine. He&#8217;s<br />
>>>> giving<br />
>>>> it his best shot, and that&#8217;s all he can do. BUT he inheretted a ><br />
>>> bizillion<br />
>>>> dollar debt and now it is a two bizillion dollar debt. It&#8217;s really four<br />
>>>> bizilion, but why quibble over details?<br />
>>><br />
>>> he was handed much more, see above.<br />
>>><br />
>>> <strong>OBTW</strong>, as you remove poor people from the tax rolls, due to the<br />
>>> fact that the wealthy are absorbing just about every red cent left in<br />
>>> america. the percentage of taxes they pay, will appear larger, because<br />
>>> so many have been removed from the tax rolls, and because the wealthy<br />
>>> make so much more now.<br />
>>><br />
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<br />
>>><br />
>>> If YOU pay your bills, the debt gets smaller. Same thing for the<br />
>>> government.<br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> and that is exactly what is happening, debt to gdp is dropping.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> If you keep buying furniture, big screens, new cars, dig a pool in the<br />
>>> yard,<br />
>>> and so on, your debt grows whether you pay your bills or not. Same<br />
>>> thing for<br />
>>> government.<br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> then maybe bush should have cleaned things up, before handing the<br />
>> bill to obama.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> ObamaCare, bank bailouts, car companies, and so on, all cause the debt to<br />
>>> grow. Obama is making the claim, and you are perpetuating it, that he<br />
>>> took<br />
>>> control of whatever debt there was, and now that it is several times<br />
>>> greater, he&#8217;s blaming the guy he got it from.<br />
>>><br />
>>> You are fed a line of <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>, and you swallow hook, line, and sinker.<br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> i do not think to much of obama, he is to conservative. but i also<br />
>> understand what he was handed. you either do not understand that, or<br />
>> you are dishonest.<br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
> Obama is too totalitarian&#8230;.  But he is Socialist.  You are mixing up<br />
> &#8220;Conservative&#8221;  with &#8220;Totalitarian&#8221;  Obama is NOT conservative, he is<br />
> very totalitarian.  Obama wants to force all his laws and regulations on<br />
> America even if it takes violating the constitution or procedures of the<br />
> constitution.   That is NOT conservative it is Stalin-esque.   Castro<br />
> does that and so does Hugo Chavez and they were all more Socialist than<br />
> Conservative.   If you know you&#8217;re supporting totalitarians then you are<br />
> scum and if you don&#8217;t know it you are an idiot.<br />
><br />
><br />
> <strong>NEXT</strong>, Obama was handed what we all knew was getting worse, and he went<br />
> back to the <strong>WHITE</strong> HOUSE with McCain and BUSH for a meeting to discuss<br />
> it. If they &#8220;all&#8221; had no idea how bad it was then NONE of them deserve<br />
> to be <strong>PRESIDENT</strong>(because I knew it and my posts back to pre Obama prove<br />
> it).   Obama continued to say he knew how to fix the economy, turns out<br />
> he hasn&#8217;t got a clue.  His advisers didn&#8217;t see the economic crash coming<br />
> so *what use are they* at seeing how to fix it.<br />
><br />
><br />
>    <strong>Socialists</strong> will Never be able to fix Capitalism.<br />
><br />
><br />
> I said that on day one of Obama and I say it today.<br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
></p>
</thendestroyeveryth></u></crwlrj></vide></crwlrj></vide></crwlrj></video61></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/if-you-know-youre-supporting-totalitarians-then-youre-scum-and-if-you-dont-know-it-youre-an-idiot/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>movement to ban &#8220;Nuclear Plants&#8221;  A bunch of Socialists using the facade of environmentalism to kill as much capitalism as they can.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/movement-to-ban-nuclear-plants-a-bunch-of-socialists-using-the-facade-of-environmentalism-to-kill-as-much-capitalism-as-they-can/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/movement-to-ban-nuclear-plants-a-bunch-of-socialists-using-the-facade-of-environmentalism-to-kill-as-much-capitalism-as-they-can/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 18:37:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ECO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[JOBS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuclear Plants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialist #]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=31002</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/23/2012 2:15 PM, Barb May wrote: > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> On 4/21/2012 2:10 PM, Barb May wrote: >>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> Obama has stopped a pipe line which would have meant plenty of Oil >>>> for refineries to turn into exports and Gasoline for us. >>> >>> We are already exporting our own oil. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/<strong>23</strong>/2012 2:15 PM, Barb May wrote:<br />
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>> On 4/21/2012 2:<strong>10</strong> PM, Barb May wrote:<br />
>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> Obama has stopped a pipe line which would have meant plenty of Oil<br />
>>>> for refineries to turn into exports and Gasoline for us.<br />
>>><br />
>>> We are already exporting our own oil.<br />
>>><br />
>>> The Keystone pipeline was to transport tar sands oil from <strong>Canada</strong> to<br />
>>> be refined in the <strong>US</strong> and then exported.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> You don&#8217;t like Americans having <strong>JOBS</strong>?    Refining oil seems like an<br />
>> OK job.<br />
><br />
> It&#8217;s not an &#8220;OK&#8221; job. The increase in toxic emissions from refining oil<br />
> from tar sands will kill far more people than the number of jobs it<br />
> creates.</p>
<p>That tells us where you stand&#8230;  you&#8217;re just an <strong>ECO</strong> <strong>SOCIALIST</strong> that<br />
wants to shut down capitalist business because you think you can decide<br />
that oil is a deadly poison.</p>
<p>This is just like the movement to ban &#8220;<strong>Nuclear Plants</strong>&#8221;  A bunch of<br />
Socialists using the facade of environmentalism to kill as much<br />
capitalism as they can.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/movement-to-ban-nuclear-plants-a-bunch-of-socialists-using-the-facade-of-environmentalism-to-kill-as-much-capitalism-as-they-can/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How much shit does it take in YOUR bowl of ice cream to ruin the whole bowl?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/how-much-shit-does-it-take-in-your-bowl-of-ice-cream-to-ruin-the-whole-bowl/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/how-much-shit-does-it-take-in-your-bowl-of-ice-cream-to-ruin-the-whole-bowl/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 17:52:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COLLAPSE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FOREX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMLBSHNO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MORTGAGE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RISK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[subprime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the poor]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30992</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/23/2012 7:10 AM, jim wrote: > > > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: > >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Fees and Taxes and regulations are all a tax that cost us and inflation >>>> is a tax that costs us&#8230;. inflation will come back with a vengeance >>>> thanks to Obama&#8217;s spending and plethora of new regulations. >>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/<strong>23</strong>/2012 7:<strong>10</strong> AM, jim wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
><br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Fees and Taxes and <strong>regulations</strong> are all a tax that cost us and inflation<br />
>>>> is a tax that costs us&#8230;.   inflation will come back with a vengeance<br />
>>>> thanks to Obama&#8217;s spending and plethora of new <strong>regulations</strong>.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Inflation will come back if the private sector goes back to<br />
>>> spending significantly more than income as they<br />
>>> did from 1945-2008.<br />
>>> But that won&#8217;t happen again for decades.<br />
>><br />
>> Obviously you think the <strong>MORTGAGE</strong> <strong>COLLAPSE</strong> was instigated by the private<br />
>> sector,<br />
><br />
>  You think the government controls everything that people do.<br />
> According to you everyone is just a puppet on a string.<br />
><br />
> The private sector did cause the mortgagee debacle.<br />
> And Mortgage debt was only 25% of the $45 trillion in<br />
> private sector debt that caused the economic crash.<br />
><br />
> <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/HMLBSHNO?cid=32258" >http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/HMLBSHNO?cid=32258</a><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
>> yet it was <strong>Democrats</strong> that urged all that <strong>money</strong> be loaned to the<br />
>> poor&#8230;..<br />
><br />
> The <strong>money</strong> loaned to <strong>the poor</strong> was a drop in the bucket</p>
<p>That was Leveraged because of it being mixed in with the lower <strong>RISK</strong><br />
loans.  When the <strong>subprime</strong> loans went down, there were no buyers for any<br />
loans in those bundles, hence the frozen mortgage markets&#8230;  the High<br />
risk loans that failed took the good Low risk loans with them as<br />
everyone stopped buying the entire mortgage packages that were rife with<br />
High Risk loans to <strong>the poor</strong> that made the whole package a bad return on<br />
your invested <strong>money</strong>.</p>
<p>So the <strong>subprime</strong> loans had been put in the packaged mortgages vehicles to<br />
leverage the Low &#8220;Risk&#8221; of good and what it did was collapse.  Which is<br />
why they limit the amount of Leverage you can have in currency trading<br />
like when trading the <strong>FOREX</strong> currencies.  When the <strong>subprime</strong> mortgages<br />
failed their effect was exponential, you are thinking linear and that<br />
isn&#8217;t what happened.  You&#8217;re thinking in a box and even a bit simple<br />
given you&#8217;re in that box.</p>
<p>> and that drop in the bucket performed better than the rest<br />
> of the mortgage market.</p>
<p>How much <acronym title="shit"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> s&*$?%t</span></acronym> does it take in YOUR bowl of ice cream to ruin the whole bowl?</p>
<p>That is how you need to look at <strong>subprime</strong> loans.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/how-much-shit-does-it-take-in-your-bowl-of-ice-cream-to-ruin-the-whole-bowl/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If you know your supporting totalitarians then you&#8217;re scum and if you don&#8217;t know it you&#8217;re an idiot.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/if-you-know-your-supporting-totalitarians-then-youre-scum-and-if-you-dont-know-it-youre-an-idiot/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/if-you-know-your-supporting-totalitarians-then-youre-scum-and-if-you-dont-know-it-youre-an-idiot/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 16:48:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[41]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chavez]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GROW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeff Strickland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Rosenbluth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEXT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBAMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBTW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPENDING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WHITE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WILD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30984</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/23/2012 12:11 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote: > > &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message > news:4d789092-c5fa-4986-ab43-2919127223f2 @&#038;*$?%m13g2000yqi.googlegroups.com&#8230; > On Apr 21, 10:41 am, &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; wrote: >> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message >> >> news:27b36a16-338b-499e-99f2-95ea035ba907 @&#038;*$?%p6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com&#8230; >> On Apr 20, 8:24 pm, &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; wrote: >> >> >> >> > &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/<strong>23</strong>/2012 12:<strong>11</strong> PM, <strong>Jeff Strickland</strong> wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <video61 @tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
> news:4d789092-c5fa-4986-ab43-2919127223f2<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>m13g2000yqi.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
> On Apr 21, <strong>10</strong>:<strong>41</strong> am, &#8220;<strong>Jeff Strickland</strong>&#8221; <crwlrj ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>> news:27b36a16-338b-499e-99f2-95ea035ba907<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>p6g2000yqi.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>> On Apr 20, 8:24 pm, &#8220;<strong>Jeff Strickland</strong>&#8221; <crwlrj ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> > &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>> >news:0b8617a9-d46b-4dd5-95f3-e08a007d66a2<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>i18g2000vbx.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>> > On Apr 20, 6:20 pm, &#8220;<strong>Jeff Strickland</strong>&#8221; <crwlrj ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>> > > &#8220;Josh&#8221; <u ...@nowhere.com> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>> > >news:jmsme4$i4s$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>josh.motzarella.org&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>> > > > On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>> > > >> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>> > > >>> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>> > > >>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:32 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>> > > >>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>> > > >>>>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, <strong>Josh Rosenbluth</strong> wrote:<br />
>> > > >>>>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>> > > >>>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>> > > >>>>>>> Spending went down as a % of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010 and 2011 relative<br />
>> to > > >>>>>>> a<br />
>> > > >>>>>>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget). Your confusion (and<br />
>> all<br />
>> > > >>>>>>> of<br />
>> > > >>>>>>> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using<br />
>> 2008 as<br />
>> > > >>>>>>> the<br />
>> > > >>>>>>> baseline year to evaluate Obama. 2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s<br />
>> > > >>>>>>> last<br />
>> > > >>>>>>> budget.<br />
>><br />
>> > > >>>>>> the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion<br />
>> > > >>>>>> dollars<br />
>> > > >>>>>> became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that<br />
>> > > >>>>>> cutting<br />
>> > > >>>>>> that<br />
>> > > >>>>>> by 1% is an accomplishment?<br />
>><br />
>> > > >>>>> 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget): deficit $1.4T<br />
>> > > >>>>> 2010 and 2011 (Obama): deficit $1.3T<br />
>><br />
>> > > >>>>> Why do you keep saying that Obama <strong>increased</strong> Bush&#8217;s $1T to $2T?<br />
>><br />
>> > ><br />
>> >>>>http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> > > >>> That link claims the spending increases under Obama are much ><br />
>> > >>> smaller<br />
>> > > >>> than they were under Bush.<br />
>><br />
>> > > >> Thanks for Noticing, even you catch the <strong>WILD</strong> Liberal lies&#8230;.. Now<br />
>> > > >> the<br />
>> > > >> question is why did Obama propose 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>TAXES</strong> to<br />
>> > > >> cover<br />
>> > > >> his<br />
>> > > >> 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>SPENDING</strong>?<br />
>><br />
>> > > >> The Federal/National debt is up from $9 trillion at the Obama<br />
>> > > >> coronation<br />
>> > > >> to $16 trillion in 3.5 years? If that isn&#8217;t debt what is it?<br />
>> That > > >> is<br />
>> > > >> roughly $7 trillion of <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>OBAMA</strong> <strong>DEBT</strong>. That amounts to an<br />
>> average > > >> of<br />
>> > > >> $2<br />
>> > > >> trillion per year in the last 3.5 years. Bush was in office 8 ><br />
>> > >> years,<br />
>> > > >> had he run the debt up 2 trillion a year it would have been 16<br />
>> > > >> trillion<br />
>> > > >> and Obama&#8217;s would NOW be at $<strong>23</strong> trillion in debt.<br />
>><br />
>> > > > I can only conclude you are too stupid to understand why 2009 is<br />
>> the<br />
>> > > > last<br />
>> > > > Bush budget year, since you keep ignoring that fact.<br />
>><br />
>> > > It doesn&#8217;t matter. The debt under Obama is greater than under<br />
>> Bush, > > and<br />
>> > > by<br />
>> > > a<br />
>> > > huge percentage. Let&#8217;s give the 2009 budget to Bush. Let&#8217;s give<br />
>> him > > the<br />
>> > > 2010<br />
>> > > budget while we are passing stuff around. Obama STILL has<br />
>> ballooned > > the<br />
>> > > national debt.<br />
>><br />
>> > > Obama is making a claim, and by extension you are making it too,<br />
>> that > > he<br />
>> > > was<br />
>> > > divorced and the judge told him to pay his wife&#8217;s credit card<br />
>> bill, > > and<br />
>> > > told<br />
>> > > her to stop using it. He is bitching today that he inherited a<br />
>> balance<br />
>> > > of<br />
>> > > $<strong>10</strong>,000 but now it is $25,000, and unmanageable. THEN he attempts to<br />
>> > > make<br />
>> > > the claim that it&#8217;s ALL her fault.<br />
>><br />
>> > the debt from drunken sailor spending, and out right crank policies,<br />
>> > does not disappear the very next day after a election. if you put a<br />
>> > idiot in power, and most conservatives are. do not be to surprised if<br />
>> > you have to live with the results for decades to come.<br />
>><br />
>> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<br />
>><br />
>> > It might not disappear, but the debt also does not <strong>GROW</strong>.<br />
>><br />
>> sure it does. ever hear of interest. debt must be serviced. plus<br />
>> handing obama a blown out economy, two bungled wars, a unfunded<br />
>> medicare mandate, and two unfunded tax cuts for wealthy parasites, and<br />
>> its a witches brew.<br />
>><br />
>> > IF Obama was making a claim that he inheretted a bizzillion dollar<br />
>> debt,<br />
>> > and<br />
>> > the best he could do is shave a few hundred million, then fine. He&#8217;s<br />
>> > giving<br />
>> > it his best shot, and that&#8217;s all he can do. BUT he inheretted a ><br />
>> bizillion<br />
>> > dollar debt and now it is a two bizillion dollar debt. It&#8217;s really four<br />
>> > bizilion, but why quibble over details?<br />
>><br />
>> he was handed much more, see above.<br />
>><br />
>> <strong>OBTW</strong>, as you remove poor people from the tax rolls, due to the<br />
>> fact that the wealthy are absorbing just about every red cent left in<br />
>> america. the percentage of taxes they pay, will appear larger, because<br />
>> so many have been removed from the tax rolls, and because the wealthy<br />
>> make so much more now.<br />
>><br />
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<br />
>><br />
>> If YOU pay your bills, the debt gets smaller. Same thing for the<br />
>> government.<br />
>><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
> and that is exactly what is happening, debt to gdp is dropping.<br />
><br />
><br />
>> If you keep buying furniture, big screens, new cars, dig a pool in the<br />
>> yard,<br />
>> and so on, your debt grows whether you pay your bills or not. Same<br />
>> thing for<br />
>> government.<br />
>><br />
><br />
><br />
> then maybe bush should have cleaned things up, before handing the<br />
> bill to obama.<br />
><br />
><br />
>> ObamaCare, bank bailouts, car companies, and so on, all cause the debt to<br />
>> grow. Obama is making the claim, and you are perpetuating it, that he<br />
>> took<br />
>> control of whatever debt there was, and now that it is several times<br />
>> greater, he&#8217;s blaming the guy he got it from.<br />
>><br />
>> You are fed a line of <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>, and you swallow hook, line, and sinker.<br />
>><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
> i do not think to much of obama, he is to conservative. but i also<br />
> understand what he was handed. you either do not understand that, or<br />
> you are dishonest.</p>
<p>Obama is too totalitarian&#8230;.  But he is Socialist.  You are mixing up<br />
&#8220;Conservative&#8221;  with &#8220;Totalitarian&#8221;  Obama is NOT conservative, he is<br />
very totalitarian.  Obama wants to force all his laws and <strong>regulations</strong> on<br />
America even if it takes violating the constitution or procedures of the<br />
constitution.   That is NOT conservative it is Stalin-esque.   Castro<br />
does that and so does Hugo <strong>Chavez</strong> and they were all more Socialist than<br />
Conservative.   If you know your supporting totalitarians then you are<br />
scum and if you don&#8217;t know it you are an idiot.</p>
<p><strong>NEXT</strong>, Obama was handed what we all knew was getting worse, and he went<br />
back to the <strong>WHITE</strong> HOUSE with McCain and BUSH for a meeting to discuss<br />
it. If they &#8220;all&#8221; had no idea how bad it was then NONE of them deserve<br />
to be PRESIDENT(because I knew it and my posts back to pre Obama prove<br />
it).   Obama continued to say he knew how to fix the economy, turns out<br />
he hasn&#8217;t got a clue.  His advisers didn&#8217;t see the economic crash coming<br />
so *what use are they* at seeing how to fix it.</p>
<p>Socialists will Never be able to fix Capitalism.</p>
<p>I said that on day one of Obama and I say it today.</p>
</thendestroyeveryth></u></crwlrj></vide></crwlrj></vide></crwlrj></video61></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/if-you-know-your-supporting-totalitarians-then-youre-scum-and-if-you-dont-know-it-youre-an-idiot/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another Poll Proves The Success of the DNC / MSM Propaganda Machine.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/another-poll-proves-the-success-of-the-dnc-msm-propaganda-machine/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/another-poll-proves-the-success-of-the-dnc-msm-propaganda-machine/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 05:21:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barbarian Mutual]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eddie Haskell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MSM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SNICKER]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yahoo News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30978</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/22/2012 10:51 PM, Eddie Haskell wrote: > &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message > news:0e9a53b8-5908-44e9-8fb9-a8cacf8b48a2 @&#038;*$?%2g2000yqk.googlegroups.com&#8230; > On Apr 21, 2:01 pm, &#8220;Eddie Haskell&#8221; wrote: >> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; wrote in message >> >> news:8c4c987c-357b-4224-adb3-b4c2fe7868d1 @&#038;*$?%t16g2000yqt.googlegroups.com&#8230; >> On Apr 19, 10:49 am, &#8220;Eddie Haskell&#8221; wrote: >> >> >> >>> &#8220;Barbarian Mutual&#8221; wrote in >>> message >> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/22/2012 <strong>10</strong>:51 PM, <strong>Eddie Haskell</strong> wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <video61 @tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
> news:0e9a53b8-5908-44e9-8fb9-a8cacf8b48a2<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>2g2000yqk.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
> On Apr 21, 2:01 pm, &#8220;<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong>&#8221; <hghg ...@ssasas.com> wrote:<br />
>> &#8220;Nickname unavailable&#8221; <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>> news:8c4c987c-357b-4224-adb3-b4c2fe7868d1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>t16g2000yqt.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>> On Apr 19, <strong>10</strong>:49 am, &#8220;<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong>&#8221; <hfhfh ...@ssassw.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> &#8220;<strong>Barbarian Mutual</strong>&#8221; <barbarianfinancialservi ...@yahoo.com> wrote in<br />
>>> message<br />
>><br />
>>> news:ab85e3ea-6cd2-43be-a4dc-dc24cd3ce0d2<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>j3g2000vba.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>>> &#8211;<br />
>>> <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/poll-more-americans-global-warming-extreme-weat..." >http://news.yahoo.com/poll-more-americans-global-warming-extreme-weat&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>>>> 18 hours ago – From Yahoo! News: According to the <strong>New York</strong> Times, a<br />
>>>> poll shows a large majority of Americans attribute recent and unusual<br />
>>>> seasonal weather to global warming.<br />
>><br />
>>> Another poll taken to gauge the success of the <strong>MSM</strong> / <strong>DNC</strong> cabal<br />
>>> propaganda<br />
>>> machine that&#8217;s destroying America.<br />
>><br />
>>> Makes you and Goebbels giddy.<br />
>><br />
>>> -<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong><br />
>><br />
>> <strong>SNICKER</strong> <img src='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))<br />
>><br />
>>> <a href="http://www.germantownnow.com/blogs/communityblogs/146114635.html" >http://www.germantownnow.com/blogs/communityblogs/146114635.html</a><br />
>>> Just Sayin&#8217;<br />
>>> Paul Adair is a 21-year Germantown resident, retired scientist,<br />
>>> writer, and lecturer.<br />
>>> Why Do Conservatives Hate Science?<br />
>><br />
>> Nice try, but we all know that it&#8217;s corrupt liberals that are corrupting<br />
>> science in order to advance a political end.<br />
>><br />
>> -<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong><br />
><br />
>> when are you going to have your book burning?<br />
><br />
> As soon as you write one.<br />
><br />
> -<strong>Eddie Haskell</strong></p>
<p>Why waste a perfectly good door stop?</p>
<p></barbarianfinancialservi></hfhfh></vide></hghg></video61></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/23/another-poll-proves-the-success-of-the-dnc-msm-propaganda-machine/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Time and money are being diverted from useful endeavors in the PRIVATE SECTOR economy to support useless redistribution so politicians can get re-elected.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/22/time-and-money-are-being-diverted-from-useful-endeavors-in-the-private-sector-economy-to-support-useless-redistribution-so-politicians-can-get-re-elected/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/22/time-and-money-are-being-diverted-from-useful-endeavors-in-the-private-sector-economy-to-support-useless-redistribution-so-politicians-can-get-re-elected/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 03:05:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ALWAYS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[demand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[JOBS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PRIVATE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Redistribution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SECTOR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30968</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/22/2012 2:08 PM, suzeeq wrote: > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> On 4/22/2012 1:20 PM, suzeeq wrote: >>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> On 4/22/2012 12:01 PM, Dano wrote: >>>>> &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221; wrote in message >>>>> news:4F93AD10.1080808 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230; >>>>> >>>>> On 4/21/2012 2:10 PM, Barb May wrote: >>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>>>>> Obama has stopped a pipe line which would [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/22/2012 2:08 PM, suzeeq wrote:<br />
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>> On 4/22/2012 1:20 PM, suzeeq wrote:<br />
>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> On 4/22/2012 12:01 PM, Dano wrote:<br />
>>>>> &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221;  wrote in message<br />
>>>>> news:4F93AD10.1080808<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230;<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> On 4/21/2012 2:<strong>10</strong> PM, Barb May wrote:<br />
>>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> Obama has stopped a pipe line which would have meant plenty of<br />
>>>>>>> Oil for<br />
>>>>>>> refineries to turn into exports and Gasoline for us.<br />
>>>>>> We are already exporting our own oil.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> The Keystone pipeline was to transport tar sands oil from <strong>Canada</strong><br />
>>>>>> to be<br />
>>>>>> refined in the <strong>US</strong> and then exported.<br />
>>>>> You don&#8217;t like Americans having <strong>JOBS</strong>?    Refining oil seems like an<br />
>>>>> OK job.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> So that would have meant more<br />
>>>>>> profits for the oil companies and refineries and more pollution<br />
>>>>>> for the<br />
>>>>>> American people, and in return there&#8217;d be just a couple of hundred<br />
>>>>>> permanent jobs.<br />
>>>>> and American exports don&#8217;t mean more indirect jobs at the docks where<br />
>>>>> they ship those refined products from?  Or Shipping repairs at the<br />
>>>>> docks<br />
>>>>> or lunch truck at the docks or trucks that transport barrels from a<br />
>>>>> refinery to the docks and other U.S. businesses?<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> It&#8217;s not worth it &#8212; unless you are an oil company or a Republican<br />
>>>>>> politician on their payroll.<br />
>>>>> Or someone that needs a job.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> ===========================================<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Yet you folks on the right are <strong>ALWAYS</strong> in favor of eliminating jobs.<br />
>>>>> Every single cut to government agencies&#8230;support for emergency<br />
>>>>> personnel like police and fire&#8230;support for education which provides<br />
>>>>> teaching positions&#8230;and on and on.<br />
>>>> Government workers are NOT producers of wealth, they are a drag on the<br />
>>>> private sector that loses that <strong>money</strong> that could be re-invested into the<br />
>>>> private sector economy.<br />
>>> It is re-invested in the private sector economy &#8211; they buy goods and<br />
>>> services with their salaries.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> NO&#8230;  it is redistributed, NOT re-invested.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> <strong>Redistribution</strong> creates no wealth.<br />
><br />
> Yabbut it creates jobs. The more people employed whether in government<br />
> or manufacturing jobs, the more <strong>demand</strong> for goods and services which<br />
> creates more jobs and so on.</p>
<p>That would mean the economy is a circle jerk&#8230;.  If you &#8220;give&#8221; the<br />
<strong>money</strong> to someone that digs a hole, and then they pay someone to fill in<br />
the hole&#8230;   who created wealth ?</p>
<p>All you have done is waste peoples time.</p>
<p>Most government jobs are useless and redundant pretend make work and<br />
therefore create NO wealth.  That means it is redistribution and there<br />
is NO wealth creation.</p>
<p>Time and <strong>money</strong> are being diverted from useful endeavors in the <strong>PRIVATE</strong><br />
<strong>SECTOR</strong> economy to support useless redistribution so politicians can get<br />
re-elected.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/22/time-and-money-are-being-diverted-from-useful-endeavors-in-the-private-sector-economy-to-support-useless-redistribution-so-politicians-can-get-re-elected/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Create an Income TAX amendment says that the Federal Income  taxcanNOT be raised until ALL deficit spending is paid off.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/22/create-an-income-tax-amendment-says-that-the-federal-income-taxcannot-be-raised-until-all-deficit-spending-is-paid-off/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/22/create-an-income-tax-amendment-says-that-the-federal-income-taxcannot-be-raised-until-all-deficit-spending-is-paid-off/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Apr 2012 16:57:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30956</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/22/2012 12:24 PM, jim wrote: > > > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> >> On 4/22/2012 7:57 AM, jim wrote: >>> >>> >>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>> >>>>> >>>>>> The simple fact is, using your own figures, the income tax >>>>>> from the top 10% of income earners funds about 18% >>>>>> of federal govt expenditures. >>>>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/22/2012 12:24 PM, jim wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>><br />
>> On 4/22/2012 7:57 AM, jim wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> The simple fact is, using your own figures, the income tax<br />
>>>>>> from the top <strong>10</strong>% of income earners funds about 18%<br />
>>>>>> of federal govt expenditures.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> So? The income tax collected from this group is 70% of income taxes<br />
>>>>> collected. That is the topic.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The problem is they don&#8217;t earn 70% of all the <strong>money</strong> earned&#8230;.<br />
>>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> The problem is that they own <strong>Congress</strong> and thus get<br />
>>> to define most of their sources of income as not being<br />
>>> earned income and therefore subject to less tax.<br />
>><br />
>> That certainly is part of the mix&#8230;.   but <strong>money</strong> earned and that you<br />
>> have paid tax on&#8230;..  is also eaten up by inflation.<br />
><br />
> Well who&#8217;s fault is that? Here is a clue<br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
>> Which is<br />
>> essentially government printing <strong>money</strong>.<br />
><br />
> the government prints dollar bills that people put in<br />
> their wallets. That is not what is driving inflation<br />
> (except in your delusional concept of reality).<br />
><br />
> What the govt prints is an insignificantly small<br />
> part of the <strong>money</strong> supply.<br />
><br />
><br />
>>  Anyone with cash during this high<br />
>> inflation will be paying the inflation tax.<br />
><br />
> anyone without cash will be <acronym title="shit"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> s&*$?%t</span></acronym> out of luck when<br />
> <strong>Congress</strong> tries to balance the budget and severe<br />
> deflation follows.<br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
>><br />
>>> And the problem that creates is not the loss of tax<br />
>>> revenue but the distortion it creates in markets as<br />
>>> large amounts of <strong>money</strong> move away from productive<br />
>>> enterprises to totally unproductive manipulation of<br />
>>> capital because of the incentive to avoid taxes.<br />
>><br />
>> *Correct* &#8211; &#8220;They will seek lower taxes&#8221; and that&#8217;s why raising taxes is<br />
>> a bad idea&#8230;<br />
><br />
> So far that bad idea has not been implemented.<br />
> Taxes are now the lowest they have been in 60 years</p>
<p>Obama raised a tax on you called ObamaCare, you have paid that tax for 2<br />
years and received nothing from ObamaCare, where is the <strong>money</strong> and what<br />
happens when the government is forced to start paying for ObamaCare&#8230;.?</p>
<p>Are you confuse and you really meant that the taxes &#8220;collected&#8221; by the<br />
treasury are the lowest in 60 years(no one is earning as much because no<br />
one wants to pay for Obama&#8217;s deficit spending.), and that is due to a<br />
lack of economic growth.  Are you saying Obama has presided over the<br />
destruction of the growth of the <strong>United States</strong> economy?</p>
<p>Fees and Taxes and <strong>regulations</strong> are all a tax that cost us and inflation<br />
is a tax that costs us&#8230;.   inflation will come back with a vengeance<br />
thanks to Obama&#8217;s spending and plethora of new <strong>regulations</strong>.</p>
<p>2013 is when the whole pile drops in the dumper, after Obama wins and<br />
doesn&#8217;t need to care OR after Obama loses and doesn&#8217;t need to care.   He<br />
has been setting it up for 3.5 years now.  Either way, the economy will<br />
fall to the siege that government has been waging.</p>
<p>Be prepared or be at the bottom of the pile, but Obama knows he has his<br />
security team to protect him and it&#8217;s all paid for by us.  I guarantee<br />
that if you&#8217;re starving in the streets, they won&#8217;t cut a dime of Obama&#8217;s<br />
security expenses.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/22/create-an-income-tax-amendment-says-that-the-federal-income-taxcannot-be-raised-until-all-deficit-spending-is-paid-off/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Create an Income TAX amendment says that the Federal Income tax canNOT be raised until ALL deficit spending is paid off.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/22/create-an-income-tax-amendment-says-that-the-federal-income-tax-cannot-be-raised-until-all-deficit-spending-is-paid-off/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/22/create-an-income-tax-amendment-says-that-the-federal-income-tax-cannot-be-raised-until-all-deficit-spending-is-paid-off/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Apr 2012 16:09:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BAD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[future]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WWII]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30950</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/22/2012 7:57 AM, jim wrote: > > > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: > >>> >>>> The simple fact is, using your own figures, the income tax >>>> from the top 10% of income earners funds about 18% >>>> of federal govt expenditures. >>> >>> So? The income tax collected from this group is 70% of income [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/22/2012 7:57 AM, jim wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
><br />
>>><br />
>>>> The simple fact is, using your own figures, the income tax<br />
>>>> from the top <strong>10</strong>% of income earners funds about 18%<br />
>>>> of federal govt expenditures.<br />
>>><br />
>>> So? The income tax collected from this group is 70% of income taxes<br />
>>> collected. That is the topic.<br />
>><br />
>> The problem is they don&#8217;t earn 70% of all the <strong>money</strong> earned&#8230;.<br />
>><br />
><br />
> The problem is that they own <strong>Congress</strong> and thus get<br />
> to define most of their sources of income as not being<br />
> earned income and therefore subject to less tax.</p>
<p>That certainly is part of the mix&#8230;.   but <strong>money</strong> earned and that you<br />
have paid tax on&#8230;..  is also eaten up by inflation.   Which is<br />
essentially government printing <strong>money</strong>.  That is a tax so the inflation<br />
that is taxed on <strong>money</strong> you hold and receive interest on is actually<br />
higher than you are pretending.   Add the inflation rate to the capital<br />
gains rate to get the real rate of tax on &#8220;<strong>money</strong>&#8221;  that&#8217;s NOT earned income.</p>
<p>It is a variable Tax and the inflation tax is low at the moment buy it<br />
will be high in the near <strong>future</strong>.  The longer the inflation tax is kept<br />
artificially low for this Depression and to make Obama look good, the<br />
longer and higher it will be later.  Anyone with cash during this high<br />
inflation will be paying the inflation tax.</p>
<p>> And the problem that creates is not the loss of tax<br />
> revenue but the distortion it creates in markets as<br />
> large amounts of <strong>money</strong> move away from productive<br />
> enterprises to totally unproductive manipulation of<br />
> capital because of the incentive to avoid taxes.</p>
<p>*Correct* &#8211; &#8220;They will seek lower taxes&#8221; and that&#8217;s why raising taxes is<br />
a bad idea&#8230;  at least in <strong>BAD</strong> times it&#8217;s a real bad idea.  In good<br />
times it will suppress the <strong>GDP</strong> by as much as <strong>10</strong>% as was done after <strong>WWII</strong><br />
when <strong>GDP</strong> dropped after taxes were raised dramatically.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/22/create-an-income-tax-amendment-says-that-the-federal-income-tax-cannot-be-raised-until-all-deficit-spending-is-paid-off/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Create an Income TAX amendment says that the Federal Income tax can NOT be raised until ALL deficit spending is paid off.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/21/create-an-income-tax-amendment-says-that-the-federal-income-tax-can-not-be-raised-until-all-deficit-spending-is-paid-off/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/21/create-an-income-tax-amendment-says-that-the-federal-income-tax-can-not-be-raised-until-all-deficit-spending-is-paid-off/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Apr 2012 02:44:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[INCOME]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeff Strickland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Subject Line]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30932</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/21/2012 4:49 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote: > > &#8220;jim&#8221; < "sjedgingN0Sp"@m @&#038;*$?%mwt,net> wrote in message > news:-ImdndQTI_fQQA_SnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d @&#038;*$?%bright.net&#8230; >> >> >> Jeff Strickland wrote: >>> >>> &#8220;jim&#8221; < "sjedgingN0Sp"@m @&#038;*$?%mwt,net> wrote in message >>> news:BsmdnZwO6tnVjQ_SnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d @&#038;*$?%bright.net&#8230; >>> > >>> > >>> > Jeff Strickland wrote: >>> >> >>> >> &#8220;jim&#8221; < "sjedgingN0Sp"@m @&#038;*$?%mwt,net> wrote [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/21/2012 4:49 PM, <strong>Jeff Strickland</strong> wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;jim&#8221; < "sjedgingN0Sp"@m<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>mwt,net> wrote in message<br />
> news:-ImdndQTI_fQQA_SnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>bright.net&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> <strong>Jeff Strickland</strong> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>> &#8220;jim&#8221; < "sjedgingN0Sp"@m<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>mwt,net> wrote in message<br />
>>> news:BsmdnZwO6tnVjQ_SnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>bright.net&#8230;<br />
>>> ><br />
>>> ><br />
>>> > <strong>Jeff Strickland</strong> wrote:<br />
>>> >><br />
>>> >> &#8220;jim&#8221; < "sjedgingN0Sp"@m<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>mwt,net> wrote in message<br />
>>> >> news:J-WdneXLKNVNbgzSnZ2dnUVZ_qidnZ2d<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>bright.net&#8230;<br />
>>> >> ><br />
>>> >> ><br />
>>> >> > <strong>Jeff Strickland</strong> wrote:<br />
>>> >> ><br />
>>> >> >><br />
>>> >> >> 70% of the total taxes are collected from <strong>10</strong>% of taxpayers.<br />
>>> >> ><br />
>>> >> > No that is not true.<br />
>>> >> > 70% of income tax is collected from <strong>10</strong>% of taxpayers, but<br />
>>> >> > income tax is only 30% of federal tax revenue and pays for<br />
>>> >> > only 25% of federal expenditures.<br />
>>> >><br />
>>> >> But the other revenues are not in question here, only the income tax.<br />
>>> ><br />
>>> > You said &#8220;total taxes&#8221;.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Sorry. Total <strong>INCOME</strong> Taxes. Income taxes are the discussion, so total<br />
>>> taxes<br />
>>> in that context would mean income taxes.<br />
>><br />
>> No. Total taxes means all of the taxes combined.<br />
>><br />
><br />
> Not if the topic as per the <strong>Subject Line</strong> is <strong>INCOME</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> <strong>AMENDMENT</strong> &#8230; and<br />
> the discussion is about income taxes.<br />
><br />
> In any case, I rephrased per your criticism to <strong>10</strong>% of the top income tax<br />
> payers pay 70% of the income tax receipts. That&#8217;s fact. It&#8217;s also fact<br />
> that 40-some percent of Americans pay no income tax at all.<br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
>> The simple fact is, using your own figures, the income tax<br />
>> from the top <strong>10</strong>% of income earners funds about 18%<br />
>> of federal govt expenditures.<br />
><br />
> So? The income tax collected from this group is 70% of income taxes<br />
> collected. That is the topic.</p>
<p>The problem is they don&#8217;t earn 70% of all the <strong>money</strong> earned&#8230;.</p>
<p>So why do they pay more in tax than they earn of the <strong>GDP</strong>.</p>
<p>If they earn 70% of all the <strong>money</strong> why NOT pay tax on that 70% that they<br />
earned.   Why would they pay tax on more than they earned?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/21/create-an-income-tax-amendment-says-that-the-federal-income-tax-can-not-be-raised-until-all-deficit-spending-is-paid-off/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS NEVER CHANGE &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;deficit between 1947 and 2008&gt;&gt;&gt;  was less than Obama Deficit spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/21/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-10/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/21/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-10/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2012 19:41:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Executive Orders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FBI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Rosenbluth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NSA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30924</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/21/2012 8:17 AM, Josh wrote: > On 4/21/2012 12:15 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> On 4/19/2012 10:32 PM, Josh wrote: >>> On 4/19/2012 10:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote: >>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Spending went down as a % of GDP in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/21/2012 8:17 AM, Josh wrote:<br />
> On 4/21/2012 12:15 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:32 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, <strong>Josh Rosenbluth</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com>   wrote:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Spending went down as a % of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010 and 2011 relative to a<br />
>>>>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget).  Your confusion (and all of<br />
>>>>> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using 2008 as the<br />
>>>>> baseline year to evaluate Obama.  2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s last<br />
>>>>> budget.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion dollars<br />
>>>> became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that cutting<br />
>>>> that<br />
>>>> by 1% is an accomplishment?<br />
>>><br />
>>> 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget):  deficit $1.4T<br />
>>> 2010 and 2011 (Obama):  deficit $1.3T<br />
>>><br />
>>> Why do you keep saying that Obama <strong>increased</strong> Bush&#8217;s $1T to $2T?<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> So you say <strong>Clinton</strong> was responsible for the Oct, 2000 to Oct, 2001 budget<br />
>> when the deficit and economy crashed and both went in the dumper rather<br />
>> than being &#8220;balanced&#8221; or getting better?   And Obama is going to be<br />
>> responsible for Oct, 2012  to Oct, 2013 and will actually be responsible<br />
>> for the Great <strong>Economic</strong> meltdown of 2013 while Romney is President.<br />
><br />
> In fiscal 2001 (yes, <strong>Clinton</strong>&#8216;s last budget), there was a surplus of over<br />
> $100B.  Fiscal year&#8217;s 2013 budget is Obama&#8217;s.</p>
<p>Who will sign it into law?</p>
<p>>> Doesn&#8217;t that mean <strong>Clinton</strong> is responsible for all the spending up to and<br />
>> including 9/<strong>11</strong>/2001 and so 9/<strong>11</strong> was really on <strong>Clinton</strong>&#8216;s watch while<br />
>> <strong>Clinton</strong> was funding the <strong>FBI</strong> and the <strong>CIA</strong> and the <strong>NSA</strong> and cutting the<br />
>> <strong>Military</strong> and <strong>Clinton</strong> was leaving the Nation unprotected with his Budget<br />
>> that he was responsible for.<br />
><br />
> <strong>FBI</strong>, <strong>CIA</strong>, and <strong>NSA</strong> funding through September of 2001 is part of <strong>Clinton</strong>&#8216;s<br />
> record.  What extent that funding is to blame for 9/<strong>11</strong>, as opposed to<br />
> things Bush had control of, is a matter opinion.<br />
><br />
>> This is a very interesting way to place blame, it&#8217;s like blaming the<br />
>> Dead guy for the mistakes.<br />
><br />
> There are of course many, many things that the current President is<br />
> accountable for in his first 9 months but funding levels aren&#8217;t one of<br />
> them.  Thus, your conclusion that my analysis leads to always<br />
> blaming/crediting the last guy is not sound.  I have made a factual<br />
> objective observation limited to the budget.  How people use that fact<br />
> to dish out blame/credit is a separate issue not at issue here.</p>
<p>The President write a lot of <strong>Executive Orders</strong> that effect spending and<br />
he does it in the first 9 months also&#8230;.</p>
</thendestroyeveryth>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/21/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-10/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS NEVER CHANGE &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;deficit between 1947 and 2008&gt;&gt;&gt; was less than Obama Deficit spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/21/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-9/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/21/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-9/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2012 18:36:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[41]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capitalist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBTW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the poor]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30914</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/21/2012 12:41 AM, Nickname unavailable wrote: > OBTW, as you remove poor people from the tax rolls, due to the > fact that the wealthy are absorbing just about every red cent left in > america. the percentage of taxes they pay, will appear larger, because > so many have been removed from the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/21/2012 12:<strong>41</strong> AM, Nickname unavailable wrote:</p>
<p>> <strong>OBTW</strong>, as you remove poor people from the tax rolls, due to the<br />
> fact that the wealthy are absorbing just about every red cent left in<br />
> america. the percentage of taxes they pay, will appear larger, because<br />
> so many have been removed from the tax rolls, and because the wealthy<br />
> make so much more now.</p>
<p>From what you said&#8230;  I understand that you think <strong>the poor</strong> need to go<br />
out and earn more so they can pay more tax?  Is that correct?</p>
<p>Or do you want 90% of us all using government <strong>money</strong> to live and eat and<br />
live like Socialists with all things derived from the government, while<br />
the <strong>10</strong>% who are elite millionaires working in the government decide and<br />
pay for everything with their tax <strong>money</strong>&#8230;.  essentially you want to<br />
live under communism but give it the facade of being a <strong>Capitalist</strong><br />
<strong>system</strong>.    When the people are enslaved in their <strong>social</strong> and financial<br />
strata by government taxes and <strong>regulations</strong> and policy, they are really<br />
serfs and we will actually be living in a serfdom.   Odd how governments<br />
naturally gravitate to totalitarian <strong>rule</strong> and tyranny and making the<br />
masses into serfs.  But such is the Nature of Socialism and the more it<br />
permeates the government the closer we are to that serfdom.</p>
<p>What needs to be done it to get rid of most of government and stop<br />
people from living off the government so as to get rid of the serfdom<br />
that&#8217;s being created by a combination of Government and Socialists.</p>
<p>Socialism will create a Static class of elites that will never <strong>change</strong>,<br />
look at Castro and Putin and any other Socialist Nation, the leadership<br />
cling to the <strong>power</strong> and <strong>money</strong> and never leave.  And that means there is a<br />
static class of serfs.  Laws and government <strong>regulations</strong> and taxes will<br />
keep you in your place as a serf while they spew propaganda that says<br />
you are equal and the rich Capitalists are/were evil.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/21/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-9/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS NEVER CHANGE &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;deficit between 1947 and 2008&gt;&gt;&gt;  was less than Obama Deficit spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-8/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-8/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2012 04:15:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FBI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Rosenbluth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NSA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30908</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/19/2012 10:32 PM, Josh wrote: > On 4/19/2012 10:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote: >>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty >>> wrote: >>> >>> Spending went down as a % of GDP in 2010 and 2011 relative to a >>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget). Your [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:32 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, <strong>Josh Rosenbluth</strong> wrote:<br />
>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com>  wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>> Spending went down as a % of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010 and 2011 relative to a<br />
>>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget).  Your confusion (and all of<br />
>>> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using 2008 as the<br />
>>> baseline year to evaluate Obama.  2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s last<br />
>>> budget.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion dollars<br />
>> became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that cutting that<br />
>> by 1% is an accomplishment?<br />
><br />
> 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget):  deficit $1.4T<br />
> 2010 and 2011 (Obama):  deficit $1.3T<br />
><br />
> Why do you keep saying that Obama <strong>increased</strong> Bush&#8217;s $1T to $2T?</p>
<p>So you say <strong>Clinton</strong> was responsible for the Oct, 2000 to Oct, 2001 budget<br />
when the deficit and economy crashed and both went in the dumper rather<br />
than being &#8220;balanced&#8221; or getting better?   And Obama is going to be<br />
responsible for Oct, 2012  to Oct, 2013 and will actually be responsible<br />
for the Great <strong>Economic</strong> meltdown of 2013 while Romney is President.</p>
<p>Doesn&#8217;t that mean <strong>Clinton</strong> is responsible for all the spending up to and<br />
including 9/<strong>11</strong>/2001 and so 9/<strong>11</strong> was really on <strong>Clinton</strong>&#8216;s watch while<br />
<strong>Clinton</strong> was funding the <strong>FBI</strong> and the <strong>CIA</strong> and the <strong>NSA</strong> and cutting the<br />
<strong>Military</strong> and <strong>Clinton</strong> was leaving the Nation unprotected with his Budget<br />
that he was responsible for.</p>
<p>This is a very interesting way to place blame, it&#8217;s like blaming the<br />
Dead guy for the mistakes.    I worked with a person that did that&#8230;..<br />
But it sure explained what kind of person he was if he was willing to<br />
soil the reputation of the dead guy just keep himself looking good.</p>
<p>It tells us what kind of person you are.</p>
</thendestroyeveryth>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-8/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS NEVER CHANGE &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;deficit between 1947 and 2008&gt;&gt;&gt; was less than Obama Deficit spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-7/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-7/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2012 01:28:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Rosenbluth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBAMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WILD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30902</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/20/2012 8:38 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote: > On Apr 20, 5:02 pm, Josh wrote: >> On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote: >>>> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>>> On 4/19/2012 10:32 PM, Josh wrote: >>>>>> On 4/19/2012 10:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>>>>> On [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/20/2012 8:38 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote:<br />
> On Apr 20, 5:02 pm, Josh <u ...@nowhere.com> wrote:<br />
>> On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:32 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, <strong>Josh Rosenbluth</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com>    wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> Spending went down as a % of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010 and 2011 relative to a<br />
>>>>>>>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget).  Your confusion (and all of<br />
>>>>>>>> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using 2008 as the<br />
>>>>>>>> baseline year to evaluate Obama.  2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s last<br />
>>>>>>>> budget.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion dollars<br />
>>>>>>> became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that cutting<br />
>>>>>>> that<br />
>>>>>>> by 1% is an accomplishment?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget):  deficit $1.4T<br />
>>>>>> 2010 and 2011 (Obama):  deficit $1.3T<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Why do you keep saying that Obama <strong>increased</strong> Bush&#8217;s $1T to $2T?<br />
>><br />
>>>>> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/..." >http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>>>> That link claims the spending increases under Obama are much smaller<br />
>>>> than they were under Bush.<br />
>><br />
>>> Thanks for Noticing, even you catch the <strong>WILD</strong> Liberal lies&#8230;..   Now the<br />
>>> question is why did Obama propose 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES to cover his<br />
>>> 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> SPENDING?<br />
>><br />
>>> The <strong>Federal</strong>/National debt is up from $9 trillion at the Obama coronation<br />
>>> to $16 trillion in 3.5 years?  If that isn&#8217;t debt what is it? That is<br />
>>> roughly $7 trillion of <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>OBAMA</strong> <strong>DEBT</strong>.  That amounts to an average of $2<br />
>>> trillion per year in the last 3.5 years.  Bush was in office 8 years,<br />
>>> had he run the debt up 2 trillion a year it would have been 16 trillion<br />
>>> and Obama&#8217;s would NOW be at $<strong>23</strong> trillion in debt.<br />
>><br />
>> I can only conclude you are too stupid to understand why 2009 is the<br />
>> last Bush budget year, since you keep ignoring that fact.<br />
><br />
>  i said that to him years ago.</p>
<p>Has Obama ever signed a budget into law?</p>
</thendestroyeveryth></u></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-7/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS NEVER CHANGE &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;deficit between 1947 and 2008&gt;&gt;&gt; was less than Obama Deficit spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-6/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-6/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2012 01:26:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeff Strickland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Rosenbluth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATIONAL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30900</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/20/2012 8:44 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote: > On Apr 20, 6:14 pm, &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; wrote: >> &#8220;Josh&#8221; wrote in message >> >> news:jmqhru$3k2$1 @&#038;*$?%josh.motzarella.org&#8230; >> >> >> >>> On 4/19/2012 10:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote: >>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty >>>>> wrote: >> >>>>> Spending [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/20/2012 8:44 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote:<br />
> On Apr 20, 6:14 pm, &#8220;<strong>Jeff Strickland</strong>&#8221; <crwlrj ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>> &#8220;Josh&#8221; <u ...@nowhere.com> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>> news:jmqhru$3k2$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>josh.motzarella.org&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, <strong>Josh Rosenbluth</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com>  wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>> Spending went down as a % of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010 and 2011 relative to a<br />
>>>>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget).  Your confusion (and all of<br />
>>>>> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using 2008 as the<br />
>>>>> baseline year to evaluate Obama.  2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s last<br />
>>>>> budget.<br />
>><br />
>>>> the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion dollars<br />
>>>> became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that cutting that<br />
>>>> by 1% is an accomplishment?<br />
>><br />
>>> 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget):  deficit $1.4T<br />
>>> 2010 and 2011 (Obama):  deficit $1.3T<br />
>><br />
>>> Why do you keep saying that Obama <strong>increased</strong> Bush&#8217;s $1T to $2T?<br />
>><br />
>> Because it&#8217;s true?<br />
><br />
>  he did not.</p>
<p>How did we get from $9 trillion to $16 trillion in <strong>NATIONAL</strong> <strong>DEBT</strong> within<br />
3.5 years?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.usdebtclock.org/" >http://www.usdebtclock.org/</a></p>
</thendestroyeveryth></u></crwlrj></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-6/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS NEVER CHANGE &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;deficit between 1947 and 2008&gt;&gt;&gt; was less than Obama Deficit spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-5/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-5/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2012 01:24:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeff Strickland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Rosenbluth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NOTHING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBAMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WILD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30898</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/20/2012 8:46 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote: > On Apr 20, 6:20 pm, &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; wrote: >> &#8220;Josh&#8221; wrote in message >> >> news:jmsme4$i4s$1 @&#038;*$?%josh.motzarella.org&#8230; >> >> >> >>> On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote: >>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>>>> On 4/19/2012 10:32 PM, Josh [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/20/2012 8:46 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote:<br />
> On Apr 20, 6:20 pm, &#8220;<strong>Jeff Strickland</strong>&#8221; <crwlrj ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>> &#8220;Josh&#8221; <u ...@nowhere.com> wrote in message<br />
>><br />
>> news:jmsme4$i4s$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>josh.motzarella.org&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:32 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, <strong>Josh Rosenbluth</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com>    wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Spending went down as a % of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010 and 2011 relative to a<br />
>>>>>>>>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget).  Your confusion (and all of<br />
>>>>>>>>> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using 2008 as the<br />
>>>>>>>>> baseline year to evaluate Obama.  2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s last<br />
>>>>>>>>> budget.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion dollars<br />
>>>>>>>> became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that cutting<br />
>>>>>>>> that<br />
>>>>>>>> by 1% is an accomplishment?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget):  deficit $1.4T<br />
>>>>>>> 2010 and 2011 (Obama):  deficit $1.3T<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> Why do you keep saying that Obama <strong>increased</strong> Bush&#8217;s $1T to $2T?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/..." >http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>>>>> That link claims the spending increases under Obama are much smaller<br />
>>>>> than they were under Bush.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Thanks for Noticing, even you catch the <strong>WILD</strong> Liberal lies&#8230;..   Now the<br />
>>>> question is why did Obama propose 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES to cover his<br />
>>>> 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> SPENDING?<br />
>><br />
>>>> The <strong>Federal</strong>/National debt is up from $9 trillion at the Obama coronation<br />
>>>> to $16 trillion in 3.5 years?  If that isn&#8217;t debt what is it? That is<br />
>>>> roughly $7 trillion of <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>OBAMA</strong> <strong>DEBT</strong>.  That amounts to an average of $2<br />
>>>> trillion per year in the last 3.5 years.  Bush was in office 8 years,<br />
>>>> had he run the debt up 2 trillion a year it would have been 16 trillion<br />
>>>> and Obama&#8217;s would NOW be at $<strong>23</strong> trillion in debt.<br />
>><br />
>>> I can only conclude you are too stupid to understand why 2009 is the last<br />
>>> Bush budget year, since you keep ignoring that fact.<br />
>><br />
>> It doesn&#8217;t matter. The debt under Obama is greater than under Bush, and by a<br />
>> huge percentage. Let&#8217;s give the 2009 budget to Bush. Let&#8217;s give him the 2010<br />
>> budget while we are passing stuff around. Obama STILL has ballooned the<br />
>> national debt.<br />
>><br />
>> Obama is making a claim, and by extension you are making it too, that he was<br />
>> divorced and the judge told him to pay his wife&#8217;s credit card bill, and told<br />
>> her to stop using it. He is bitching today that he inherited a balance of<br />
>> $<strong>10</strong>,000 but now it is $25,000, and unmanageable. THEN he attempts to make<br />
>> the claim that it&#8217;s ALL her fault.<br />
><br />
>  the debt from drunken sailor spending, and out right crank policies,<br />
> does not disappear the very next day after a election. if you put a<br />
> idiot in <strong>power</strong>, and most conservatives are. do not be to surprised if<br />
> you have to live with the results for decades to come.</p>
<p>Obama and democrats had the House the Senate and the Presidency, they<br />
could pass any law they please&#8230;  they had 2 years of being all<br />
powerful and *ALL* they did was run up the Debt.</p>
<p>They fixed <strong>NOTHING</strong>.</p>
</thendestroyeveryth></u></crwlrj></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-5/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS NEVER CHANGE &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;deficit between 1947 and 2008&gt;&gt;&gt;  was less than Obama Deficit spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-4/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2012 01:09:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeff Strickland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Rosenbluth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBAMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WILD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30896</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/20/2012 8:58 PM, Josh wrote: > On 4/20/2012 7:20 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote: >> >> &#8220;Josh&#8221; wrote in message >> news:jmsme4$i4s$1 @&#038;*$?%josh.motzarella.org&#8230; >>> On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote: >>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>>>> On 4/19/2012 10:32 PM, Josh wrote: >>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 10:08 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/20/2012 8:58 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
> On 4/20/2012 7:20 PM, <strong>Jeff Strickland</strong> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;Josh&#8221; <user @nowhere.com> wrote in message<br />
>> news:jmsme4$i4s$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>josh.motzarella.org&#8230;<br />
>>> On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:32 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, <strong>Josh Rosenbluth</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Spending went down as a % of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010 and 2011 relative to a<br />
>>>>>>>>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget). Your confusion (and all of<br />
>>>>>>>>> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using 2008 as the<br />
>>>>>>>>> baseline year to evaluate Obama. 2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s last<br />
>>>>>>>>> budget.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion dollars<br />
>>>>>>>> became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that cutting<br />
>>>>>>>> that<br />
>>>>>>>> by 1% is an accomplishment?<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget): deficit $1.4T<br />
>>>>>>> 2010 and 2011 (Obama): deficit $1.3T<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Why do you keep saying that Obama <strong>increased</strong> Bush&#8217;s $1T to $2T?<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2011/07/25/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/debt%20changes%20under%20bush%20obama.jpg?uuid=qZCizrbZEeCYzBMQCYwsyQ" >http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2011/07/25/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/debt%20changes%20under%20bush%20obama.jpg?uuid=qZCizrbZEeCYzBMQCYwsyQ</a><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> That link claims the spending increases under Obama are much smaller<br />
>>>>> than they were under Bush.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Thanks for Noticing, even you catch the <strong>WILD</strong> Liberal lies&#8230;.. Now the<br />
>>>> question is why did Obama propose 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES to cover<br />
>>>> his<br />
>>>> 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> SPENDING?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The <strong>Federal</strong>/National debt is up from $9 trillion at the Obama<br />
>>>> coronation<br />
>>>> to $16 trillion in 3.5 years? If that isn&#8217;t debt what is it? That is<br />
>>>> roughly $7 trillion of <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>OBAMA</strong> <strong>DEBT</strong>. That amounts to an average of $2<br />
>>>> trillion per year in the last 3.5 years. Bush was in office 8 years,<br />
>>>> had he run the debt up 2 trillion a year it would have been 16 trillion<br />
>>>> and Obama&#8217;s would NOW be at $<strong>23</strong> trillion in debt.<br />
>>><br />
>>> I can only conclude you are too stupid to understand why 2009 is the<br />
>>> last Bush budget year, since you keep ignoring that fact.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> It doesn&#8217;t matter. The debt under Obama is greater than under Bush, and<br />
>> by a huge percentage. Let&#8217;s give the 2009 budget to Bush. Let&#8217;s give him<br />
>> the 2010 budget while we are passing stuff around. Obama STILL has<br />
>> ballooned the national debt.<br />
>><br />
>> Obama is making a claim, and by extension you are making it too, that he<br />
>> was divorced and the judge told him to pay his wife&#8217;s credit card bill,<br />
>> and told her to stop using it. He is bitching today that he inherited a<br />
>> balance of $<strong>10</strong>,000 but now it is $25,000, and unmanageable. THEN he<br />
>> attempts to make the claim that it&#8217;s ALL her fault.<br />
><br />
> I have made only one claim:  that the claim that the deficit went up<br />
> 100% under Obama is false.</p>
<p>I believe I have proven that Obama is increasing the deficit by about $2<br />
trillion a year on average by pointing out the National debt when Obama<br />
took office and what it is today, can you prove that Bush <strong>increased</strong> the<br />
debt at more than 1 trillion a year on average over his presidency?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.usdebtclock.org/" >http://www.usdebtclock.org/</a></p>
<p>Maybe a little visual stimulation will shock you back into reality&#8230;.</p>
</thendestroyeveryth></user></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-4/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS NEVER CHANGE &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;deficit between 1947 and 2008&gt;&gt;&gt;  was less than Obama Deficit spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-3/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2012 01:06:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeff Strickland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Rosenbluth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBAMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WILD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30894</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/20/2012 8:58 PM, Josh wrote: > On 4/20/2012 7:20 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote: >> >> &#8220;Josh&#8221; wrote in message >> news:jmsme4$i4s$1 @&#038;*$?%josh.motzarella.org&#8230; >>> On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote: >>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>>>> On 4/19/2012 10:32 PM, Josh wrote: >>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 10:08 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/20/2012 8:58 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
> On 4/20/2012 7:20 PM, <strong>Jeff Strickland</strong> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;Josh&#8221; <user @nowhere.com> wrote in message<br />
>> news:jmsme4$i4s$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>josh.motzarella.org&#8230;<br />
>>> On 4/20/2012 5:39 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:32 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, <strong>Josh Rosenbluth</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Spending went down as a % of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010 and 2011 relative to a<br />
>>>>>>>>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget). Your confusion (and all of<br />
>>>>>>>>> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using 2008 as the<br />
>>>>>>>>> baseline year to evaluate Obama. 2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s last<br />
>>>>>>>>> budget.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion dollars<br />
>>>>>>>> became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that cutting<br />
>>>>>>>> that<br />
>>>>>>>> by 1% is an accomplishment?<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget): deficit $1.4T<br />
>>>>>>> 2010 and 2011 (Obama): deficit $1.3T<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Why do you keep saying that Obama <strong>increased</strong> Bush&#8217;s $1T to $2T?<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2011/07/25/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/debt%20changes%20under%20bush%20obama.jpg?uuid=qZCizrbZEeCYzBMQCYwsyQ" >http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2011/07/25/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/debt%20changes%20under%20bush%20obama.jpg?uuid=qZCizrbZEeCYzBMQCYwsyQ</a><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> That link claims the spending increases under Obama are much smaller<br />
>>>>> than they were under Bush.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Thanks for Noticing, even you catch the <strong>WILD</strong> Liberal lies&#8230;.. Now the<br />
>>>> question is why did Obama propose 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES to cover<br />
>>>> his<br />
>>>> 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> SPENDING?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The <strong>Federal</strong>/National debt is up from $9 trillion at the Obama<br />
>>>> coronation<br />
>>>> to $16 trillion in 3.5 years? If that isn&#8217;t debt what is it? That is<br />
>>>> roughly $7 trillion of <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>OBAMA</strong> <strong>DEBT</strong>. That amounts to an average of $2<br />
>>>> trillion per year in the last 3.5 years. Bush was in office 8 years,<br />
>>>> had he run the debt up 2 trillion a year it would have been 16 trillion<br />
>>>> and Obama&#8217;s would NOW be at $<strong>23</strong> trillion in debt.<br />
>>><br />
>>> I can only conclude you are too stupid to understand why 2009 is the<br />
>>> last Bush budget year, since you keep ignoring that fact.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> It doesn&#8217;t matter. The debt under Obama is greater than under Bush, and<br />
>> by a huge percentage. Let&#8217;s give the 2009 budget to Bush. Let&#8217;s give him<br />
>> the 2010 budget while we are passing stuff around. Obama STILL has<br />
>> ballooned the national debt.<br />
>><br />
>> Obama is making a claim, and by extension you are making it too, that he<br />
>> was divorced and the judge told him to pay his wife&#8217;s credit card bill,<br />
>> and told her to stop using it. He is bitching today that he inherited a<br />
>> balance of $<strong>10</strong>,000 but now it is $25,000, and unmanageable. THEN he<br />
>> attempts to make the claim that it&#8217;s ALL her fault.<br />
><br />
> I have made only one claim:  that the claim that the deficit went up<br />
> 100% under Obama is false.</p>
<p>I believe I have proven that Obama is increasing the deficit by about $2<br />
trillion a year on average by pointing out the National debt when Obama<br />
took office and what it is today, can you prove that Bush <strong>increased</strong> the<br />
debt at more than 1 trillion a year on average over his presidency?</p>
</thendestroyeveryth></user></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS NEVER CHANGE &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;deficit between 1947 and 2008&gt;&gt;&gt;  was less than Obama Deficit spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 21:39:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Rosenbluth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBAMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WILD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30892</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote: > On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> On 4/19/2012 10:32 PM, Josh wrote: >>> On 4/19/2012 10:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote: >>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Spending went down as a % of GDP in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/20/2012 4:58 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
> On 4/20/2012 4:05 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:32 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>> On 4/19/2012 <strong>10</strong>:08 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, <strong>Josh Rosenbluth</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com>   wrote:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Spending went down as a % of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010 and 2011 relative to a<br />
>>>>> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget).  Your confusion (and all of<br />
>>>>> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using 2008 as the<br />
>>>>> baseline year to evaluate Obama.  2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s last<br />
>>>>> budget.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion dollars<br />
>>>> became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that cutting<br />
>>>> that<br />
>>>> by 1% is an accomplishment?<br />
>>><br />
>>> 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget):  deficit $1.4T<br />
>>> 2010 and 2011 (Obama):  deficit $1.3T<br />
>>><br />
>>> Why do you keep saying that Obama <strong>increased</strong> Bush&#8217;s $1T to $2T?<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2011/07/25/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/debt%20changes%20under%20bush%20obama.jpg?uuid=qZCizrbZEeCYzBMQCYwsyQ" >http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2011/07/25/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/debt%20changes%20under%20bush%20obama.jpg?uuid=qZCizrbZEeCYzBMQCYwsyQ</a><br />
>><br />
><br />
> That link claims the spending increases under Obama are much smaller<br />
> than they were under Bush.</p>
<p>Thanks for Noticing, even you catch the <strong>WILD</strong> Liberal lies&#8230;..   Now the<br />
question is why did Obama propose 1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES to cover his<br />
1.5 trillion in <strong>NEW</strong> SPENDING?</p>
<p>The <strong>Federal</strong>/National debt is up from $9 trillion at the Obama coronation<br />
to $16 trillion in 3.5 years?  If that isn&#8217;t debt what is it? That is<br />
roughly $7 trillion of <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>OBAMA</strong> <strong>DEBT</strong>.  That amounts to an average of $2<br />
trillion per year in the last 3.5 years.  Bush was in office 8 years,<br />
had he run the debt up 2 trillion a year it would have been 16 trillion<br />
and Obama&#8217;s would NOW be at $<strong>23</strong> trillion in debt.</p>
<p><strong>SO</strong> NOW we know that Obama is leading the pack on wasteful spending with<br />
himself maybe being the most expensive education the American people<br />
have ever received.</p>
<p>Socialism is something we just can&#8217;t afford.  Like Liberals say we need<br />
to pay for tax cuts, well&#8230; you need to pay for Socialism and you<br />
haven&#8217;t done it.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/19/obama-to-present-balanced-plan-to-tackle-deficit/" >http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/19/obama-to-present-balanced-plan-to-tackle-deficit/</a></p>
<p>Or are you just saying that Obama is happy to pay down Republican<br />
spending rather than cut that republican waste out of the <strong>Federal</strong><br />
Government?  And why would Obama pay for Republican waste rather than<br />
cutting it out of the budget?</p>
<p>You see how your Liberal lies get you in a box every time.</p>
</thendestroyeveryth>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/20/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS NEVER CHANGE &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;deficit between 1947 and 2008&gt;&gt;&gt;  was less than Obama Deficit spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/19/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/19/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 02:08:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Rosenbluth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ROTFLMAO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPEND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30882</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote: > On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: >> On 4/19/2012 7:22 AM, Josh wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 4/19/2012 12:02 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> On 4/18/2012 10:10 PM, Josh wrote: >>>>> On 4/18/2012 10:02 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>>>> On [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/19/2012 1:09 PM, <strong>Josh Rosenbluth</strong> wrote:<br />
> On Apr 19, 12:45 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>> On 4/19/2012 7:22 AM, Josh wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> On 4/19/2012 12:02 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> On 4/18/2012 <strong>10</strong>:<strong>10</strong> PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>> On 4/18/2012 <strong>10</strong>:02 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>> On 4/18/2012 7:35 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On 4/18/2012 3:58 PM, <acronym title="Peter Franks"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> P&*$?%s</span></acronym> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> On 4/17/2012 7:03 PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> On 4/17/2012 12:09 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/17/2012 2:31 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> <strong>ROTFLMAO</strong>!<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> NOT if he cuts 3% of real actual spending for every 1% in tax hike.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> The biggest problem is Governments inability to make any &#8220;real&#8221;<br />
>>>>>>>>>> cuts to<br />
>>>>>>>>>> its own spending. Every time they cut it&#8217;s cutting projected<br />
>>>>>>>>>> growth or<br />
>>>>>>>>>> making cuts that are non existent expenditures.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> ***. <strong>Clinton</strong> reduced spending relative to <strong>GDP</strong>.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> Lies, damn lies, and statistics. Your statement encompasses all<br />
>>>>>>>> three,<br />
>>>>>>>> nice work!<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> <strong>Clinton</strong> did not reduce spending. He <strong>increased</strong> spending by close to<br />
>>>>>>>> 30%.<br />
>>>>>>>> <strong>GDP</strong> <strong>increased</strong> faster.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> He said spending was reduced relative to <strong>GDP</strong>.  That is factually<br />
>>>>>>> correct.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> So what does that mean Obama has done relative&#8230;..  tell us the<br />
>>>>>> numbers.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> In the final- Bush fiscal year (2009), spending was 25% of <strong>GDP</strong>.  It&#8217;s<br />
>>>>> stayed flat since then.<br />
>><br />
>>>> HHHHHhhhhhhmmmmm<br />
>><br />
>>>> The <strong>GDP</strong> is flat or falling and Obama has doubled or tripped the Deficit,<br />
>>>> what kind of math did you use to make that stay at 25%?<br />
>><br />
>>>> Your numbers are not making any sense&#8230;.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Perhaps you need to put them on paper and then post them here.<br />
>><br />
>>> In fiscal 2009 (last Bush budget), spending was 25% of <strong>GDP</strong>, the deficit<br />
>>> was <strong>10</strong>% of <strong>GDP</strong>.  In each of the first two Obama years, the deficit was<br />
>>> 9% of <strong>GDP</strong>.<br />
>><br />
>>> Source:<br />
>>> <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/01-31-201..." >http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/01-31-201&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>>> Appendix F, Page 133.<br />
>><br />
>> I&#8217;m Still not there yet, HOW did the Deficit double, that is a 100%<br />
>> increase from 2008 to 2011 and <strong>GDP</strong> remain roughly the same $14 trillion<br />
>> and spending go down from 2011 to 2012 and 3598 &#8211; 3601 in billions.  It<br />
>> was a decrease of a measly 3 billion dollars&#8230;.  That is well within<br />
>> the margin of error and it was all fudged to make it just over the line.<br />
><br />
> Spending went down as a % of <strong>GDP</strong> in 2010 and 2011 relative to a<br />
> baseline in 2009 (Bush&#8217;s last budget).  Your confusion (and all of<br />
> your mistaken analysis snipped below) stems from using 2008 as the<br />
> baseline year to evaluate Obama.  2009, not 2008, is Bush&#8217;s last<br />
> budget.</p>
<p>the deficit went up by 100% after Obama, Bushes $1 trillion dollars<br />
became Obama&#8217;s $2 trillion dollars and now you suggest that cutting that<br />
by 1% is an accomplishment?</p>
<p>You may be that stupid but I&#8217;m NOT.  Obama spent a trillion in deficit<br />
spending and cut a billion off the deficit he created&#8230;.  What a joke.</p>
<p>*<strong>TAX</strong> AND <strong>SPEND</strong> <strong>LIBERALS</strong> NEVER <strong>CHANGE</strong>*</p>
</thendestroyeveryth>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/19/tax-and-spend-liberals-never-change-deficit-between-1947-and-2008-was-less-than-obama-deficit-spending/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A &#8220;Dark Day&#8221; for Solar Power</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/19/a-dark-day-for-solar-power/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/19/a-dark-day-for-solar-power/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 01:55:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Africa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Asia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barbarian Mutual]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Latin America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30880</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/19/2012 11:50 AM, Barbarian Mutual wrote: > On Apr 18, 10:54 pm, &#8220;James&#8221; wrote: >> April 18, 2012 >> A Dark Day for Solar Power >> By Ross Kaminsky > > &#8220;solar power is now cheaper than diesel &#8220;anywhere as sunny as Spain&#8220;. > That means vast areas of Latin America, Africa and Asia&#8221; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/19/2012 <strong>11</strong>:50 AM, <strong>Barbarian Mutual</strong> wrote:<br />
> On Apr 18, <strong>10</strong>:54 pm, &#8220;James&#8221; <kingk ...@iglou.com> wrote:<br />
>> April 18, 2012<br />
>> A Dark Day for Solar Power<br />
>> By Ross Kaminsky<br />
><br />
> &#8220;solar <strong>power</strong> is now cheaper than diesel &#8220;anywhere as sunny as <strong>Spain</strong>&#8220;.<br />
> That means vast areas of <strong>Latin America</strong>, <strong>Africa</strong> and <strong>Asia</strong>&#8221;</p>
<p>Then America can use all the fuel we need and the rest of the sunny<br />
equatorial regions will be happy to use solar&#8230;.  No more Socialist<br />
brouhaha whining about the <strong>USA</strong> using all the oil.</p>
<p>><br />
> &#8212; <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328505.000-indias-panel-price-crash-could-spark-solar-revolution.html" >http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328505.000-indias-panel-price-crash-could-spark-solar-revolution.html</a></p>
<p></kingk></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/19/a-dark-day-for-solar-power/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;below that recorded last year but still higher (in percentage,terms) than any deficit between 1947 and 2008&#8243;</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/19/below-that-recorded-last-year-but-still-higher-in-percentageterms-than-any-deficit-between-1947-and-2008/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/19/below-that-recorded-last-year-but-still-higher-in-percentageterms-than-any-deficit-between-1947-and-2008/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CBO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CITE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEFICIT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ESTIMATES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GAIN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HEAD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NET]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PUBLIC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ROTFLMAO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White House]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30866</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/19/2012 7:22 AM, Josh wrote: > On 4/19/2012 12:02 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> On 4/18/2012 10:10 PM, Josh wrote: >>> On 4/18/2012 10:02 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> On 4/18/2012 7:35 PM, Josh wrote: >>>>> On 4/18/2012 3:58 PM, P&#038;*$?%s wrote: >>>>>> On 4/17/2012 7:03 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote: >>>>>>> On 4/17/2012 12:09 PM, BeamMeUpScotty [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/19/2012 7:22 AM, Josh wrote:<br />
> On 4/19/2012 12:02 AM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>> On 4/18/2012 <strong>10</strong>:<strong>10</strong> PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>> On 4/18/2012 <strong>10</strong>:02 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> On 4/18/2012 7:35 PM, Josh wrote:<br />
>>>>> On 4/18/2012 3:58 PM, <acronym title="Peter Franks"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> P&*$?%s</span></acronym> wrote:<br />
>>>>>> On 4/17/2012 7:03 PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On 4/17/2012 12:09 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> On 4/17/2012 2:31 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> <strong>ROTFLMAO</strong>!<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> NOT if he cuts 3% of real actual spending for every 1% in tax hike.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> The biggest problem is Governments inability to make any &#8220;real&#8221;<br />
>>>>>>>> cuts to<br />
>>>>>>>> its own spending. Every time they cut it&#8217;s cutting projected<br />
>>>>>>>> growth or<br />
>>>>>>>> making cuts that are non existent expenditures.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> ***. <strong>Clinton</strong> reduced spending relative to <strong>GDP</strong>.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> Lies, damn lies, and statistics. Your statement encompasses all<br />
>>>>>> three,<br />
>>>>>> nice work!<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> <strong>Clinton</strong> did not reduce spending. He <strong>increased</strong> spending by close to<br />
>>>>>> 30%.<br />
>>>>>> <strong>GDP</strong> <strong>increased</strong> faster.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> He said spending was reduced relative to <strong>GDP</strong>.  That is factually<br />
>>>>> correct.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> So what does that mean Obama has done relative&#8230;..  tell us the<br />
>>>> numbers.<br />
>>><br />
>>> In the final- Bush fiscal year (2009), spending was 25% of <strong>GDP</strong>.  It&#8217;s<br />
>>> stayed flat since then.<br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> HHHHHhhhhhhmmmmm<br />
>><br />
>> The <strong>GDP</strong> is flat or falling and Obama has doubled or tripped the Deficit,<br />
>> what kind of math did you use to make that stay at 25%?<br />
>><br />
>> Your numbers are not making any sense&#8230;.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Perhaps you need to put them on paper and then post them here.<br />
><br />
> In fiscal 2009 (last Bush budget), spending was 25% of <strong>GDP</strong>, the deficit<br />
> was <strong>10</strong>% of <strong>GDP</strong>.  In each of the first two Obama years, the deficit was<br />
> 9% of <strong>GDP</strong>.<br />
><br />
> Source:<br />
> <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/01-31-2012_Outlook.pdf" >http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/01-31-2012_Outlook.pdf</a><br />
><br />
><br />
> Appendix F, Page 133.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m Still not there yet, HOW did the Deficit double, that is a 100%<br />
increase from 2008 to 2011 and <strong>GDP</strong> remain roughly the same $14 trillion<br />
and spending go down from 2011 to 2012 and 3598 &#8211; 3601 in billions.  It<br />
was a decrease of a measly 3 billion dollars&#8230;.  That is well within<br />
the margin of error and it was all fudged to make it just over the line.</p>
<p>You lose the math yet again, I don&#8217;t need another group telling me the<br />
same thing without any explanation.      I just need to know how you can<br />
have the <strong>GDP</strong> stay roughly the same and double the deficits over 4<br />
years&#8230;..  and yet the percentage didn&#8217;t <strong>change</strong>. You and they say we<br />
are now down 1% when I know we are actually up at least 99-102%</p>
<p>Obama was the one that ran the deficit up by 100% and NOW he is<br />
supposedly reducing his own deficit spending by 1% and you call that<br />
reducing the deficit, I call it hiking the deficit by 99%&#8230;..</p>
<p>I&#8217;m speaking in terms of post Bush and you are speaking in terms of<br />
12 months of Obama&#8217;s manipulation and forecasting with rose colored<br />
glasses on to make it all look good.</p>
<p>&#8220;You&#8221; see this as a turn in the right direction while &#8220;I&#8221; see it as the<br />
continuation or flat <strong>GDP</strong> with the same doubled 100% deficit increases.<br />
You seem to think a one or 4 year 100% increase in deficits is OK as<br />
long as you cut 1% on paper?</p>
<p>I think we are still flat, we have yet to fix any spending problems we<br />
are simply coasting with the same 99% &#8211; 102% larger deficit and your<br />
statement that we are cutting deficit as percentage of <strong>GDP</strong> is a lie<br />
that&#8217;s based on even more lies from Obama and the <strong>CBO</strong>&#8230;..   the <strong>GDP</strong><br />
numbers are fudged and then on top of that 1% spending is within the<br />
margin of error so it may be the other way and be a (-1%) growth in <strong>GDP</strong><br />
and the Deficit may have grown by +1% leaving us with a larger <strong>GDP</strong> to<br />
Deficit ratio.</p>
<p>Obama&#8217;s government has LOST more than 3 billion dollars and can&#8217;t tell<br />
you where it is&#8230;.  it&#8217;s Obvious when you look at the Wild spending<br />
that Obama and the <strong>CBO</strong> and the <strong>Democrats</strong> have no way to accurately<br />
calculate the Deficit to <strong>GDP</strong> accurately enough to tell you we have a 3<br />
billion dollar reduction in deficit.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m Sad to say that ever since the <strong>CBO</strong> head (an independent agency) was<br />
summoned to the <strong>White House</strong>, and had a face to face meeting with Obama,<br />
that agency has been less than respected and believable.</p>
<p>There was NO reason for such a meeting and it created a loss of any<br />
neutral standing the <strong>CBO</strong> had.  We have no idea of what Obama told the<br />
<strong>CBO</strong> <strong>HEAD</strong> in private.  An &#8220;independent agency&#8221; should only accept written<br />
letters from the Politicians like Obama.   Letters that are all <strong>PUBLIC</strong><br />
and that way we can see what is being threatened and extorted from the <strong>CBO</strong>.</p>
<p>*FROM YOUR <strong>CITE</strong>*</p>
<p>["To provide a benchmark against which potential policy<br />
changes can be measured, the Congressional Budget<br />
<strong>Office</strong> (<strong>CBO</strong>) constructs its baseline estimates of federal<br />
revenues and spending under the assumption that current<br />
laws generally remain unchanged. In that case, <strong>CBO</strong> estimates<br />
that *the federal budget will show a deficit* of nearly<br />
$1.1 trillion in fiscal year 2012 (see Table 1-1). As a percentage<br />
of gross domestic product (<strong>GDP</strong>), that shortfall<br />
will be 7.0 percent, which is nearly 2 percentage points<br />
*below that recorded last year but still higher* (in percentage<br />
terms) *than any deficit between 1947 and 2008* (see<br />
Figure 1-1)."]</p>
<p>Very interesting here that they admit in a rather sly way that it&#8217;s<br />
still a higher &#8220;Deficit to <strong>GDP</strong>&#8221; percentage than it was from 1947 to<br />
2008.    So as I have said we are up +100% under Obama and then Obama<br />
managed to get the numbers fudged enough to claim a 1% decline from his<br />
100% deficit hike&#8230;.  THE <strong>NET</strong> <strong>GAIN</strong> IN THE <strong>DEFICIT</strong> IS STILL 99% even if<br />
the lies were NOT lies..</p>
<p>So far all &#8220;&#8221;<strong>ESTIMATES</strong>&#8221; have been fudged to the better side, to say that<br />
things are better than they are, the result is that we can expect the<br />
2012 numbers to be far worse than the <strong>Obama Government</strong>&#8216;s rosy<br />
prognostications.  It never was and never will measure up to the number<br />
that are being used.   That means those numbers you have been shouting<br />
about like the 100% more deficit only being 99% larger than when Obama<br />
came in, are NOT very good numbers for you and Obama.</p>
<p>The Economy will continue to be strangled by the Government and its<br />
deficits, and from 1947 &#8211; 2008 we were in better shape and Obama is the<br />
one that created this disproportional deficit to <strong>GDP</strong> mess.  Obama wasted<br />
all that <strong>money</strong>.  Obama is the problem. Obama is spending. Obama has &#8220;We<br />
The People&#8221; upside-down in this government like many people are<br />
upside-down in their house payments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/19/below-that-recorded-last-year-but-still-higher-in-percentageterms-than-any-deficit-between-1947-and-2008/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Where did ALL these banks get ALL this excessive money to loan?,,It&#8217;smyunderstandingthat the Federal Reserve sets MONEY POLICY.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/18/where-did-all-these-banks-get-all-this-excessive-money-to-loanitsmyunderstandingthat-the-federal-reserve-sets-money-policy-11/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/18/where-did-all-these-banks-get-all-this-excessive-money-to-loanitsmyunderstandingthat-the-federal-reserve-sets-money-policy-11/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 20:59:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capitalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[future]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[POLICY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PURE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Space Race]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the poor]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30848</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/18/2012 8:38 AM, SaPeIsMa wrote: > > &#8220;Gary Forbis&#8221; wrote in message > news:11a02797-a749-4841-b565-8e8da4754ef5 @&#038;*$?%j9g2000pbn.googlegroups.com&#8230; >> On Apr 17, 8:11 am, BeamMeUpScotty >> wrote: >>> On 4/16/2012 11:15 PM, Gary Forbis wrote: >>> >>> So you want government to speculate? When they get it wrong as with >>> the mortgage speculation of Loans to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/18/2012 8:38 AM, SaPeIsMa wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;Gary Forbis&#8221; <forbisgaryg @msn.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:11a02797-a749-4841-b565-8e8da4754ef5<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>j9g2000pbn.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>> On Apr 17, 8:<strong>11</strong> am, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>> On 4/16/2012 <strong>11</strong>:15 PM, Gary Forbis wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>> So you want government to speculate?    When they get it wrong as with<br />
>>> the mortgage speculation of Loans to <strong>the poor</strong>, who will pay?<br />
>><br />
>> I think it better for the government to speculate on infrastructure,<br />
>> basic research, training, etc.  The dollars spent should be based upon<br />
>> expected roi.  peer reviewed expected roi.<br />
><br />
> The ONLY kind of research government should be subsidizing is <strong>PURE</strong><br />
> research.<br />
> That kind of research is expensive. BUT it usually pays for itself<br />
> within <strong>10</strong> years. And when it does pay off, it pays off in spades<br />
> Just look at all the spinoffs from the pure research for the space race.</p>
<p>The <strong>Space Race</strong> was a military project that we called peaceful, to use<br />
the Facade of science to get air and space superiority.</p>
<p>Obama has made it clear that we will no longer try to be superior and he<br />
has destroyed our programs that made us the most advanced and gained us<br />
the upper <strong>hand</strong>&#8230;..    Obama has made sure that he throws as many monkey<br />
wrenches into the <strong>National Security</strong> as he can.  He plans to use 4 years<br />
to set us back several generations.</p>
<p>That is what Obama care does, it trashes the <strong>future</strong>, it was done that<br />
way on purpose.</p>
<p>Obama is NOT helping America, Obama is doing all he can to rid the world<br />
of American <strong>power</strong> and <strong>Capitalism</strong>.</p>
</thendestroyeveryth></forbisgaryg></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/18/where-did-all-these-banks-get-all-this-excessive-money-to-loanitsmyunderstandingthat-the-federal-reserve-sets-money-policy-11/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Republicans controlling the House are eying big cuts to food stamps</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/18/republicans-controlling-the-house-are-eying-big-cuts-to-food-stamps/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/18/republicans-controlling-the-house-are-eying-big-cuts-to-food-stamps/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 15:49:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CLOSE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEPARTMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EDUCATION]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NOTHING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unconstitutional]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30842</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/17/2012 10:24 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote: > On 4/17/2012 9:16 AM, Sid9 wrote: >> April 17, 2012 >> >> GOP to Cut Food Stamps in Deficit-Reduction Drive > > It figures. Food stamps are the number one most effective economic > stimulus. Still selling that snake oil are you? You have &#8220;All&#8221; this trillions [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/17/2012 <strong>10</strong>:24 PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
> On 4/17/2012 9:16 AM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
>> April 17, 2012<br />
>><br />
>> <strong>GOP</strong> to Cut Food Stamps in Deficit-Reduction Drive<br />
><br />
> It figures.  Food stamps are the number one most effective economic<br />
> stimulus.</p>
<p>Still selling that snake oil are you?</p>
<p>You have &#8220;All&#8221; this trillions of dollars of government stimulus and yet<br />
the economy is crashing and burning.   It has become obvious that<br />
government stimulus is useless.  <strong>NOTHING</strong> has been fixed by stimulus.</p>
<p>But that said, the cuts in government should start in education where<br />
its instant savings hurts people the least and hurts the government<br />
propaganda and control the most.  <strong>CLOSE</strong> THE <strong>FEDERAL</strong> <strong>DEPARTMENT</strong> OF <strong>EDUCATION</strong>.</p>
<p>The States can handle it and it is the States power NOT a <strong>POWER</strong> that has<br />
been delegated to the Federal Government.  In other words, any laws they<br />
pass including spending laws related to education is <strong>unconstitutional</strong>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/18/republicans-controlling-the-house-are-eying-big-cuts-to-food-stamps/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Income TAX amendment say that the Federal Income tax can NOT be raised until ALL deficit spending is paid off</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/17/income-tax-amendment-say-that-the-federal-income-tax-can-not-be-raised-until-all-deficit-spending-is-paid-off/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/17/income-tax-amendment-say-that-the-federal-income-tax-can-not-be-raised-until-all-deficit-spending-is-paid-off/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 19:09:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CHOICE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FACT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ROTFLMAO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30826</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/17/2012 2:31 PM, Bret Cahill wrote: > ROTFLMAO! NOT if he cuts 3% of real actual spending for every 1% in tax hike. The biggest problem is Governments inability to make any &#8220;real&#8221; cuts to its own spending. Every time they cut it&#8217;s cutting projected growth or making cuts that are non existent expenditures. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/17/2012 2:31 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:<br />
> <strong>ROTFLMAO</strong>!</p>
<p>NOT if he cuts 3% of real actual spending for every 1% in tax hike.</p>
<p>The biggest problem is Governments inability to make any &#8220;real&#8221; cuts to<br />
its own spending.  Every time they cut it&#8217;s cutting projected growth or<br />
making cuts that are non existent expenditures.</p>
<p>Lets see the cuts, and then we might agree to a 3% cut to 1% tax hike.<br />
It should be an <strong>amendment</strong> to the constitution&#8230;  that <strong>Federal</strong> income<br />
tax should be set with a <strong>10</strong>% baseline for anyone making $1.00 and up and<br />
a limit that says for every 1% in tax hikes, the <strong>Federal</strong> government has<br />
to cut every single expenditure by 3% equally across the board. NO<br />
matter if it causes death or destruction.  That would make them think<br />
very hard before they simply jack-up taxes.</p>
<p>IN <strong>FACT</strong> making the Income <strong>TAX</strong> <strong>amendment</strong> say that the <strong>Federal</strong> Income tax<br />
can NOT be raised until ALL deficit spending is paid off from the<br />
<strong>Federal</strong> spending and that would be a real positive <strong>change</strong>&#8230;   So the<br />
<strong>Federal</strong> Government will have a choice just like our <strong>CHOICE</strong> to NOT buy<br />
ObamaCare.</p>
<p>They can spend spend spend and NOT be able to raise taxes but put it all<br />
on time payment of borrowed <strong>money</strong>, or they can pay-off/cut the Deficit<br />
spending, and raise the tax 1% for every 3% in cuts they make from the<br />
balanced budget.</p>
<p>That should limit the <strong>Federal</strong> governments games with the tax code and<br />
spending.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/17/income-tax-amendment-say-that-the-federal-income-tax-can-not-be-raised-until-all-deficit-spending-is-paid-off/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tax Hikes Romney Already Tossing the Teabaggers Under the Bus!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/17/tax-hikes-romney-already-tossing-the-teabaggers-under-the-bus/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/17/tax-hikes-romney-already-tossing-the-teabaggers-under-the-bus/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 18:51:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ROTFLMAO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30824</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/17/2012 2:31 PM, Bret Cahill wrote: > ROTFLMAO! > > NOT if he cuts 3% of real actual spending for every 1% in tax hike. The biggest problem is Governments inability to make any &#8220;real&#8221; cuts to its own spending. Every time they cut it&#8217;s cutting projected growth or making cuts that are non [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/17/2012 2:31 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:<br />
> <strong>ROTFLMAO</strong>!<br />
><br />
></p>
<p>NOT if he cuts 3% of real actual spending for every 1% in tax hike.</p>
<p>The biggest problem is Governments inability to make any &#8220;real&#8221; cuts to<br />
its own spending.  Every time they cut it&#8217;s cutting projected growth or<br />
making cuts that are non existent expenditures.</p>
<p>Lets see the cuts, and then we might agree to a 3% cut to 1% tax hike.<br />
It should be an <strong>amendment</strong> to the constitution&#8230;  that <strong>Federal</strong> income<br />
tax should be set with a <strong>10</strong>% baseline for anyone making $1.00 and up and<br />
a limit that says for every 1% in tax hikes, the <strong>Federal</strong> government has<br />
to cut every single expenditure by 3% equally across the board. NO<br />
matter if it causes death or destruction.  That would make them think<br />
very hard before they simply jack-up <strong>taxes</strong>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/17/tax-hikes-romney-already-tossing-the-teabaggers-under-the-bus/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Where did ALL these banks get ALL this excessive money to loan?,,It&#8217;smyunderstandingthat the Federal Reserve sets MONEY POLICY.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/17/where-did-all-these-banks-get-all-this-excessive-money-to-loanitsmyunderstandingthat-the-federal-reserve-sets-money-policy-10/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/17/where-did-all-these-banks-get-all-this-excessive-money-to-loanitsmyunderstandingthat-the-federal-reserve-sets-money-policy-10/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 18:15:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BIG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Graham]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOVERNMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Keneysian Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NANNY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NOTHING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[POLICY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30822</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/17/2012 12:44 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote: > On Apr 16, 10:15 pm, Gary Forbis wrote: >> On Apr 16, 5:50 pm, &#8220;Bill Graham&#8221; wrote: >> >> >> >>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> On 4/16/2012 9:23 AM, Gary Forbis wrote: >>>>> On Apr 15, 9:44 pm, Nickname unavailable wrote: >>>>>> On Apr 15, 9:34 pm, &#8220;Bill [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/17/2012 12:44 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote:<br />
> On Apr 16, <strong>10</strong>:15 pm, Gary Forbis <forbisga ...@msn.com> wrote:<br />
>> On Apr 16, 5:50 pm, &#8220;<strong>Bill Graham</strong>&#8221; <w ...@comcast.net> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> On 4/16/2012 9:<strong>23</strong> AM, Gary Forbis wrote:<br />
>>>>> On Apr 15, 9:44 pm, Nickname unavailable <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote:<br />
>>>>>> On Apr 15, 9:34 pm, &#8220;<strong>Bill Graham</strong>&#8221; <w ...@comcast.net> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> and the current government deficit is the reslt of their<br />
>>>>>>> bad spending decisions, too.<br />
>>>>> &#8230;<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>  please institute austerity, then we will no longer have to listen<br />
>>>>>> to your type.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> Please don&#8217;t do it until the Fed considers tightening credit then<br />
>>>>> do it sufficiently and only sufficiently to keep interest rates low.<br />
>><br />
>>>> The damage is done and it will get worse&#8230;.  spending will make it<br />
>>>> worse but it won&#8217;t get better.  Austerity will make things worse but<br />
>>>> there will be a way out once things begin to balance out and spending<br />
>>>> begins to come down to the level of Tax receipts.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> When the Fed starts to raise interest rates then we know the<br />
>>>>> bankers are consdered about inflation.<br />
>><br />
>>>> I was concerned long before that, their spending is the cause of<br />
>>>> inflation because someone has to pay for that spending.   And they can<br />
>>>> either raise <strong>taxes</strong> (which is inflation) or the government can print<br />
>>>> <strong>money</strong> which devalues the dollar and creates inflation or they borrow<br />
>>>> <strong>money</strong> which has to be paid by tax payers at some point and when they<br />
>>>> pay it that will create inflation&#8230;.  At the moment Obama has done<br />
>>>> all three in a giant way.<br />
>><br />
>>>> inflation is here and going to get worse as the cost of Obama&#8217;s short<br />
>>>> sighted policies comes due.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Notice the government figures inflation and they do it without<br />
>>>> including &#8220;energy&#8221;  &#8220;food&#8221;  or &#8220;Taxes&#8221; yet all three are going up<br />
>>>> fast, gasoline alone has inflated 100%  over 3.5 years.   That would<br />
>>>> be an average 30% inflation rate.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> Sure the current government deficit is the result of Bush era<br />
>>>>> bad spending decisions.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Obama has done the same and worse than Bush did.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> These things can&#8217;t be corrected on<br />
>>>>> a dime without negatively affecting the economy.<br />
>><br />
>>>> They can&#8217;t be fixed at all if you ignore the problem which is<br />
>>>> Government spending.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>  Good spending<br />
>>>>> decisions take time to correct bad spending decisions.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Obama has NOT made any good spending decisions.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>  The<br />
>>>>> economy still isn&#8217;t recovering very well and it won&#8217;t until the<br />
>>>>> middle class starts getting raises and income distribution starts<br />
>>>>> returning to more rational norms.<br />
>><br />
>>>> The economy is still in the process of crashing and burning.  Obama<br />
>>>> has fixed <strong>NOTHING</strong>, Obama is making it worse.  We the tax payers will<br />
>>>> pay for this, and that will cause the inflation and the deeper<br />
>>>> collapse that is coming.<br />
>><br />
>>> I agree that Obama has made it worse. You can&#8217;t spend your way out of debt,<br />
>>> in spite of the <strong>Keneysian Economy</strong> idiots. I have been listening to their<br />
>>> whacko theories all of my adult life. They were worng when I was in college<br />
>>> back in the 70&#8242;s and they are still wrong today.<br />
>><br />
>> I wonder how businesses spend their way out of debt?  It seems to me<br />
>> that<br />
>> business contraction when retooling is needed isn&#8217;t a good idea.<br />
>> There is<br />
>> good debt and bad debt.  Speculative production involves capital and<br />
>> operational<br />
>> expenses up front and profit down the road.<br />
><br />
>  it takes <strong>money</strong> to make <strong>money</strong>. have you ever worked at a company that<br />
> has a severe cash flow shortage? it ain&#8217;t fun. now think about that<br />
> situation in a whole country. there is no reason for that to happen to<br />
> a country, unless its in the grip of conservative fanatics.</p>
<p>HAVE YOU ever worked for a company that had to borrow <strong>money</strong> to pay their<br />
employees?</p>
<p>It ain&#8217;t fun&#8230;.  they&#8217;re always one payment from *NOT* being able to<br />
pay you and laying you off because they didn&#8217;t get paid by just one<br />
customer on time.</p>
<p>Then you NOT only worry but you also are very likely to be permanently<br />
out of work there, as the entire business collapses and shuts down.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s better when the company quits paying for all the cable <strong>TV</strong> for the<br />
office and cut back on a phone line and put the least used person on<br />
part time&#8230;..    don&#8217;t buy tools you can put off for a few years, and<br />
don&#8217;t schedule any out of town sales rallies or education seminars.</p>
<p>Planning expansion in a time when you have no cash flow, would sound<br />
like a Liberal plan.</p>
<p>The government could learn from that, cut the education department. And<br />
cut the Propaganda budget and cut the Regulations and inspections&#8230;.<br />
at least for 5 or <strong>10</strong> years.  Stop being a <strong>NANNY</strong> <strong>FEDERAL</strong> <strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> and<br />
let the States do their job. Cancel and quit taking over items that<br />
aren&#8217;t Federal Powers, that cost trillions like ObamaCare.</p>
<p><strong>Democrats</strong> are just plain old <strong>BIG</strong> <strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> idiots, they will happily<br />
cost people their jobs and houses and see them hungry, just so the<br />
<strong>Democrats</strong> can avoid losing the ground they have taken in micromanaging<br />
our lives.</p>
<p></w></vide></w></forbisga></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/17/where-did-all-these-banks-get-all-this-excessive-money-to-loanitsmyunderstandingthat-the-federal-reserve-sets-money-policy-10/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Deficit reduction? Hardly</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/17/deficit-reduction-hardly/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/17/deficit-reduction-hardly/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 14:36:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Buffett Rule]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dick Cheney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Martin Phipps]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Neal Boortz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30808</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/17/2012 12:19 AM, Martin Phipps wrote: > On Apr 16, 9:15 pm, emoneyjoe wrote: >> On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:28:22 -0700, Lamont Cranston >> >> wrote: >>> On 4/13/2012 10:00 AM, Neal Boortz wrote: >>>> Looks like the Obama propagandists need to have a little pow-pow to hone >>>> their message on the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/17/2012 12:19 AM, <strong>Martin Phipps</strong> wrote:<br />
> On Apr 16, 9:15 pm, emoneyjoe <emoney ...@iglou.com> wrote:<br />
>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 16 Apr 2012 16:28:22 -0700, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong><br />
>><br />
>> <hewhokn ...@Penumbra.com> wrote:<br />
>>> On 4/13/2012 <strong>10</strong>:00 AM, <strong>Neal Boortz</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>> Looks like the Obama propagandists need to have a little pow-pow to hone<br />
>>>> their message on the <strong>Buffett Rule</strong>.  I mean, propaganda 101 is to have a<br />
>>>> clear message and repeat it over and over until people believe it to be<br />
>>>> true.  In this case we are talking about whether or not the <strong>Buffett Rule</strong><br />
>>>> will reduce the deficit.<br />
>><br />
>>> There is no doubt whatsover that it will, kook &#8212; by $5 billion a year.<br />
>><br />
>>        <strong>Congress</strong> has better things they could be doing<br />
>> than spending time on a bill that can only increase<br />
>> <strong>taxes</strong> by 15 dollars per person in the population<br />
>> when the annual deficit is 5,000 per.<br />
><br />
> &#8220;<strong>Reagan</strong> proved that deficits don&#8217;t matter&#8221; &#8211;<strong><acronym title="Dick"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> D&*$?%k</span></acronym> Cheney</strong><br />
><br />
> Martin</p>
<p>Who proved that Cheney was correct?</p>
<p></hewhokn></emoney></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/17/deficit-reduction-hardly/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>WALK SOFTLY BUT CARRY A BIG STICK</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/16/walk-softly-but-carry-a-big-stick/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/16/walk-softly-but-carry-a-big-stick/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 02:56:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BIG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CARRY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OWS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PARTY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richard Steel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SOFTLY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[STICK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TEA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WALK]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30800</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/16/2012 10:46 PM, Clave wrote: > &#8220;Richard Steel&#8221; wrote in message > news:28744b6a-4889-4190-93ba-444f1be18f17 @&#038;*$?%r32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com&#8230; >> : >>>>> Democrats in the Senate fail to get the 60 votes they need to move >>>>> forward with a measure that would set a minimum 30% tax on >>>>> millionaires >>>>> and billionaires. >> >>>> Good for the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/16/2012 <strong>10</strong>:46 PM, Clave wrote:<br />
> &#8220;<strong>Richard Steel</strong>&#8221; <rsteel2525 @aol.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:28744b6a-4889-4190-93ba-444f1be18f17<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>r32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>> :<br />
>>>>> <strong>Democrats</strong> in the Senate fail to get the 60 votes they need to move<br />
>>>>> forward with a measure that would set a minimum 30% tax on<br />
>>>>> millionaires<br />
>>>>> and billionaires.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Good for the Republicans.<br />
>><br />
>>> Heh.  Let&#8217;s see how good it is for them in November.<br />
>><br />
>> You guys were making that kind of noise two years ago&#8230;<br />
><br />
> You think there&#8217;s no buyers&#8217; remorse over that?<br />
><br />
> The Teabaggers are vanishing, caveman.<br />
><br />
> Jim<br />
><br />
><br />
*<strong>WALK</strong> <strong>SOFTLY</strong> BUT <strong>CARRY</strong> A <strong>BIG</strong> <strong>STICK</strong>*</p>
<p>The <strong>TEA</strong> <strong>PARTY</strong> is alive and well&#8230; but no need to camp out in a park.</p>
<p>We do it without silly Medieval and Renaissance Festival type of<br />
entertainment.  Drum circles are for a few hours on a Saturday to get a<br />
break from work, it&#8217;s NOT a way of life or career like <strong>OWS</strong> seems to think.</p>
<p></rsteel2525></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/16/walk-softly-but-carry-a-big-stick/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Where did ALL these banks get ALL this excessive money to    loan?,,It&#8217;smyunderstandingthattheFederal Reserve sets MONEY POLICY.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/16/where-did-all-these-banks-get-all-this-excessive-money-to-loanitsmyunderstandingthatthefederal-reserve-sets-money-policy/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/16/where-did-all-these-banks-get-all-this-excessive-money-to-loanitsmyunderstandingthatthefederal-reserve-sets-money-policy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 02:13:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BIG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PARTY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[POLICY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[REPUBLICANS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPENDERS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPENDING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TEA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[YES]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30792</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/16/2012 10:02 PM, jim wrote: > > > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> >> On 4/16/2012 5:06 PM, jim wrote: >>> >>> >>> Mike Smith wrote: >>> >>>>> >>>>> Tax receipts will fall faster than spending and after >>>>> a couple years of depression the voters will throw out the idiots >>>>> that brought the pox. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/16/2012 <strong>10</strong>:02 PM, jim wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>><br />
>> On 4/16/2012 5:06 PM, jim wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> Mike Smith wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Tax receipts will fall faster than spending and after<br />
>>>>> a couple years of depression the voters will throw out the idiots<br />
>>>>> that brought the pox.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> That has been happening since 2008 and the voters will take care of<br />
>>>> business this November.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Maybe they will.<br />
>>><br />
>>> But if voters <strong>change</strong> horses because they are expecting<br />
>>> deficit reduction they will be<br />
>>> in for a big surprise.<br />
>><br />
>> we &#8220;<strong>change</strong>&#8221; horses every 4 or 8 years and it makes no difference which<br />
>> we <strong>change</strong> to, because the the <strong>Federal</strong> Bureaucracy is NOT very different<br />
>> from one another.<br />
><br />
> Nevertheless, The federal deficit will continue to go up<br />
> no matter who is elected.<br />
><br />
> It is the private debt that is driving the deficit.</p>
<p>But who will continue to wast <strong>money</strong> like a drunken sailor, it will be<br />
<strong>Democrats</strong>, I think the <strong>TEA</strong> <strong>PARTY</strong> got the attention of the Republicans<br />
and if they do any big spending the <strong>TEA</strong> <strong>PARTY</strong> will turn out and get the<br />
<strong>BIG</strong> <strong>SPENDERS</strong> out of office.  <strong>YES</strong> the <strong>TEA</strong> <strong>PARTY</strong> has shown they will toss<br />
<strong>REPUBLICANS</strong> OUT OF <strong>OFFICE</strong> FOR <strong>BIG</strong> <strong>SPENDING</strong> just as fast as they will<br />
turn out and get rid of <strong>Democrats</strong>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/16/where-did-all-these-banks-get-all-this-excessive-money-to-loanitsmyunderstandingthatthefederal-reserve-sets-money-policy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A new excuse for gas prices .. credit cards!  &#8230;.Obama is creating his own problems.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/16/a-new-excuse-for-gas-prices-credit-cards-obama-is-creating-his-own-problems/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/16/a-new-excuse-for-gas-prices-credit-cards-obama-is-creating-his-own-problems/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:45:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ABC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Neal Boortz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30778</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/16/2012 12:29 PM, trotsky wrote: > On 4/16/12 11:18 AM, jim wrote: >> >> >> trotsky wrote: >>> >>> On 4/16/12 10:16 AM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>> In article , >>>> Neal Boortz wrote: >>>> >>>>> The ABC News story also failed to point out other facts about the >>>>> cost of >>>>> a gallon [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/16/2012 12:29 PM, trotsky wrote:<br />
> On 4/16/12 <strong>11</strong>:18 AM, jim wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> trotsky wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>> On 4/16/12 <strong>10</strong>:16 AM, BTR1701 wrote:<br />
>>>> In article<br />
<h201204091300 .q3A0P54l019810<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>WSB.com>,<br />
>>>>    <strong>Neal Boortz</strong><boortz @WSB.com>   wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> The <strong>ABC</strong> News story also failed to point out other facts about the<br />
>>>>> cost of<br />
>>>>> a gallon of gasoline.  The ObamaMedia is quick to blame the oil<br />
>>>>> companies<br />
>>>>> or the credit card companies, how about our own government?  With<br />
>>>>> boxers<br />
>>>>> in a bunch over 7 cents for the credit card swipe fee, let’s talk<br />
>>>>> about<br />
>>>>> the 18.4 cents that the federal government skims off of each gallon of<br />
>>>>> gas.  Add that to the state <strong>taxes</strong> also added into the price of a<br />
>>>>> gallon<br />
>>>>> of gas.  Those <strong>taxes</strong> can add anywhere from 8 cents (Alaska) to 49<br />
>>>>> cents<br />
>>>>> (<strong>New York</strong>) per gallon.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Yeah, it&#8217;s interesting to watch the lefties start screeching about how<br />
>>>> much the oil companies profit off the masses every time gas prices go<br />
>>>> up, but they never seem to mind the gazillions of government profits<br />
>>>> that result when gas prices rise.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Because if the government had more <strong>money</strong> coming in, the deficit might go<br />
>>> down?<br />
>><br />
>> you both are clueless idiots.<br />
>> the government gets less revenue when gas prices go up.<br />
><br />
><br />
> Cite?</p>
<p>then they need less <strong>money</strong> because travel on the roads is down and need<br />
less maintenance.</p>
<p>gas tax is like road use, when one is down so is the other.</p>
<p>The question is what will limited high dollar energy do to the economy,<br />
the economy will slow and so will the use of the highways.</p>
<p>Obama is creating his own problems.</p>
<p></boortz></h201204091300>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/16/a-new-excuse-for-gas-prices-credit-cards-obama-is-creating-his-own-problems/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A new excuse for gas prices .. credit cards!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/16/a-new-excuse-for-gas-prices-credit-cards/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/16/a-new-excuse-for-gas-prices-credit-cards/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:40:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ABC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Neal Boortz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Union]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=30776</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[> On 4/16/12 11:20 AM, cloud dreamer wrote: >> On 16/04/2012 1:44 PM, trotsky wrote: >>> On 4/16/12 10:16 AM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>> In article , >>>> Neal Boortz wrote: >>>> >>>>> The ABC News story also failed to point out other facts about the >>>>> cost of >>>>> a gallon of gasoline. The ObamaMedia [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>> On 4/16/12 <strong>11</strong>:20 AM, cloud dreamer wrote:<br />
>> On 16/04/2012 1:44 PM, trotsky wrote:<br />
>>> On 4/16/12 <strong>10</strong>:16 AM, BTR1701 wrote:<br />
>>>> In article<br />
<h201204091300 .q3A0P54l019810<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>WSB.com>,<br />
>>>> <strong>Neal Boortz</strong><boortz @WSB.com> wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> The <strong>ABC</strong> News story also failed to point out other facts about the<br />
>>>>> cost of<br />
>>>>> a gallon of gasoline. The ObamaMedia is quick to blame the oil<br />
>>>>> companies<br />
>>>>> or the credit card companies, how about our own government? With<br />
>>>>> boxers<br />
>>>>> in a bunch over 7 cents for the credit card swipe fee, let’s talk<br />
>>>>> about<br />
>>>>> the 18.4 cents that the federal government skims off of each gallon of<br />
>>>>> gas. Add that to the state taxes also added into the price of a gallon<br />
>>>>> of gas. Those taxes can add anywhere from 8 cents (Alaska) to 49 cents<br />
>>>>> (New York) per gallon.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Yeah, it&#8217;s interesting to watch the lefties start screeching about how<br />
>>>> much the oil companies profit off the masses every time gas prices go<br />
>>>> up, but they never seem to mind the gazillions of government profits<br />
>>>> that result when gas prices rise.<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> Because if the government had more <strong>money</strong> coming in, the deficit might go<br />
>>> down?<br />
>>><br />
>>> Perhaps you&#8217;d like revise your bullshit statement.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> You know, with all this whining over taxes, I have to wonder where they<br />
>> think the <strong>money</strong> for road and bridge construction and maintenance comes<br />
>> from.</p>
<p>According to the Democrat politicians, NO <strong>money</strong> is for fixing Bridges<br />
and Roads&#8230;..    we send it in but the bridges and Roads never seem to<br />
get fixed and we strangely need MORE <strong>TAXES</strong> to fix the roads and bridges.</p>
<p>somewhere between the government and the private contractor&#8230;  maybe at<br />
the <strong>UNION</strong> level, we lose the <strong>money</strong> and can&#8217;t fix the roads and bridges.</p>
<p>So then we need <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>TAXES</strong>.</p>
<p></boortz></h201204091300>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/04/16/a-new-excuse-for-gas-prices-credit-cards/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

