<?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; NEW</title>
	<atom:link href="http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/new/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, 08 Feb 2012 19:57:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The Federal Reserve actions contradict Obama&#8217;s words in the Stateof the Union speech.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/26/the-federal-reserve-actions-contradict-obamas-words-in-the-stateof-the-union-speech-3/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/26/the-federal-reserve-actions-contradict-obamas-words-in-the-stateof-the-union-speech-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 18:16:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=28272</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/26/2012 12:50 PM, jim wrote: > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> >> On 1/26/2012 11:40 AM, jim wrote: >>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Good luck, and I NOW know what you do, you subcontract to the government >>>> or fill-out regulation forms for the businesses in the private sector&#8230;. >>> >>> I&#8217;m suspect most businesses [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/26/2012 12:50 PM, jim wrote:<br />
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>><br />
>> On 1/26/2012 <strong>11</strong>:40 AM, jim wrote:<br />
>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Good luck, and I NOW know what you do, you subcontract to the government<br />
>>>> or fill-out regulation forms for the businesses in the private sector&#8230;.<br />
>>><br />
>>> I&#8217;m suspect most businesses can do their own paperwork. You make it<br />
>>> sound like if all regulation and forms were eliminated there would<br />
>>> be another 20 million people out of work.<br />
>><br />
>> 20 million government &#8220;workers&#8221; or government <strong>welfare</strong> employed people<br />
>> out of work.   They are employees but really just collecting <strong>welfare</strong> for<br />
>> showing up in an office.<br />
><br />
> Yeah but those workers don&#8217;t exist in reality &#8211; its all in your head.<br />
><br />
><br />
>><br />
>>> If forms and <strong>regulations</strong> were eliminated how much more production<br />
>>> would businesses output? And who would they sell this additional<br />
>>> production to?<br />
>><br />
>> There would be <strong>NEW</strong> businesses just for a start and the existing business<br />
>> would be able to concentrate their effort and energy and funds on<br />
>> producing and distributing their service or product&#8230;.  Each hour<br />
>> wasted on government mandated items and avoiding excessive government<br />
>> <strong>taxes</strong> and fines is an hour that can&#8217;t be used to be productive.<br />
><br />
><br />
> You didn&#8217;t answer my question.<br />
> You clearly can&#8217;t grasp what the question was.<br />
><br />
>  What good is more production and new business<br />
> when you don&#8217;t have buyers<br />
> for it??</p>
<p>Yes I did answer it, you cropped the answer and missed the meaning.</p>
<p>> Maybe if you tried running a business you<br />
> would understand this stuff.</p>
<p>Been there done that.</p>
<p>> Instead, it is like trying<br />
> to explain colors to<br />
> a blind man.</p>
<p>Yes that&#8217;s right, I&#8217;m explaining what paint is to a blind man.</p>
<p>If you really read and comprehended what I was saying you would put it<br />
all together and realize that if there are no wealthy to open and run<br />
and pay <strong>taxes</strong> on businesses that hire people, we will all be too poor to<br />
go out and eat.</p>
<p>OR</p>
<p><strong>Socialism</strong> and an all powerful government will make more of the working<br />
poor, out of work poor.   The incentive to work against my own best<br />
interest is just not there when you and government want to take all the<br />
benefits and micro manage my life.</p>
<p>Here is an idea for you <strong>Socialists</strong>, try getting a reverse income tax<br />
where all people get to keep the first $75,000 tax free and the<br />
remainder is taxed at 100%</p>
<p>Then just send each of us a e-Calendar that has a schedule to micro<br />
manage our lives and diets and health care.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/26/the-federal-reserve-actions-contradict-obamas-words-in-the-stateof-the-union-speech-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Federal Reserve actions contradict Obama&#8217;s words in the State of the Union speech.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/26/the-federal-reserve-actions-contradict-obamas-words-in-the-state-of-the-union-speech-3/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/26/the-federal-reserve-actions-contradict-obamas-words-in-the-state-of-the-union-speech-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:26:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the poor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=28270</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/26/2012 11:40 AM, jim wrote: > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: > >> >> Good luck, and I NOW know what you do, you subcontract to the government >> or fill-out regulation forms for the businesses in the private sector&#8230;. > > I&#8217;m suspect most businesses can do their own paperwork. You make it > sound like [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/26/2012 <strong>11</strong>:40 AM, jim wrote:<br />
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
><br />
>><br />
>> Good luck, and I NOW know what you do, you subcontract to the government<br />
>> or fill-out regulation forms for the businesses in the private sector&#8230;.<br />
><br />
> I&#8217;m suspect most businesses can do their own paperwork. You make it<br />
> sound like if all regulation and forms were eliminated there would<br />
> be another 20 million people out of work.</p>
<p>20 million government &#8220;workers&#8221; or government <strong>welfare</strong> employed people<br />
out of work.   They are employees but really just collecting <strong>welfare</strong> for<br />
showing up in an office.</p>
<p>> If forms and <strong>regulations</strong> were eliminated how much more production<br />
> would businesses output? And who would they sell this additional<br />
> production to?</p>
<p>There would be <strong>NEW</strong> businesses just for a start and the existing business<br />
would be able to concentrate their effort and energy and funds on<br />
producing and distributing their service or product&#8230;.  Each hour<br />
wasted on government mandated items and avoiding excessive government<br />
<strong>taxes</strong> and fines is an hour that can&#8217;t be used to be productive.</p>
<p>> I&#8217;ve seen no evidence of <strong>increased</strong> federal regulation or <strong>taxes</strong> in<br />
> recent years. Maybe if you stopped dreaming about starting a<br />
> business and actually tried it you would have a more realistic<br />
> view of how it works.</p>
<p>Been in plenty of them up to the time Obama was elected and started<br />
adding more.  I decided to take an extended vacation.  I am happy to<br />
take time off and not help Obama screw me, I relax and earn less and pay<br />
less tax and I live like I&#8217;m poor, until Obama and his <strong>Socialists</strong> are<br />
gone or I drop dead.   So I don&#8217;t need to work hard, just to hire people<br />
like you, and that means Obama makes even less tax <strong>money</strong>.</p>
<p>Even better is that I don&#8217;t go out to restaurants, after all we should<br />
all be poor right, and <strong>the poor</strong> don&#8217;t go out all the time? I have<br />
avoided restaurants and movies like the plague, ever since Obama took<br />
office.  I always ate out before but my plan is to live poor so that we<br />
will all be living alike and you have no reason to hate me, or to ask me<br />
for a job or ask me to pay more tax, you can go create your own jobs.</p>
<p>> The restaurant business is probably one of the most govt<br />
> inspected and regulated businesses there is, yet there<br />
> doesn&#8217;t seem to be any shortage of restaurants.</p>
<p>And fewer successful ones every day&#8230;.</p>
<p>> I don&#8217;t ever<br />
> recall being turned away from a restaurant because it was<br />
> too busy filling out forms.</p>
<p>The door is locked, they can&#8217;t feed you and fill out forms at the same time.</p>
<p>> Restaurant owners don&#8217;t start or end a business based on<br />
> how much paperwork there is.</p>
<p>Or inspections and how many wash hands signs they have posted&#8230;.<br />
I&#8217;m telling you &#8220;I&#8221; am NOT interested in running hot dog cart today.<br />
Much less putting $100,000 into a kitchen and then having no <strong>money</strong> left<br />
over after bills because of the cost of <strong>regulations</strong> and <strong>taxes</strong> and the rest.</p>
<p>> They base those decisions on<br />
> how many customers they expect will walk thru the doors.</p>
<p>And then they charge enough to stay opened and if they have to hire<br />
extra people(and health <strong>insurance</strong>)  or pay an outside business to do the<br />
work like lawyers and maybe professional dietitian menu writers to<br />
follow the <strong>regulations</strong> then the cost of the meal rises and fewer people<br />
walk thru those doors.</p>
<p>Food taste is everything in a restaurant,  how do you attract customers<br />
when you have government telling what foods and seasoning you can serve?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/26/the-federal-reserve-actions-contradict-obamas-words-in-the-state-of-the-union-speech-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama has created a financial mess.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/19/obama-has-created-a-financial-mess/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/19/obama-has-created-a-financial-mess/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 21:07:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CNN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DIABOLICAL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EVIL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HOUSE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MSNBC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[People Republic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SENATE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=27956</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/19/2012 3:35 PM, Bret Cahill wrote: >>>> This should not be surprising. Jesus supported separation of church >>>> and state. >> >>> Ok, ok, the order of the 1st two was wrong. >> >>> http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/cnn-rick-perry-end-campaign-141912&#8230; >> >>> Bret Cahill >> >> I supposed you kick dogs when they are in the dirt too. > [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/19/2012 3:35 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:<br />
>>>> This should not be surprising.  Jesus supported separation of church<br />
>>>> and state.<br />
>><br />
>>> Ok, ok, the order of the 1st two was wrong.<br />
>><br />
>>> <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/cnn-rick-perry-end-campaign-141912..." >http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/cnn-rick-perry-end-campaign-141912&#8230;</a><br />
>><br />
>>> Bret Cahill<br />
>><br />
>> I supposed you kick dogs when they are in the dirt too.<br />
><br />
> You suppose wrong.<br />
><br />
>> You cannot know how depressed many of us conservatives are [if I'm any<br />
>> measure].<br />
><br />
> 1.  Jesus wasn&#8217;t about hate, especially hating Christians who happen<br />
> to be black.<br />
><br />
> 2.  Jesus was clear that you should pray in private, not on the<br />
> campaign stump.<br />
><br />
>> If you have any assets [speaking to any fellow conservatives], you&#8217;d<br />
>> better start sending them overseas to Swizerland or wherever now.<br />
>> Think of this&#8230;when Obama has 4 more years,<br />
><br />
> Who said Mitt can&#8217;t get elected?  Rasmussen shows Romney beating Obama<br />
> by 15 points.<br />
><br />
>> and no longer any concern<br />
>> over re-election, he is gonna have a field day with America&#8230;turning<br />
>> it into another &#8216;People&#8217;s Republic&#8217;.<br />
><br />
>> I&#8217;m not sure what we expected anyway.  I mean, THEY own the media<br />
>> now.  That&#8217;s like an IV directly into the brainstream of the American<br />
>> public [the younger, more naive set anyway...those that still watch<br />
>> <strong>CNN</strong> and <strong>MSNBC</strong>].<br />
>><br />
>> There are so many <strong>DIABOLICAL</strong> things going on just now, well,<br />
>> <strong>DIABOLICAL</strong> speaks for itself.  It is like <strong>EVIL</strong> must have it&#8217;s day or<br />
>> something [in the world].  I can&#8217;t explain it [the perfect storm of<br />
>> sweeping <strong>change</strong> to Communism-lite].<br />
><br />
>> Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Lincoln, Hamilton&#8230;all of<br />
>> &#8216;em&#8230;turning over in total disbelief in the graves I&#8217;m sure.<br />
>><br />
>> America.  Oh well, it was a good experiment while it lasted.  Maybe<br />
>> there&#8217;s a few last hurrays&#8217; before she totall succumbs; how knows.<br />
>> Something this big and powerful probably won&#8217;t die quickly.  But the<br />
>> liberal progressive has it by the Jugular now.  Hispanics, blacks,<br />
>> Jews, women [still can't figure them completely...why...e tu<br />
>> Brute]&#8230;and the few white liberals&#8230;all combining for a <strong>NEW</strong> majority<br />
>> that means the death Knell to the surviving progeny of the creators of<br />
>> this nation.<br />
><br />
>> We are the Alamo now&#8230;and no Sam Houston to save the later day.<br />
>> Our children will curse us of course, when the promise of socialism<br />
>> falls through and we find the same old tyrannies in it&#8217;s place we&#8217;ve<br />
>> seen before.  They&#8217;ll wonder why we weren&#8217;t stronger, why we &#8216;allowed&#8217;<br />
>> this to happen.<br />
><br />
> How can Obama be a socialist?  He&#8217;s been in office 3 years and has yet<br />
> to hike taxes on the rich.</p>
<p>Every dollar he has spent has to be paid for with <strong>TAXES</strong>, so all that<br />
deficit spending $5trillion dollars, ate tax hikes.</p>
<p>You the tax payer will be called upon to pay for that and pay for all<br />
the <strong>money</strong> printed by the <strong>Federal</strong> reserve in QE1/2/3</p>
<p>Obama has yet to get a budget passed&#8230;.   even when his own party and<br />
all his people ran the <strong>HOUSE</strong>/<strong>SENATE</strong> and the WhiteHouse.</p>
<p>Obama has created a financial mess.</p>
<p>><br />
> Bret Cahill<br />
></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/19/obama-has-created-a-financial-mess/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If you work for a living you pay the highest taxes! Romney Says His Effective Tax Rate Is &#8216;Probably&#8217; 15%</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/17/if-you-work-for-a-living-you-pay-the-highest-taxes-romney-says-his-effective-tax-rate-is-probably-15/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/17/if-you-work-for-a-living-you-pay-the-highest-taxes-romney-says-his-effective-tax-rate-is-probably-15/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:22:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ASHLEY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FLORENCE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ITEM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MICHAEL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitt Romney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PARKER]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Published January]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SALES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SHEAR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=27780</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/17/2012 12:42 PM, Sid9 wrote: > Romney Says His Effective Tax Rate Is &#8216;Probably&#8217; 15% > > By MICHAEL D. SHEAR and ASHLEY PARKER > > Published: January 17, 2012 > > FLORENCE, S.C. &#8211; Under new pressure to release his personal income tax > returns, Mitt Romney on Tuesday acknowledged that he pays [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/17/2012 12:42 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
> Romney Says His Effective Tax Rate Is &#8216;Probably&#8217; 15%<br />
><br />
> By <strong>MICHAEL</strong> D. <strong>SHEAR</strong> and <strong>ASHLEY</strong> <strong>PARKER</strong><br />
><br />
> Published: January 17, 2012<br />
><br />
> <strong>FLORENCE</strong>, S.C. &#8211; Under new pressure to release his personal income tax<br />
> returns, <strong>Mitt Romney</strong> on Tuesday acknowledged that he pays an effective<br />
> tax rate of about 15 percent because so much of his fortune comes from<br />
> investments he made in the past.</p>
<p>So why do Liberals want a tax <strong>system</strong> which allows the politicians to<br />
play favorites, we should all pay the same rates&#8230;.  that would end<br />
this little tax advantage.  One way is to end Income tax&#8230;..  and in<br />
its place, put in a <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>ITEM</strong> <strong>SALES</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> and tax every one at 15%.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/17/if-you-work-for-a-living-you-pay-the-highest-taxes-romney-says-his-effective-tax-rate-is-probably-15/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Step Backward for Economic Freedom&gt;&gt;&gt;they are in power and that power is where the wealth is coalescing around.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/15/a-step-backward-for-economic-freedomthey-are-in-power-and-that-power-is-where-the-wealth-is-coalescing-around/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/15/a-step-backward-for-economic-freedomthey-are-in-power-and-that-power-is-where-the-wealth-is-coalescing-around/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Jan 2012 17:39:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[demand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EIC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ITEM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEON]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[share]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wealth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=27642</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/15/2012 12:04 PM, NEON China BLUE wrote: > In article , ray wrote: > >> More wealth is being concentrated to the top because there are more >> products to purchase. Cell phones, computers, entertainment devices, > > No, idiot. In the 1970s central banks hit on the idea that they could control > [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/15/2012 12:04 PM, <strong>NEON</strong> <strong>China</strong> BLUE wrote:<br />
> In article <jeutvv02e32 @news1.newsguy.com>, ray <xxxrayted @aol.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> More <strong>wealth</strong> is being concentrated to the top because there are more<br />
>> products to purchase.  Cell phones, computers, entertainment devices,<br />
><br />
> No, idiot. In the 1970s central banks hit on the idea that they could control<br />
> inflation by creating minirecessions every time the earned income workers<br />
> started to earn more <strong>money</strong> as a group. When that happens interest rates are<br />
> raised to force business growth to stall or reverse which increases <strong>unemployment</strong><br />
> which creates an excess supply of labour which devalues it which prevents earned<br />
> income workers from getting higher wages as a group.<br />
><br />
> The technique was perfected during the 1980s. Since then the combination of real<br />
> and synthetic recessions has kept inflation low and earnings for most people<br />
> lower.</p>
<p>I see the point, government screws it&#8217;s poor, but they always do that.<br />
Those with <strong>power</strong> are always wanting to expand that <strong>power</strong> and become<br />
more <strong>secure</strong> and wealthy.</p>
<p>> At the same time productivity has been leaping right along, increasing profits<br />
> for businesses. Because of central bank created recessions, businesses are<br />
> rarely forced to <strong>share</strong> those profits with wage earners (and most productivity<br />
> improvements are done by the wage earners); instead the profits get funnelled<br />
> into a small number of managers as capital gains and dividends (portfolio<br />
> income) and capital investors.</p>
<p>You have correctly picked the Government and it&#8217;s government created<br />
Central bank as the villain.</p>
<p>> Along with increasing portfolio income, <strong>taxes</strong> on portfolio income have decreased<br />
> while <strong>taxes</strong> on earned income (except at the lowest wages where <strong>EIC</strong> kicks in)<br />
> have <strong>increased</strong>. Other expenses have <strong>increased</strong> as businesses are able to shed<br />
> benefits (due to artificial labour gluts).</p>
<p>The people in <strong>power</strong> are the problem, you have it backwards, you think<br />
they are rich therefore they are in positions of <strong>power</strong>&#8230;.  that&#8217;s<br />
incorrect or backwards, they are in <strong>power</strong> and that <strong>power</strong> is where the<br />
<strong>wealth</strong> is coalescing around.</p>
<p>Cut their <strong>power</strong> and you cut the reasons the rich are drawn to mingle<br />
with the low paid government workers and buy them off.   They are NOT of<br />
the same <strong>wealth</strong> class so you just said.  That means they are together<br />
for some other reason than to socialize.</p>
<p>> So the economic necking should be no surprise.</p>
<p>As I said they are &#8220;friendships&#8221; of convenience, the wealthy <strong>secure</strong> more<br />
<strong>power</strong> by intermingling with the people &#8220;YOU&#8221; are giving more <strong>power</strong> and<br />
tax <strong>money</strong>. The correct plan would be to strip the government of <strong>power</strong> so<br />
the wealthy class are less interested in sucking up to the government<br />
worker class.  When they(Government and the wealthy) combine and work<br />
against us WE(the workers) we are beaten and with people like you that<br />
want to give them more <strong>power</strong> to tax and more regulation <strong>power</strong> we are<br />
truly at risk.  This is a creation of your kind&#8230;.  We have you to<br />
thank for the current government <strong>power</strong> that has created this middle<br />
class economic morass.</p>
<p>> People with earned income (most<br />
> people) are impoverished until they&#8217;re finally poor enough to get the benefit of<br />
> <strong>EIC</strong>, uncollectable debts, and <strong>welfare</strong> like food stamps and emergency room health<br />
> care. People with portfolio income and/or vital specialised skills that can<br />
> <strong>demand</strong> higher wages (few people) are enriched at the expense of everyone else.</p>
<p>I already posted the solution, drop all &#8220;profits&#8221; to the same 15% flat<br />
rate as the rich pay for their &#8220;investments&#8221; and capital gains.</p>
<p>Or better yet, make it a 15% <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>ITEM</strong> sales tax and remove the <strong>Income<br />
Tax</strong> from the constitution.</p>
<p>> One obvious solution is to increase <strong>taxes</strong> on the rich and use that <strong>money</strong> to<br />
> provide services to everyone else.</p>
<p>That just gives the people you complained about&#8230;.  MORE <strong>power</strong>.</p>
<p>> Unfortunately useful idiots like you have<br />
> been brainwashed that higher <strong>taxes</strong> will be levied against you to provide for<br />
> your fellow poor.</p>
<p>NO&#8230;.  we realize that when the government is shooting people like<br />
yourself in the head, giving the government more bullets is NOT the<br />
solution.</p>
<p>You&#8217;re the one who&#8217;s brainwashed, why allow Government to raise <strong>taxes</strong><br />
and give those same government people that did this to us, more <strong>power</strong><br />
over us?</p>
<p>That just seems stupid.</p>
<p></xxxrayted></jeutvv02e32></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/15/a-step-backward-for-economic-freedomthey-are-in-power-and-that-power-is-where-the-wealth-is-coalescing-around/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>US Marines defile dead Afghans on camera &lt; &lt;&lt; The respect and elite aspect will be replace with mediocrity and Social engineering.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/12/us-marines-defile-dead-afghans-on-camera/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/12/us-marines-defile-dead-afghans-on-camera/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 20:50:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AMERICA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOOD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MARINES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mediocrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[REPRESENTATIVE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Semper Fi Agreed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WISHED]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=27486</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/12/2012 2:01 PM, liberal wrote: > On Jan 12, 1:38 pm, Bible Studies with Satan > wrote: >> Ken wrote: >>> Möebius Pretzel wrote: >>>> US Marines defile dead Afghans on camera >> >>>> >> >>> Is this any worse than having someone cut your head off while your arms >>> are tied behind [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/12/2012 2:01 PM, liberal wrote:<br />
> On Jan 12, 1:38 pm, Bible Studies with Satan <bi ...@hotmail.com><br />
> wrote:<br />
>> Ken wrote:<br />
>>> Möebius Pretzel wrote:<br />
>>>> <strong>US</strong> Marines defile dead Afghans on camera<br />
>><br />
>>>> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/a4UPPaHbhkY&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /><br />
>><br />
>>> Is this any worse than having someone cut your head off while your arms<br />
>>> are tied behind you?  I also seem to recall bodies being hung from a<br />
>>> bridge and having been set afire.  As far as I am concerned, &#8220;Piss on them.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>> Semper Fi<br />
>><br />
>> Agreed! <strong>US</strong> Marines are no better than Arab <acronym title="assholes"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym>.<br />
><br />
> Many former Marines are now mercenaries: kill for <strong>money</strong>.</p>
<p>Wasn&#8217;t it Liberals that want to allow everyone to serve in the military?<br />
If they can&#8217;t toss out <acronym title="Gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> G&*$?%s</span></acronym> and degenerates that <acronym title="fuck"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> f&*$?%k</span></acronym> animals and wife<br />
beaters and porn stars and pedophiles, then you have to expect that you<br />
could get *WHAT YOU <strong>WISHED</strong> FOR*</p>
<p>Actually I would expect the <strong>GOOD</strong> <strong>MARINES</strong> to leave in larger numbers as<br />
the mentally and sexually deficient and disturbed numbers rise.   The<br />
respect and elite aspect will be replace with <strong>mediocrity</strong> and Social<br />
engineering.</p>
<p>Te Democrat <strong>Socialists</strong> are creating a *<strong>NEW</strong> <strong>MILITARY</strong> THAT&#8217;S MORE*<br />
*<strong>REPRESENTATIVE</strong> OF <strong>AMERICA</strong>*, how do you like it so far.</p>
<p>This is what happens when you turn the military into another government<br />
<strong>welfare</strong> jobs program for the hopelessly <strong>unemployed</strong> dregs of society.</p>
<p>>> &#8211;<br />
>> new video!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-Px2Hi7ZA4</p>
<p></bi></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/12/us-marines-defile-dead-afghans-on-camera/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Alaska&#8217;s credit rating is A Rated due to Govenor Palin&#8217;s Trickle-Down Tutalage</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/09/alaskas-credit-rating-is-a-rated-due-to-govenor-palins-trickle-down-tutalage-3/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/09/alaskas-credit-rating-is-a-rated-due-to-govenor-palins-trickle-down-tutalage-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 17:47:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dodd Frank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LAW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Sun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yoorghis Jurgis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=27224</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/9/2012 12:28 AM, Larry Hewitt wrote: > On 1/8/2012 11:41 PM, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: >> On Sun, 08 Jan 2012 19:20:22 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty >> wrote: >> >>>> Name a policy that Obama has implemented that caused ANY of the >>>> present disaster >>>> >>> Dodd Frank&#8230;. >> >> Dodd/Frank was SUBVERTED by the Republican [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/9/2012 12:28 AM, Larry Hewitt wrote:<br />
> On 1/8/2012 <strong>11</strong>:41 PM, <a href="mailto:Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net">Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
>> <strong>On Sun</strong>, 08 Jan 2012 19:20:22 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com>  wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> Name a policy that Obama has implemented that caused ANY of the<br />
>>>> present disaster<br />
>>>><br />
>>> <strong>Dodd Frank</strong>&#8230;.<br />
>><br />
>> Dodd/Frank was SUBVERTED by the Republican congress<br />
>><br />
>> Dodd and Frank were minority members<br />
>><br />
>> Explain how they implemented the law.<br />
>><br />
>  A recent report states that 95% of companies covered by <strong>Dodd Frank</strong> are<br />
> not in compliance.<br />
><br />
> Repugs in the House watered penalties down so far that defiance pays.<br />
><br />
> Larry</p>
<p>The <strong>LAW</strong> simply created more government regulatory agencies and <strong>NEW</strong><br />
powers  to write <strong>10</strong>,000++ pages of Regulations&#8230;.  the endless<br />
<strong>regulations</strong> have STOPPED any new interest in starting a business in the<br />
<strong>USA</strong>.</p>
</thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/09/alaskas-credit-rating-is-a-rated-due-to-govenor-palins-trickle-down-tutalage-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sometimes you eat the bear, and sometimes the bear eats you!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/06/sometimes-you-eat-the-bear-and-sometimes-the-bear-eats-you/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/06/sometimes-you-eat-the-bear-and-sometimes-the-bear-eats-you/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2012 01:47:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MEDICARE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=27106</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/6/2012 6:33 PM, Bull in a China Blue Shop wrote: > In article &#60;4F074A1B.8010109 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com>, > BeamMeUpScotty wrote: > >> On 1/6/2012 1:59 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote: >>> On 1/5/2012 5:16 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> On 1/5/2012 8:06 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote: >>>>> On 1/4/2012 5:31 PM, CB @&#038;*$?%PrayForMe.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Recess appointments [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/6/2012 6:33 PM, Bull in a <strong>China</strong> Blue Shop wrote:<br />
> In article &lt;4F074A1B.8010109<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>,<br />
>  BeamMeUpScotty
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On 1/6/2012 1:59 PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
>>> On 1/5/2012 5:16 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>> On 1/5/2012 8:06 PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>> On 1/4/2012 5:31 PM, <a href="mailto:CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com">CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com</a> wrote:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Recess appointments have been occurring for years, dumbfuck.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> You don&#8217;t know what a Marxist is.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The difference is they actually happen during a recess&#8230;.<br />
>>><br />
>>> &#8230;as <strong>Congress</strong> is in now.<br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> euphemistically I might say the Senate is always &#8220;out to lunch&#8221;  but on<br />
>> the books they were technically in session when Obama made his recess<br />
>> appointment.<br />
><br />
> I look forward to the Republicans explaining during an election year why they<br />
> were blocking a consumer advocate.<br />
><br />
Because it&#8217;s a government boondoggle and one that would grow and cost<br />
more and more and more LIKE <strong>MEDICARE</strong> and it would be cheaper for the<br />
consumers to close the <strong>NEW</strong> government department and accept any small<br />
loss they have after suing the the companies cheating them.</p>
<p>Sometimes you eat the bear, and sometimes the bear eats you!</p>
</thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2012/01/06/sometimes-you-eat-the-bear-and-sometimes-the-bear-eats-you/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Still&#8230;down sizing, layoffs better than a Boobuh bailout</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/27/still-down-sizing-layoffs-better-than-a-boobuh-bailout/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/27/still-down-sizing-layoffs-better-than-a-boobuh-bailout/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2011 15:08:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libertarian Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real Estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stephen Hawking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[YORK]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=26588</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 12/27/2011 10:02 AM, CB @&#038;*$?%PrayForMe.com wrote: > Sears to close 100 to 120 Kmart, Sears stores > > Retailer blames terrible holiday season, especially for big-ticket > items > > NEW YORK — Sears Holdings Corp. plans to close between 100 and 120 > Sears and Kmart stores after poor sales during the holidays, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 12/27/2011 <strong>10</strong>:02 AM, <a href="mailto:CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com">CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com</a> wrote:<br />
> Sears to close 100 to 120 Kmart, Sears stores<br />
><br />
> Retailer blames terrible holiday season, especially for big-ticket<br />
> items<br />
><br />
> <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>YORK</strong> — Sears Holdings Corp. plans to close between 100 and 120<br />
> Sears and Kmart stores after poor sales during the holidays, the most<br />
> crucial time of year for retailers.<br />
></p>
<p>Surprise, Surprise, Surprise Sargent Carter&#8230;.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve been telling people for all three years of Obama that he wasn&#8217;t<br />
going solve our problems with <strong>HIS</strong> SOCIALISM and REDISTRIBUTION.</p>
<p>The <strong>Real Estate</strong> crash and burn is still getting worse as real Estate<br />
prices continue to fall.</p>
<p>What ever the Question is, <strong>Socialism</strong> is NOT the answer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/27/still-down-sizing-layoffs-better-than-a-boobuh-bailout/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I&#8217;ll show you mine if you show us yours?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/23/ill-show-you-mine-if-you-show-us-yours-11/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/23/ill-show-you-mine-if-you-show-us-yours-11/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2011 21:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CHOSE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[INTENDED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PART]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RIGHTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[text]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNLESS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USSC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yoorghis Jurgis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=26506</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 12/23/2011 3:15 PM, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: > On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 13:17:34 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: > >>>> There is the Constitution&#8230;. it delegates the powers. >>> >>> Interpreted by who? >> >> Used by the courts, but written and interpreted by the Legislature. > > That&#8217;s Crazy talk ! ! > > [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 12/<strong>23</strong>/2011 3:15 PM, <a href="mailto:Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net">Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
> On Fri, <strong>23</strong> Dec 2011 13:17:34 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>>>> There is the <strong>Constitution</strong>&#8230;.   it delegates the powers.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Interpreted by who?<br />
>><br />
>> Used by the courts, but written and interpreted by the Legislature.<br />
><br />
> That&#8217;s Crazy talk ! !<br />
><br />
> Legislatures enact law&#8230;.all kinds.</p>
<p>do you understand what you write when you are a Legislator?</p>
<p>You have to understand what you write so that you can get the law to<br />
mean exactly what you have written&#8230;.   That way it needs NO further<br />
interpretation, just comprehension.</p>
<p>But should others have difficulty with the law then the law needs to be<br />
rewritten and only the Legislature can do that.</p>
<p>Refer to Article I, Section 1.  of the U.S. constitution</p>
<p>> When challenges to the law arise, the judiciary is called on to hear<br />
> cases coming before it.  Certain issues of laws (all kinds) can have<br />
> issues that need to be resolved via an appelate <strong>system</strong>.</p>
<p>Jurisdiction is one&#8230;..  if it is NOT a legitimate legally created law<br />
they have NO jurisdiction.   So a law that I write would be out of the<br />
courts jurisdiction because it is NOT really a U.S. law.</p>
<p>I suppose they could try to say it&#8217;s unconstitutional since I don&#8217;t have<br />
the constitutional <strong>power</strong> to write a law.  But the constitution has no<br />
provision for a law being unconstitutional.</p>
<p>It therefore must be a jurisdiction problem.  The law would not fall<br />
with in the supreme courts jurisdiction(being as I can&#8217;t write <strong>Federal</strong><br />
law) and they would NOT hear the case.</p>
<p>> IF those laws rise to levels of issues of enough significance, the<br />
> <strong>USSC</strong> can <strong>CHOSE</strong> to hear them if THEY determine a case merits an<br />
> &#8220;interpretation&#8221;.  (judicial review)<br />
></p>
<p>They don&#8217;t &#8220;interpret&#8221; the law or the constitution.  They <strong>rule</strong> on a case<br />
and file opinions.</p>
<p>> Cases involving enacted law can, and does, bring challenges as to the<br />
> constitutionality of any, or ALL of the legislation.</p>
<p>What is &#8220;Constitutionality&#8221;&#8230;.   Define it.</p>
<p>> The court MAY choose to <strong>rule</strong> the entire act unconstitutional;<br />
How can they <strong>rule</strong> on something like &#8220;unconstitutional&#8221;  when the<br />
constitution doesn&#8217;t allow for anything to be unconstitutional, the<br />
constitution treats this as a jurisdictional problem.  What court has<br />
what <strong>power</strong> and The federal Supreme court can&#8217;t hear a case derived from<br />
a law that is not a legally instituted <strong>Federal</strong> law.</p>
<p>What act or article or <strong>amendment</strong> or law?   And what does<br />
unconstitutional mean and where in the constitution did it bestow that<br />
<strong>power</strong> onto the courts?  I see the part where the courts can accept or<br />
reject jurisdiction but I see nothing about them making laws or making<br />
constitutional amendments or declaring laws unconstitutional.</p>
<p>You have affirmed what the court says it can do but NOT told us under<br />
what act or article or <strong>amendment</strong> or law, they are given <strong>power</strong> to do it.</p>
<p>> , or,<br />
> Rule that parts may be unconstitutional,</p>
<p>NO they can&#8217;t &#8220;<strong>rule</strong>&#8221;  that part of a law is unconstitutional.   They<br />
either take the case and the law or they claim that it&#8217;s NOT within the<br />
courts jurisdiction.  If they take the case then the law it is based on<br />
is legitimate.</p>
<p>> OR&#8212;made a determination of<br />
> what the legislature &#8220;intended&#8221; if it isn&#8217;t clear.</p>
<p>The Legislature determines what they intend when they write the law.<br />
There is NO more intent beyond the <strong>text</strong>, if it is vague then the <strong>text</strong><br />
needs to be clarified.  That is done by the Legislature.  Until that<br />
time the law could not be within the courts jurisdiction because they<br />
can&#8217;t tell you what its intent is.</p>
<p>> The legislature CAN get rid of the law&#8212;-and start over.  Nothing<br />
> says they have to keep it</p>
<p>Exactly, because the Legislature has all the <strong>power</strong> to legislate.<br />
Article. I.<br />
Section. 1.</p>
<p>*All* legislative Powers herein granted <strong>shall</strong> be vested in a Congress of<br />
the <strong>United States</strong>, which <strong>shall</strong> consist of a Senate and House of<br />
Representatives.</p>
<p>NO courts are given legislative <strong>power</strong>.</p>
<p>><br />
> BUT&#8212;when the Court &#8220;interprets&#8221; what the law &#8220;means&#8221;, or what <strong>PART</strong><br />
> of the law means, or what is <strong>INTENDED</strong> (or would happen)&#8212;That&#8217;s tough<br />
> <acronym title="shit"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> s&*$?%t</span></acronym>.<br />
></p>
<p>Actually it is NOT being tried by the law that you were charged with, if<br />
it has been interpreted it is a different law. And that new law the<br />
interpreted law is explained to the jury AFTER you have been arrested<br />
for the crime.   So the <strong>NEW</strong> law is ex-post facto and according to the<br />
constitution that is NOT allowed.</p>
<p>>> When a court can&#8217;t use a written law because it&#8217;s vague or<br />
>> unintelligible, they can throw out the case and that will either force<br />
>> congress to fix it, or they can ignore it and get voted out of office.<br />
><br />
> The case wouldn&#8217;t have gotten to the <strong>USSC</strong> <strong>UNLESS</strong> the case was a valid<br />
> issue case.</p>
<p>Sure&#8230;.</p>
<p>><br />
> There are more than one option (like the silly one you gave) in<br />
> dealing with a law.<br />
><br />
> Since 200 years of application of the doctrine of review&#8211;there has<br />
> never been an &#8220;either, or&#8221; demand&#8211;simply because: &#8220;The legisature<br />
> wrote it&#8221;</p>
<p>200 years of breaking the law makes it legal?</p>
<p>> The whole purpose of Marbury was to eliminate the legislature&#8217;s <strong>power</strong><br />
> to enact unconstitutional law.  Simply enacting law (by a legislature)<br />
> does not make it a constitutional law.</p>
<p>The purpose was to find out if the <strong>Supreme Court</strong> had Jurisdiction.<br />
They decided they had no jurisdiction because the laws used to base the<br />
case on were NOT binding because they violated the constitution.  The<br />
laws and therefore the legal case was out of the jurisdiction of the<br />
supreme court.   So they decided the law was conflicting in how it was<br />
created or was otherwise in conflict with other constitutional powers or<br />
<strong>RIGHTS</strong>.   All they could do was to say the case had no merit in that<br />
court.   But they added their &#8220;opinion&#8221;  that suggested the law was<br />
unconstitutional, and that created a new class of laws.   They are laws<br />
that the court can&#8217;t hear cases on because they don&#8217;t have any <strong>power</strong> to<br />
hear cases outside of <strong>Federal</strong> powers and laws that are NOT ligament are<br />
outside of <strong>Federal</strong> powers.</p>
<p>> The entire idea behind the bullshit you&#8217;re doing is&#8211;that <strong>power</strong> was<br />
> stripped away from states, corporations and the wealth class to abuse<br />
> rights and priviliges that <strong>money</strong> and <strong>power</strong> control.<br />
><br />
> David McIntosh (as a congressman) hated the fact that the central<br />
> government had the &#8220;right&#8221; to negate <strong>power</strong> of a state (or government)<br />
> to pass and enforce laws that HE wanted.<br />
><br />
> His excuse was rooted in &#8220;literal interpretation&#8221; or &#8220;originalism&#8221; and<br />
> that hasn&#8217;t been accepted doctine in the 30+ years he&#8217;s been crying<br />
> and whining.<br />
><br />
> H</p>
<p>Call it what you want but the truth is NOT a &#8220;conceptual choice&#8221;  What I<br />
am saying is simply that the courts can&#8217;t make Legislation, it&#8217;s written<br />
in the constitution in plain black and white.</p>
<p>If you think lying and ignoring laws and constitutional amendments is<br />
the way to run a government then that&#8217;s your own political choice but<br />
when you base your entire legal <strong>system</strong> on lies, it tells me that it&#8217;s<br />
NOT a legal <strong>system</strong> at all, it&#8217;s a political arm of the political powers.</p>
<p>If you make everything political you will always have a political outcome.</p>
</thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/23/ill-show-you-mine-if-you-show-us-yours-11/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I&#8217;ll show you mine if you show us yours?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/23/ill-show-you-mine-if-you-show-us-yours-5/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/23/ill-show-you-mine-if-you-show-us-yours-5/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2011 14:37:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Madison Show]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Thu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[share]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[text]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yoorghis Jurgis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=26480</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 12/23/2011 8:50 AM, NoBody wrote: > On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 11:28:19 -0700, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: > >> On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 08:22:15 -0500, NoBody wrote: >> +&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;+ This was my text Beam Me Up Scotty and I am proud of my genius that share. So please get the attributes correct, I get [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 12/<strong>23</strong>/2011 8:50 AM, NoBody wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Thu</strong>, 22 Dec 2011 <strong>11</strong>:28:19 -0700, <a href="mailto:Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net">Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> <strong>On Thu</strong>, 22 Dec 2011 08:22:15 -0500, NoBody <nobody @nowhere.com> wrote:<br />
>></p>
<p>+&#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;&#8211;+<br />
This was my <strong>text</strong>  Beam Me Up Scotty and I am proud of my genius that<br />
<strong>share</strong>.  So please get the attributes correct, I get this information<br />
correct you should at least get who wrote what was right attributed<br />
correctly.</p>
<p>>>>> Point out the <strong>text</strong> in the constitution that gave the courts the Power to<br />
>>>> &#8220;interpret&#8221; or &#8220;add&#8221; to laws to mean anything they want and return that<br />
>>>> new interpretation back to the legal <strong>system</strong> as a <strong>NEW</strong> law.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> I can quote the <strong>text</strong> where the constitution says *ALL* legislative <strong>power</strong><br />
>>>> resides with congress.<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;+</p>
<p>>><br />
>> Marbury v Madison<br />
>><br />
>> Show that&#8217;s been overturned.<br />
><br />
> You&#8217;re again dishonestly attributing something to me I never said.<br />
> Either learn to use your newsgreader or get a better one.</p>
<p>I honestly think that some of these Liberals can&#8217;t get anything correct<br />
NOT even things that are simple like attributes&#8230;&#8230;.</p>
<p>Cahill attributes his quotes to a bunch of people that are wrong.</p>
<p></nobody></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/23/ill-show-you-mine-if-you-show-us-yours-5/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I&#8217;ll show you mine if you show us yours?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/22/ill-show-you-mine-if-you-show-us-yours-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/22/ill-show-you-mine-if-you-show-us-yours-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2011 19:17:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Madison Show]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Thu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OPINION]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[REAL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[text]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unconstitutional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yoorghis Jurgis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=26438</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 12/22/2011 1:28 PM, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: > On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 08:22:15 -0500, NoBody wrote: > >>> Point out the text in the constitution that gave the courts the Power to >>> &#8220;interpret&#8221; or &#8220;add&#8221; to laws to mean anything they want and return that >>> new interpretation back to the legal system [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 12/22/2011 1:28 PM, <a href="mailto:Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net">Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Thu</strong>, 22 Dec 2011 08:22:15 -0500, NoBody <nobody @nowhere.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>>> Point out the <strong>text</strong> in the constitution that gave the courts the Power to<br />
>>> &#8220;interpret&#8221; or &#8220;add&#8221; to laws to mean anything they want and return that<br />
>>> new interpretation back to the legal <strong>system</strong> as a <strong>NEW</strong> law.<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> I can quote the <strong>text</strong> where the constitution says *ALL* legislative <strong>power</strong><br />
>>> resides with congress.<br />
><br />
> Marbury v Madison<br />
><br />
> Show that&#8217;s been overturned.<br />
></p>
<p>That isn&#8217;t <strong>text</strong> in the constitution&#8230;..</p>
<p>It isn&#8217;t even in any law.</p>
<p>Where is it written?</p>
<p>It must be an *<strong>OPINION</strong>* which is NOT legislation or a constitutional<br />
amendment.</p>
<p>Which means the court is suggesting a legislative <strong>change</strong> in the &#8220;<strong>REAL</strong>&#8221; law.</p>
<p>They /had/have/ NO <strong>power</strong> to grant any <strong>NEW</strong> powers to the government.</p>
<p>The constitution still says ALL legislative <strong>power</strong> resides with the<br />
congress.  Did you have an *<strong>AMENDMENT</strong>* to the constitution that has<br />
modified or changed that in any way?</p>
<p>The *only* way to <strong>change</strong> that <strong>text</strong> in the constitution is to use an<br />
amendment to annul it or to modify it.   The court could try to call it<br />
<strong>unconstitutional</strong> and yet they have NOT ruled it <strong>unconstitutional</strong> to give<br />
&#8220;all&#8221; Legislative <strong>power</strong> to the Legislature.</p>
<p>Even if they did say it&#8217;s <strong>unconstitutional</strong> they have zero <strong>power</strong> to<br />
decide who does have the legislative <strong>power</strong>.   It would have to be<br />
written in the constitution as an amendment&#8230;..  you see there is no<br />
way out.</p>
<p>The constitution is a closed document that only allows for <strong>change</strong> in the<br />
constitution by using amendments to the constitution, You don&#8217;t delete<br />
and you don&#8217;t create external powers to modify it internally.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a self contained document that needs no outside rewriting, what is<br />
in it is all that it is.  Any outside reforms or tests or addendum are<br />
without <strong>power</strong> to <strong>change</strong> what is already <strong>text</strong> in the constitution except<br />
the ability of the court to find something <strong>unconstitutional</strong>.  Which only<br />
means congress/States has allowed a conflict of interest in the document<br />
that needs congress/States to rectify the conflict.</p>
<p>What did the courts find <strong>unconstitutional</strong> in Marbury v Madison?</p>
<p>Did they strike down part of the constitution as <strong>unconstitutional</strong>?<br />
Because I don&#8217;t see it.  Had that happened then congress would have<br />
acted with an Amendment to make that part constitutional or amend it<br />
from being active like was done to Prohibition and slavery.</p>
<p></nobody></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/22/ill-show-you-mine-if-you-show-us-yours-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I&#8217;ll show you mine if you show us yours?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/21/ill-show-you-mine-if-you-show-us-yours/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/21/ill-show-you-mine-if-you-show-us-yours/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 20:33:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LAW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[text]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unconstitutional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USSC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yoorghis Jurgis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=26406</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 12/21/2011 3:21 PM, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: > On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 13:52:41 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: > >>> You &#8220;point out&#8221; that what you believe is unconstittional&#8211;is nothing >>> more than pissing about rulings you don&#8217;t agree with. >> >> Wrong, those rulings are unconstitutional because the courts have no >> power to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 12/21/2011 3:21 PM, <a href="mailto:Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net">Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 13:52:41 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>>> You &#8220;point out&#8221; that what you believe is unconstittional&#8211;is nothing<br />
>>> more than pissing about rulings you don&#8217;t agree with.<br />
>><br />
>> Wrong, those rulings are <strong>unconstitutional</strong> because the courts have no<br />
>> power to give any <strong>NEW</strong> powers to government.<br />
><br />
> Not even a grade school argument<br />
><br />
> Courts interpret laws passed by congress<br />
><br />
> Courts interpret cases, civil and criminal, coming before them<br />
><br />
> Enacted legislation is &#8220;law&#8221; and can be challenged in courts.  Rulings<br />
> of what enacted law &#8216;means&#8221;&#8212;IS the domain of the Courts<br />
><br />
> If a <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>LAW</strong> is enacted by the legislature, the court didn&#8217;t make it<br />
> but DO have the authority to interpret what it means.  That is the<br />
> function of the Justice <strong>system</strong><br />
><br />
>>> The ONLY institution allowed to determine what is constitutional or<br />
>>> not&#8211;is the <strong>USSC</strong>.<br />
><br />
>> You just said it, they have NO power to redefine and interpret&#8230;. all<br />
>> they can do is one thing, they can declare a law or <strong>POWER</strong><br />
>> <strong>unconstitutional</strong> and that&#8217;s it.<br />
></p>
<p>Point out the <strong>text</strong> in the constitution that gave the courts the Power to<br />
&#8220;interpret&#8221; or &#8220;add&#8221; to laws to mean anything they want and return that<br />
new interpretation back to the legal <strong>system</strong> as a <strong>NEW</strong> law.</p>
<p>I can quote the <strong>text</strong> where the constitution says *ALL* legislative power<br />
resides with congress.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll show you mine if you show us yours?</p>
</thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/21/ill-show-you-mine-if-you-show-us-yours/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NYC-Paid Investigators Buy Guns Online Across US</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/15/nyc-paid-investigators-buy-guns-online-across-us/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/15/nyc-paid-investigators-buy-guns-online-across-us/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:44:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ASSOCIATED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bob Crachet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liberal Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libertarian Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mayor Michael Bloomberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NYC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PRESS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[YORK]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=26068</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 12/14/2011 8:13 PM, Bob Crachet wrote: > On 12/14/2011 7:35 PM, Sid9 wrote: >> December 14, 2011 >> >> >> NYC-Paid Investigators Buy Guns Online Across US >> >> By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS >> >> >> NEW YORK (AP) &#8211; A city investigation caught online gun sellers around the >> country illegally handing over [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 12/14/2011 8:13 PM, <strong>Bob Crachet</strong> wrote:<br />
> On 12/14/2011 7:35 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
>> December 14, 2011<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> <strong>NYC</strong>-Paid Investigators Buy Guns Online Across <strong>US</strong><br />
>><br />
>> By THE <strong>ASSOCIATED</strong> <strong>PRESS</strong><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>YORK</strong> (<strong>AP</strong>) &#8211; A city investigation caught online <strong>gun</strong> sellers around the<br />
>> country illegally handing over assault weapons to people who said they<br />
>> couldn&#8217;t pass a background check, <strong>Mayor Michael Bloomberg</strong> said Wednesday,<br />
>> just days after a police officer was shot to death with an illegal <strong>gun</strong>.</p>
<p>The Liberals in government have failed to do their job in so many ways,<br />
that this is an expected failure.</p>
<p>Just as <strong>Liberal Government</strong> has failed to <strong>secure</strong> the southern border of<br />
the USA.</p>
<p>Eric <strong>Holder</strong> failed to enforce existing <strong>gun</strong> laws.</p>
<p>Stop all new law creation until the executive branch of government<br />
agrees to enforce all the laws that they have been entrusted to equally<br />
enforce.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/15/nyc-paid-investigators-buy-guns-online-across-us/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>More correlations for the Greenists</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/05/more-correlations-for-the-greenists/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/05/more-correlations-for-the-greenists/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 18:58:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AGW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CO2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Giga2 Giga2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Magnetic Electrical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Sun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Orval Fairbairn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PST]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTF]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25598</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 12/5/2011 1:33 PM, Orval Fairbairn wrote: > In article > , > &#8220;erschroedinger @&#038;*$?%gmail.com&#8221; wrote: > >> On Dec 4, 12:52 pm, Wally W. wrote: >>> On Sun, 4 Dec 2011 05:40:18 -0800 (PST), Dawlish wrote: >>>> On Dec 4, 10:41 am, &#8220;Giga2&#8243; < "Giga2" >>> end)ho&#8230;@yahoo.co> wrote: >>>>> &#8220;Dawlish&#8221; wrote in message >>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 12/5/2011 1:33 PM, <strong>Orval Fairbairn</strong> wrote:<br />
> In article<br />
> <e5ce0e77 -f26e-453a-9e0d-4fb0f88d8e70<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>g21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,<br />
>  &#8220;erschroedinger<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>gmail.com&#8221; <erschroedinger @gmail.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On Dec 4, 12:52 pm, Wally W. <ww8 ...@aim.com> wrote:<br />
>>> <strong>On Sun</strong>, 4 Dec 2011 05:40:18 -0800 (<strong>PST</strong>), Dawlish wrote:<br />
>>>> On Dec 4, <strong>10</strong>:41 am, &#8220;Giga2&#8243; < "Giga2" <just(removetheseandaddmatthe<br />
>>>> end)ho&#8230;@yahoo.co> wrote:<br />
>>>>> &#8220;Dawlish&#8221;
<pjg ...@hotmail.com> wrote in message<br />
>>><br />
>>>>> news:5c5c2a37-6e57-469c-a122-578ef4827a1f<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>w1g2000vba.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>>>>> On Dec 3, 9:25 pm, Wally W. <ww8 ...@aim.com> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>>>> Correlations are &#8220;science&#8221; in the <strong>AGW</strong> hype.<br />
>>><br />
>>>>>> Here you go, Greenists: A new correlation for every day of the week:<br />
>>><br />
>>>>>> <a href="http://www.correlated.org/" >http://www.correlated.org/</a><br />
>>><br />
>>>>>> Hurry! It could be *you* who finds the next trend to hype.<br />
>>><br />
>>>>> <strong>WTF</strong> is a greenist?<br />
>>><br />
>>>>> Try these two correlations 0.87 and 0.91. <strong>CO2</strong> and temperature 1880-<br />
>>>>> present. Both at the 99%+ significance level.<br />
>>><br />
>>>>> =<strong>BS</strong><br />
>>><br />
>>>>> Now explain them.<br />
>>><br />
>>>> Two of us already have. Now do the calculations yourself, if you can<br />
>>>> and see if you find bullshit&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..or if you find exactly<br />
>>>> what <strong>AGW</strong> and I found &#8211; very strong correlations which show very high<br />
>>>> statistical significance.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Very strong correlations show very high statistical significance<br />
>>> *only* if the relationship is meaningful.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Statistical significance is not the same as scientific significance.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Large correlation in a minor factor may not be significant in an<br />
>>> overall effect.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Scientific significance is not the same as political significance.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Scientific significance is not the same as economical significance.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Scientific significance is not the same as <strong>social</strong> significance.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Few people outside the cult don&#8217;t give a rat&#8217;s <acronym title="ass"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym> about religious<br />
>>> dogma based on cooked numbers and hysterics.<br />
>>><br />
>>> What was your point?<br />
>>><br />
>>> No support from Greenists in this thread. Have they stopped listening<br />
>>> to you?<br />
>><br />
>> Correlation is necessary (but not sufficient) for causation.<br />
>><br />
>> <strong>Global</strong> temperatures are correlated with <strong>CO2</strong> levels.  They are not<br />
>> correlated with anything else that could conceivably be a cause.<br />
><br />
> &#8230; like the clearing of forests, urban development? The <strong>AGW</strong> crowd likes<br />
> to deny those influences and wants to blame the minuscule amount of <strong>CO2</strong><br />
> in the atmoaphere.</p>
<p><strong>NEW</strong> Pavement, lack of erupting volcanoes&#8230;.  lava vents at the ocean<br />
floor, lack of cloud cover, Magnetic/Electrical/<strong>RF</strong> interference with the<br />
ionosphere, Nuclear background radiation, micro black holes and/or<br />
white/dark matter or Gamma rays from a star explosion years ago. Space<br />
trash and gravitational orbits of the trash and comets and moons and the<br />
the planets and sun and Galaxy stressing the earth.  Humans own bio mass<br />
and heat.  Inter dimensional Energy leaking from a time or place we are<br />
simultaneously standing in.</p>
<p>Loss of atmosphere into space&#8230;.</p>
<p></ww8></pjg></ww8></erschroedinger></e5ce0e77></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/12/05/more-correlations-for-the-greenists/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ACORN, George Soros and the core of the Democratic Party is materiallysupports OWS anarchy</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/22/acorn-george-soros-and-the-core-of-the-democratic-party-is-materiallysupports-ows-anarchy-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/22/acorn-george-soros-and-the-core-of-the-democratic-party-is-materiallysupports-ows-anarchy-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:20:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[37]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACORN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anarchy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crazy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democratic Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FOX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Soros]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Glen Beck]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Glenn Beck]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Sat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Tue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OWS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25142</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/22/2011 3:03 PM, MattB wrote: > On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 14:48:08 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: > >> On 11/21/2011 8:42 PM, 6313 Dead, 1456 since 1/20/09 wrote: >>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 20:19:30 -0500, CB @&#038;*$?%PrayForMe.com wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 21:46:58 -0700, RichTravsky >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> BeamMeUpScotty [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/22/2011 3:03 PM, MattB wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Tue</strong>, 22 Nov 2011 14:48:08 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 8:42 PM, 6313 Dead, 1456 since 1/20/09 wrote:<br />
>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 20:19:30 -0500, <a href="mailto:CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com">CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com</a> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> <strong>On Sat</strong>, 19 Nov 2011 21:46:58 -0700, RichTravsky<br />
>>>><br />
<trarvesky @hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/17/2011 7:<strong>37</strong> PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/17/2011 <strong>11</strong>:<strong>43</strong> AM, <a href="mailto:CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com">CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com</a> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> <strong>ACORN</strong> does not exist, kooker.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> The son of <strong>ACORN</strong><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> <strong>ACORN</strong> II<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> The Ghost of <strong>ACORN</strong><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> <strong>ACORN</strong> REVISITED<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> <strong>ACORN</strong> HAS A <strong>NEW</strong> NAME&#8230;  BUT THE SONG REMAINS THE SAME.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> What is the new name?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The New Party<br />
>>>> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QtJpfxIjoBw&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /> 2:00<br />
>>><br />
>>> <strong>Glenn Beck</strong>.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Well, that proves beyond doubt that you are an ignorant nut.<br />
>><br />
>> Obviously you have proof that no people that worked at <strong>ACORN</strong> have<br />
>> migrated to this other group that <strong>Glen Beck</strong>&#8216;s &#8220;GUEST&#8221;  was discussing<br />
>> and tracking?<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Share it with us&#8230;.<br />
><br />
><br />
> Well <strong>Glenn Beck</strong> is a nutcase.  Well documented.<br />
><br />
>  Tell me something.  If someone that has done work for the Tea party<br />
> attends a <strong>OWS</strong> meeting does that mean the Tea party supports <strong>OWS</strong> or has<br />
> direct control of <strong>OWS</strong>?<br />
><br />
>  I&#8217;ve gone to several Tea party meeting now and although I do agree<br />
> with a few ideas they have can&#8217;t totally support them.  Will admit<br />
> Beck is trying to bring back McCarthyism to a degree.  Don&#8217;t think it<br />
> will work.  Maybe Fox will hack all <strong>OWS</strong> phones now.</p>
<p>Then Obama will hear phones at <strong>FOX</strong> listening to phones at <strong>OWS</strong> listening<br />
to phones at <strong>FOX</strong> won&#8217;t he&#8230;.   The echo will drive the government <strong>crazy</strong>.</p>
</trarvesky></thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/22/acorn-george-soros-and-the-core-of-the-democratic-party-is-materiallysupports-ows-anarchy-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 94%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/22/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-94-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/22/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-94-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 19:54:55 +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[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[King Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NOTICE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25138</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/22/2011 2:34 PM, Sid9 wrote: > > &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221; wrote in > message news:4ECBF124.1050201 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230; >> On 11/21/2011 9:26 PM, Milt wrote: >>> On Nov 21, 5:52 pm, BeamMeUpScotty >>> wrote: >>>> On 11/21/2011 5:00 PM, Milt wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Nov 21, 10:54 am, BeamMeUpScotty >>>>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/22/2011 2:34 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221;
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in<br />
> message news:4ECBF124.1050201<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230;<br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:26 PM, Milt wrote:<br />
>>> On Nov 21, 5:52 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 5:00 PM, Milt wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> On Nov 21, <strong>10</strong>:54 am, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>> </thendestroyeveryth>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:d...@dudu.org">d&#8230;@dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>>>>>> <c ...@PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>>> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without,<br />
>>>>>>> dumbass.  So<br />
>>>>>>> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have<br />
>>>>>> been<br />
>>>>>> wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>> Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
>>>>>> 1944    24      <strong>23</strong>%     94%     $200,000        $2.54M  Individual<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>> to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>> The <strong>HIGH</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>> Can you tell us why it failed?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>> &#8211;<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> Poverty was much lower when tax rates were 70% and above than it is<br />
>>>>> now.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> So you&#8217;re saying that we spend more now and poverty is worse, isn&#8217;t<br />
>>>> that<br />
>>>> a catch-22  when you admit that things were better then and worse now?<br />
>>><br />
>>> Poverty was getting better before we hit neocon-land.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> It would seem to indicate that spending less was better.<br />
>>><br />
>>> We spend less and there&#8217;s more poverty.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Spending less must be better than spending more(you just said so)&#8230;.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Oh wait the Treasury still took in about 18% of <strong>GDP</strong> so raising taxes<br />
>>>> had<br />
>>>> almost zero effect on <strong>Federal</strong> funds to taken in to spend back in 1944<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> so you need to tax more and/or spend less, start by spending less and<br />
>>>> see if that is sufficient and if NOT then we would be forced to look at<br />
>>>> something else.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> &#8211;<br />
>>><br />
>>> Forget that you just pulled the number out of your <acronym title="ass"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym>. Percent of <strong>GDP</strong><br />
>>> has nothing to do with this issue. When poverty is high, revenues as<br />
>>> percent of <strong>GDP</strong> will always be higher, because there are fewer<br />
>>> taxpayers, and thus less revenue.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> That didn&#8217;t make sense, but I think I see what you were trying to say.<br />
>><br />
>> did you mean when poverty is high, revenues will be low, due to<br />
>> <strong>unemployment</strong>?<br />
>><br />
>> Even that idea has no merit.  Since corporations can be profitable when<br />
>> they fire thousands of people.   We just went through that, when<br />
>> everyone trimmed the payroll in order to prepare for the Obama created<br />
>> Depression.<br />
>><br />
>> THAT SAID&#8230;.<br />
>><br />
>> The <strong>GDP</strong> will be an issue because it has a ceiling and that is 18%, raise<br />
>> and lower <strong>Federal</strong> taxes all you want but you will end up with an average<br />
>> within a few points of that 18% average.<br />
>><br />
>> It&#8217;s just how history has come to pass.  Given that truth, when<br />
>> government spends more than 18% it is going to be long term deficit<br />
>> spending.<br />
>><br />
>> Raise taxes higher to get more than an average 18%&#8230;  and you will be<br />
>> suppressing economic activity and gaining no real revenue.  The so<br />
>> called boom from high 94% taxes was an average 2% and that slowed the<br />
>> economy to the point that they were soon lowering those taxes to<br />
>> encourage economic growth and the fall in <strong>Federal</strong> taxes continued in<br />
>> incremental steps up and down until it was at 38%<br />
>><br />
>> Look at the 1920 Depression, taxes rise to 70% then crash of the<br />
>> economy, then the fall of the taxes.   They taxed higher until it<br />
>> crashed. Then they lowered taxes until it started to grow.<br />
>><br />
>> Here at the graph below is deficit spending in <strong>RED</strong> and the actual Total<br />
>> <strong>Federal</strong> Revenue is in BLUE.<br />
>><br />
>> <strong>NOTICE</strong> THAT THE 94% tax rate in 1944 didn&#8217;t raise enough revenue to<br />
>> cover the deficit spending and it crushes the economy/<strong>GDP</strong>.  1943 the<br />
>> previous year to 1944 the growth of the <strong>GDP</strong> was 30-40 billion dollars<br />
>> per year and after the 94% tax rate the <strong>GDP</strong> growth was a muted 8-<strong>10</strong><br />
>> billion dollars.  The <strong>GDP</strong> went from a 16% growth in 1943 to 6% in 1944.<br />
>><br />
>> It was a 6% growth rate after the tax rate was known to increase to a<br />
>> top rate of 94%&#8230;..  That indicates a <strong>10</strong>% loss in growth of the <strong>GDP</strong><br />
>> from before 1943 to after 1944 and that correlates to the rise in the<br />
>> federal income tax top rates.<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://prntscr.com/46m9e" >http://prntscr.com/46m9e</a><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> As I have been saying, the high taxes will slow growth(with no<br />
>> sustainable revenue benefit) and even today we see the threat of new<br />
>> high taxes has muted the growth.  We will NOT grow until Obama the<br />
>> Socialist &#8220;redistribution&#8221; King (Obama) is removed from his throne.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> &#8211;<br />
>><br />
><br />
> False.<br />
> That&#8217;s St <strong>Reagan</strong>&#8216;s and Grover Norquist&#8217;s bullshit all over again.</p>
<p>I see all your proof and I have to say your extensive facts and flawless<br />
logic based on your proof was awesome.  <img src='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>You have reaffirmed my beliefs about Liberals.</p>
<p></c></thendestroyeveryth></thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/22/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-94-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ACORN, George Soros and the core of the Democratic Party is  materiallysupports OWS anarchy</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/22/acorn-george-soros-and-the-core-of-the-democratic-party-is-materiallysupports-ows-anarchy/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/22/acorn-george-soros-and-the-core-of-the-democratic-party-is-materiallysupports-ows-anarchy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 19:48:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[37]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACORN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anarchy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democratic Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Soros]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Glen Beck]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Glenn Beck]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Sat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OWS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25134</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 8:42 PM, 6313 Dead, 1456 since 1/20/09 wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 20:19:30 -0500, CB @&#038;*$?%PrayForMe.com wrote: > >> On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 21:46:58 -0700, RichTravsky >> wrote: >> >>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11/17/2011 7:37 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote: >>>>> On 11/17/2011 11:43 AM, CB @&#038;*$?%PrayForMe.com wrote: >>>>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 8:42 PM, 6313 Dead, 1456 since 1/20/09 wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 20:19:30 -0500, <a href="mailto:CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com">CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com</a> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> <strong>On Sat</strong>, 19 Nov 2011 21:46:58 -0700, RichTravsky<br />
>><br />
<trarvesky @hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/17/2011 7:<strong>37</strong> PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/17/2011 <strong>11</strong>:<strong>43</strong> AM, <a href="mailto:CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com">CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com</a> wrote:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> <strong>ACORN</strong> does not exist, kooker.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The son of <strong>ACORN</strong><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> <strong>ACORN</strong> II<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The Ghost of <strong>ACORN</strong><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> <strong>ACORN</strong> REVISITED<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> <strong>ACORN</strong> HAS A <strong>NEW</strong> NAME&#8230;  BUT THE SONG REMAINS THE SAME.<br />
>>><br />
>>> What is the new name?<br />
>><br />
>> The New Party<br />
>> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QtJpfxIjoBw&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /> 2:00<br />
><br />
> <strong>Glenn Beck</strong>.<br />
><br />
> Well, that proves beyond doubt that you are an ignorant nut.</p>
<p>Obviously you have proof that no people that worked at <strong>ACORN</strong> have<br />
migrated to this other group that <strong>Glen Beck</strong>&#8216;s &#8220;GUEST&#8221;  was discussing<br />
and tracking?</p>
<p>Share it with us&#8230;.</p>
</trarvesky>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/22/acorn-george-soros-and-the-core-of-the-democratic-party-is-materiallysupports-ows-anarchy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 94%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/22/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-94/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/22/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-94/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 18:59:48 +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[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[King Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NOTICE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25124</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 9:26 PM, Milt wrote: > On Nov 21, 5:52 pm, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: >> On 11/21/2011 5:00 PM, Milt wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Nov 21, 10:54 am, BeamMeUpScotty >>> wrote: >>>> On 11/21/2011 9:48 AM, d&#8230;@dudu.org wrote: >> >>>>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:26 PM, Milt wrote:<br />
> On Nov 21, 5:52 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 5:00 PM, Milt wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> On Nov 21, <strong>10</strong>:54 am, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>> </thendestroyeveryth>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:d...@dudu.org">d&#8230;@dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>>>> <c ...@PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>><br />
>>>>> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass.  So<br />
>>>>> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.<br />
>><br />
>>>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
>>>> wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
>>>> 1944    24      <strong>23</strong>%     94%     $200,000        $2.54M  Individual<br />
>><br />
>>>> to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.<br />
>><br />
>>>> The <strong>HIGH</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Can you tell us why it failed?<br />
>><br />
>>>> &#8211;<br />
>><br />
>>> Poverty was much lower when tax rates were 70% and above than it is<br />
>>> now.<br />
>><br />
>> So you&#8217;re saying that we spend more now and poverty is worse, isn&#8217;t that<br />
>> a catch-22  when you admit that things were better then and worse now?<br />
><br />
> Poverty was getting better before we hit neocon-land.<br />
>><br />
>> It would seem to indicate that spending less was better.<br />
><br />
> We spend less and there&#8217;s more poverty.<br />
>><br />
>> Spending less must be better than spending more(you just said so)&#8230;.<br />
>><br />
>> Oh wait the Treasury still took in about 18% of <strong>GDP</strong> so raising taxes had<br />
>> almost zero effect on <strong>Federal</strong> funds to taken in to spend back in 1944<br />
>><br />
>> so you need to tax more and/or spend less, start by spending less and<br />
>> see if that is sufficient and if NOT then we would be forced to look at<br />
>> something else.<br />
>><br />
>> &#8211;<br />
><br />
> Forget that you just pulled the number out of your <acronym title="ass"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym>. Percent of <strong>GDP</strong><br />
> has nothing to do with this issue. When poverty is high, revenues as<br />
> percent of <strong>GDP</strong> will always be higher, because there are fewer<br />
> taxpayers, and thus less revenue.</p>
<p>That didn&#8217;t make sense, but I think I see what you were trying to say.</p>
<p>did you mean when poverty is high, revenues will be low, due to<br />
<strong>unemployment</strong>?</p>
<p>Even that idea has no merit.  Since corporations can be profitable when<br />
they fire thousands of people.   We just went through that, when<br />
everyone trimmed the payroll in order to prepare for the Obama created<br />
Depression.</p>
<p>THAT SAID&#8230;.</p>
<p>The <strong>GDP</strong> will be an issue because it has a ceiling and that is 18%, raise<br />
and lower <strong>Federal</strong> taxes all you want but you will end up with an average<br />
within a few points of that 18% average.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s just how history has come to pass.  Given that truth, when<br />
government spends more than 18% it is going to be long term deficit<br />
spending.</p>
<p>Raise taxes higher to get more than an average 18%&#8230;  and you will be<br />
suppressing economic activity and gaining no real revenue.  The so<br />
called boom from high 94% taxes was an average 2% and that slowed the<br />
economy to the point that they were soon lowering those taxes to<br />
encourage economic growth and the fall in <strong>Federal</strong> taxes continued in<br />
incremental steps up and down until it was at 38%</p>
<p>Look at the 1920 Depression, taxes rise to 70% then crash of the<br />
economy, then the fall of the taxes.   They taxed higher until it<br />
crashed. Then they lowered taxes until it started to grow.</p>
<p>Here at the graph below is deficit spending in <strong>RED</strong> and the actual Total<br />
<strong>Federal</strong> Revenue is in BLUE.</p>
<p><strong>NOTICE</strong> THAT THE 94% tax rate in 1944 didn&#8217;t raise enough revenue to<br />
cover the deficit spending and it crushes the economy/<strong>GDP</strong>.  1943 the<br />
previous year to 1944 the growth of the <strong>GDP</strong> was 30-40 billion dollars<br />
per year and after the 94% tax rate the <strong>GDP</strong> growth was a muted 8-<strong>10</strong><br />
billion dollars.  The <strong>GDP</strong> went from a 16% growth in 1943 to 6% in 1944.</p>
<p>It was a 6% growth rate after the tax rate was known to increase to a<br />
top rate of 94%&#8230;..  That indicates a <strong>10</strong>% loss in growth of the <strong>GDP</strong><br />
from before 1943 to after 1944 and that correlates to the rise in the<br />
federal income tax top rates.</p>
<p><a href="http://prntscr.com/46m9e" >http://prntscr.com/46m9e</a></p>
<p>As I have been saying, the high taxes will slow growth(with no<br />
sustainable revenue benefit) and even today we see the threat of new<br />
high taxes has muted the growth.  We will NOT grow until Obama the<br />
Socialist &#8220;redistribution&#8221; King (Obama) is removed from his throne.</p>
<p></c></thendestroyeveryth>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/22/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-94/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-17/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-17/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 01:08:30 +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[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25120</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 7:48 PM, Sid9 wrote: > > &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221; wrote in > message news:4ECAD644.5000103 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230; >> On 11/21/2011 5:00 PM, Milt wrote: >>> On Nov 21, 10:54 am, BeamMeUpScotty >>> wrote: >>>> On 11/21/2011 9:48 AM, d&#8230;@dudu.org wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com&#8221; >>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> WHAT PAERT OF [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 7:48 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221;
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in<br />
> message news:4ECAD644.5000103<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230;<br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 5:00 PM, Milt wrote:<br />
>>> On Nov 21, <strong>10</strong>:54 am, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:d...@dudu.org">d&#8230;@dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>>>> <c ...@PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass.  So<br />
>>>>> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
>>>> wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
>>>> 1944    24      <strong>23</strong>%     94%     $200,000        $2.54M  Individual<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The <strong>HIGH</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Can you tell us why it failed?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> &#8211;<br />
>>><br />
>>> Poverty was much lower when tax rates were 70% and above than it is<br />
>>> now.<br />
>><br />
>> So you&#8217;re saying that we spend more now and poverty is worse, isn&#8217;t that<br />
>> a catch-22  when you admit that things were better then and worse now?<br />
>><br />
>> It would seem to indicate that spending less was better.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Spending less must be better than spending more(you just said so)&#8230;.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Oh wait the Treasury still took in about 18% of <strong>GDP</strong> so raising taxes had<br />
>> almost zero effect on <strong>Federal</strong> funds to taken in to spend back in 1944.<br />
>><br />
>> so you need to tax more and/or spend less, start by spending less and<br />
>> see if that is sufficient and if NOT then we would be forced to look at<br />
>> something else.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> &#8211;<br />
>><br />
><br />
> So you&#8217;re saying?<br />
> His words are clear and do not need interpretation from you</p>
<p>I&#8217;m saying he&#8217;s NOT very consistent.</p>
<p>So I&#8217;m not sure which story he wants to stick with&#8230;..</p>
<p>I&#8217;m awaiting any clarification that he cares to make.</p>
<p>Or NONE at all and he decides to go with me picking between his<br />
conflicting statements.</p>
<p></c></thendestroyeveryth></thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-17/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Children are made into sheep and easy targets for the gay sexual predators by the Schools that teach them that it&#8217;s HATE and it&#8217;s illegal to dislike and a HATE CRIME to defend themselves from the gay predators&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/children-are-made-into-sheep-and-easy-targets-for-the-gay-sexual-predators-by-the-schools-that-teach-them-that-its-hate-and-its-illegal-to-dislike-and-a-hate-crime-to-defend-themselves-from-the-gay-3/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/children-are-made-into-sheep-and-easy-targets-for-the-gay-sexual-predators-by-the-schools-that-teach-them-that-its-hate-and-its-illegal-to-dislike-and-a-hate-crime-to-defend-themselves-from-the-gay-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 23:49:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CITIZENS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRIME]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DOOMING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FACILITIES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FACT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FORCING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GENDER]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HATE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[include]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[INTELLIGENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NOTE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PROBLEMS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RAPE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RIGHTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TENS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WORTHLESS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25110</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 4:32 PM, erschroedinger @&#038;*$?%gmail.com wrote: > On Nov 21, 3:09 pm, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: >> On 11/21/2011 10:46 AM, erschroedin&#8230;@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Nov 19, 5:20 pm, BeamMeUpScotty >>> wrote: >>>> Children are made into sheep and easy targets for the gay sexual >>>> predators by the Schools that teach [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 4:32 PM, <a href="mailto:erschroedinger<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>gmail.com">erschroedinger<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>gmail.com</a> wrote:<br />
> On Nov 21, 3:09 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 <strong>10</strong>:46 AM, <a href="mailto:erschroedin...@gmail.com">erschroedin&#8230;@gmail.com</a> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> On Nov 19, 5:20 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>> </thendestroyeveryth>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>>> Children are made into sheep and easy targets for the gay sexual<br />
>>>> predators by the Schools that teach them that it&#8217;s <strong>HATE</strong> and it&#8217;s illegal<br />
>>>> to dislike and a <strong>HATE</strong> <strong>CRIME</strong> to defend themselves from the gay predators&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>>>> This is the underlying problem with government schools, they teach the<br />
>>>> Democrat-Socialist agenda hidden as an under the desk education that is<br />
>>>> forced on all students.<br />
>><br />
>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/19/2011 8:20 AM, (¯`·.¸ Craig Chilton ¸.·´¯)<br />
>><br />
>>>> <a href="http://www.TravelForPay.org" >http://www.TravelForPay.org</a> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>      [[[[    RESOURCE POST:  *FACTS* Don't Change.<br />
>>>>>               And Constantly *Repeating* Them is <strong>DOOMING</strong><br />
>>>>>               the Bigots' IRRATIONAL Hate-Agendas!   ]]]]<br />
>><br />
>>>>>     Egalitarians are <strong>INTELLIGENT</strong> enough to know that once FACTS<br />
>>>>> that are *devastating* to all bigots and their hate-agendas &#8211;<br />
>>>>> especially the ones that seek to *victimize* <strong>TENS</strong> of MILLIONS of<br />
>>>>> people by blocking them from (1) having across-the-board EQUAL<br />
>>>>> rights for all LGBT people, including Marriage Equality&#8230; for abso-<br />
>>>>> lutely NO good reason, and<br />
>><br />
>>>> We see one reason that jumped out at us this month, <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> that are after<br />
>>>> young boys in the public showers&#8230;..<br />
>><br />
>>>> If <acronym title="Gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> G&*$?%s</span></acronym> are different and need Gay Hate crime laws and need gay<br />
>>>> Marriage, then they also need *<strong>GENDER</strong> SPECIFIC <strong>FACILITIES</strong>* . and need to<br />
>>>> be kept out of locker rooms for heterosexuals.  The <acronym title="Gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> G&*$?%s</span></acronym> need a (G) for<br />
>>>> their sex on their drivers license.  Anyone known to have gay sex should<br />
>>>> be so designated permanently.    Then when caught in a boys facilities<br />
>>>> they can be chastised just as boys slipping into the girls bath room<br />
>>>> are,  and marked as sexual predators or stalkers.  As Men hanging out in<br />
>>>> the girls bathrooms are.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Then there&#8217;s military bunks boys camps&#8230;.. and other NOT so private<br />
>>>> areas where <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> can stalk and cruise for vulnerable situations with<br />
>>>> boys or men.    <acronym title="Gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> G&*$?%s</span></acronym> <strong>RIGHTS</strong> have been placed above the <strong>RIGHTS</strong> of hetero<br />
>>>> sexual men&#8230;.   <strong>HATE</strong> LAWS have replaced <strong>social</strong> taboos that once kept<br />
>>>> <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> from attacking/molesting young men are NOW making hetero sexual men<br />
>>>> targets for older gay sexual predators.   A fist was once used to<br />
>>>> warn-off <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> and it is NOW a <strong>HATE</strong> <strong>CRIME</strong>. Children are made into sheep<br />
>>>> and easy targets for the gay sexual predators by the Schools that teach<br />
>>>> them that it is illegal to dislike or defend themselves from the gay<br />
>>>> predators&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>>>> It is the *government that has created the <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>PROBLEMS</strong>* through <strong>social</strong><br />
>>>> engineering.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> (2) IRRATIONALLY seeking to hurl the<br />
>>>>> USAback into the pre-1973 Dark Ages of <strong>FORCING</strong> girls and wom-<br />
>>>>> en to gestate <strong>WORTHLESS</strong>-when-UNwanted pregnancies to term<br />
>>>>> against their will (a very real and unconscionable 9-month-long<br />
>>>>> form of <strong>RAPE</strong>)&#8230;have been marshalled and presented WELL &#8211;<br />
>>>>> the BEST way to put those resources to use is to RE-PRESENT<br />
>>>>> them *every* time that it is appropriate to do so.<br />
>><br />
>>>> The dark ages when they killed babies? Yes that is true, we are in the<br />
>>>> darkest of the baby killing ages where millions are killed despite the<br />
>>>> <strong>FACT</strong> that we have drugs and condoms and sterilization and more that can<br />
>>>> prevent the fertilization and creation of a person.<br />
>><br />
>>>> If you can call a corporation a person, isn&#8217;t it obvious that a human<br />
>>>> baby in or out of a uterus is a person.  First of all there is no<br />
>>>> specific mention that a person can NOT reside in a uterus. Secondly the<br />
>>>> GPS coordinates of a person inside the united States territory can be in<br />
>>>> a uterus. There is no distinction for person-hood.  A person is a live<br />
>>>> human inside of the united states.<br />
>><br />
>>>> A &#8220;citizen&#8221; is a person born inside the united states.<br />
>><br />
>>>> <strong>NOTE</strong> the distinction that a citizen is &#8220;born&#8221; inside the united States<br />
>>>> or naturalized after their birth, but they are still a person if they<br />
>>>> are in the united states and are NOT a citizen.<br />
>><br />
>>>> It isn&#8217;t a question of what &#8220;you&#8221; want, it&#8217;s a question of another<br />
>>>> persons <strong>RIGHTS</strong>&#8230;..   You get tired of your kids you can *NOT* just kill<br />
>>>> them under our constitution because they are persons with <strong>RIGHTS</strong>.   As<br />
>>>> is a person in the uterus.<br />
>><br />
>>>> The <strong>FACT</strong> you have committed a million murders a year is no reason to<br />
>>>> keep murdering a million children a year.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Vegans that can&#8217;t eat meat because they love all the little animals are<br />
>>>> a measure of your hypocrisy as they are mostly Democrat-Socialists that<br />
>>>> are willing to kill a human life but then make such a stink over their<br />
>>>> NOT killing animals to eat.<br />
>><br />
>>>> The ignorance of the LEFT-WING LOONS is colossal.<br />
>><br />
>>> Most child sexual abuse occurs from heterosexual adults.<br />
>><br />
>> Most hand gun murders are black on black&#8230;..  so why do we need hate<br />
>> crime laws? You Liberals aren&#8217;t very consistent with your support of<br />
>> laws.  Sort of hypocritical aren&#8217;t you?<br />
>><br />
>> Is that what you are saying when you say, &#8220;most sex crimes are by<br />
>> heterosexuals&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>> 98% of people are heterosexual.<br />
>> 17% are black<br />
>> 2% are gay<br />
>><br />
>> ALL ARE <strong>CITIZENS</strong> and all need to be equal under the law.<br />
>><br />
>> The problem with your scenario is that we need equal protection under<br />
>> the law and <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> are less than 2% of the population but still need to<br />
>> have laws that <strong>include</strong> them as a special hate law does.<br />
><br />
> Sure, like Jews &#8212; painting a swastika on a synagogue is different<br />
> from painting a heart on a bridge overpass.</p>
<p>What is the difference, both may be symbols of groups that hate me?</p>
<p>Except that I have an (M) on my drivers license&#8230;. why is a (G) on a<br />
<acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> license like a star on a Jew?  I fail to see the problem or<br />
similarity, aren&#8217;t they proud of being GAY?</p>
<p>It&#8217;s you that says they are different and need hate laws and marriage<br />
laws special for them. I am suggesting they also should have their own<br />
designation on their drivers license.</p>
<p>> And special laws &#8212; what about the special laws that don&#8217;t let <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym><br />
> wed, inherit, visit partners in the hospital, etc?</p>
<p>NO such thing, marriage is/was NOT designed for <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> and can&#8217;t be<br />
changed to work for both <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> and heterosexuals&#8230;..   Marriage has<br />
meanings to heterosexuals that created it that <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> simply can&#8217;t<br />
appreciate or fulfill.</p>
<p>Calling two <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> married is a joke, and neither the person calling them<br />
married nor the <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> that are able to understand what marriage is about<br />
or they would NOT make the error of calling it gay marriage.</p>
<p>Gay Marriage is an oxymoron.   Since the only way it works is if a Gay<br />
man and a <acronym title="Lesbian"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> L&*$?%n</span></acronym> woman get married and that is between them and their<br />
own conscience as to whether they are entering into it for the right<br />
reasons.</p>
<p>If they want to visit in the hospital they can make the proper legal<br />
preparations to solve that *legal* problem.</p>
<p>>> They need<br />
>> special Gender designations. That SPECIAL gender designation would be<br />
>> different than MALE or FEMALE, they would also be separated from the<br />
>> other GENDERS as the M/F are from each other already.  Or at least you<br />
>> say so when you say they need special hate crime laws and marriage laws.<br />
>><br />
>> They are different and need special treatment like a <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>GENDER</strong> WOULD NEED.<br />
>><br />
>> &#8211;<br />
><br />
> And there&#8217;s the special circle of hell for bigots.  Hope you&#8217;ll like<br />
> it there.</p>
<p>Go and be as gay as you want, I don&#8217;t need to hear about it.<br />
You deserve no more <strong>RIGHTS</strong> than I do.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t have a God or a heaven or Hell.<br />
I deal in FACTS.</p>
</thendestroyeveryth>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/children-are-made-into-sheep-and-easy-targets-for-the-gay-sexual-predators-by-the-schools-that-teach-them-that-its-hate-and-its-illegal-to-dislike-and-a-hate-crime-to-defend-themselves-from-the-gay-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-16/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-16/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 23:14:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cuba]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Germany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NAZI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ROME]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WWII]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25108</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 6:02 PM, Sid9 wrote: > > &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221; wrote in > message news:4ECAD06A.8060906 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230; >> On 11/21/2011 4:44 PM, Sid9 wrote: >>> >>> &#8220;Bret Cahill&#8221; wrote in message >>> news:3ba5dd07-6491-484d-9ace-a1c3779db7fc @&#038;*$?%k5g2000pre.googlegroups.com&#8230; >>>>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have >>>>> been >>>>> wiped out in 1944 - >>>> >>>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 6:02 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221;
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in<br />
> message news:4ECAD06A.8060906<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230;<br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 4:44 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>> &#8220;Bret Cahill&#8221; <bretcahill @peoplepc.com> wrote in message<br />
>>> news:3ba5dd07-6491-484d-9ace-a1c3779db7fc<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>k5g2000pre.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>>>>> If High <strong>taxes</strong> would solve all our problems then poverty would have<br />
>>>>> been<br />
>>>>> wiped out in 1944 -<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> 1944 was the most Keynesian, most income leveling, biggest economic<br />
>>>> boom since July 4, 1776.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Bret Cahill<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>> .<br />
>>> .<br />
>>> .<br />
>>> 12 million of the 130 million American population were in the military<br />
>>> getting government (socialistic) help.<br />
>>> They got food<br />
>>> They got clothing (uniforms)<br />
>>> They got shelter<br />
>>> They got medical care<br />
>>> They got training.<br />
>>> They got paid a monthly stipend.<br />
>>><br />
>>> <strong>Socialism</strong> at work!<br />
>>><br />
>>> There was virtually no <strong>unemployment</strong><br />
>>> Our factories worked at capacity<br />
>>> We made stuff we put on ships and German submarines sank those ships so<br />
>>> we had to make more.<br />
>>> We didn&#8217;t even have to sell the stuff our factories made<br />
>>> We borrowed <strong>hand</strong> over foot to pay for the war&#8230;.something bush,jr<br />
>>> neglected to do.<br />
>><br />
>> Are you saying that the government can afford to permanently hire <strong>10</strong>% of<br />
>> the National population?   That works well in <strong>Cuba</strong> and <strong>Russia</strong> and<br />
>> Socialist states.<br />
>><br />
>> Wasn&#8217;t the &#8220;<strong>WAR</strong>&#8221; a manipulated and unsustainable economy, <strong>Rome</strong> and<br />
>> <strong>Germany</strong> and a few others have tried to create an economy based on <strong>NEW</strong><br />
>> conquests of their neighbors but they always fail.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> &#8211;<br />
>><br />
><br />
> Don&#8217;t give that &#8220;Are you saying bullshit&#8221;<br />
><br />
> My words are clear.<br />
> My words are in English.<br />
><br />
> What happened in <strong>WWII</strong> is a model we can learn from.</p>
<p>What I learn from it is that it was a panic to win the war, else we all<br />
become <strong>NAZI</strong> and dying by attrition was better than being a <strong>NAZI</strong>.   That<br />
economy was no where near what people would want to be forced to live on<br />
a daily basis without the threat of <strong>NAZI</strong> murderers taking over, which is<br />
why we all work to live better under <strong>freedom</strong>.</p>
<p>The NAZIs were efficient at eliminating their problems. But I don&#8217;t want<br />
to live like one.   During <strong>WWII</strong> Americans were living in a military<br />
state.   That is NOT a reasonable plan to eliminate poverty.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll take the poverty and <strong>freedom</strong> over being in a <strong>Military</strong> state under<br />
the thumb of government micro managing my economic life.</p>
<p></bretcahill></thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-16/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-15/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-15/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 22:52:52 +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[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25106</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 5:00 PM, Milt wrote: > On Nov 21, 10:54 am, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: >> On 11/21/2011 9:48 AM, d&#8230;@dudu.org wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com&#8221; >>> wrote: >> >>>> WHAT PAERT OF NO NEW TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU UNDERSTAND? >> >>>> GUBMENT MUST LEARN TO DO WTHOUT! >> >>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 5:00 PM, Milt wrote:<br />
> On Nov 21, <strong>10</strong>:54 am, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:d...@dudu.org">d&#8230;@dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>> <c ...@PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>><br />
>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>><br />
>>> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass.  So<br />
>>> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.<br />
>><br />
>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
>> wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.<br />
>><br />
>> Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
>> 1944    24      <strong>23</strong>%     94%     $200,000        $2.54M  Individual<br />
>><br />
>> to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.<br />
>><br />
>> The <strong>HIGH</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.<br />
>><br />
>> Can you tell us why it failed?<br />
>><br />
>> &#8211;<br />
><br />
> Poverty was much lower when tax rates were 70% and above than it is<br />
> now.</p>
<p>So you&#8217;re saying that we spend more now and poverty is worse, isn&#8217;t that<br />
a catch-22  when you admit that things were better then and worse now?</p>
<p>It would seem to indicate that spending less was better.</p>
<p>Spending less must be better than spending more(you just said so)&#8230;.</p>
<p>Oh wait the Treasury still took in about 18% of <strong>GDP</strong> so raising taxes had<br />
almost zero effect on <strong>Federal</strong> funds to taken in to spend back in 1944.</p>
<p>so you need to tax more and/or spend less, start by spending less and<br />
see if that is sufficient and if NOT then we would be forced to look at<br />
something else.</p>
<p></c></thendestroyeveryth>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-15/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-14/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-14/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 22:33:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WWII]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25104</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 4:46 PM, Sid9 wrote: > > &#8220;First. Post&#8221; wrote in message > news:rfglc7drc5nib0a1rpog6u7u9kic0l1usb @&#038;*$?%4ax.com&#8230; >> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 13:29:55 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty >> wrote: >> >>> On 11/21/2011 12:43 PM, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: >>>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:24:48 -0600, First. Post >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 4:46 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;First. Post&#8221; <occupiersdumberthandirt @invalid.net> wrote in message<br />
> news:rfglc7drc5nib0a1rpog6u7u9kic0l1usb<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com&#8230;<br />
>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 13:29:55 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 12:<strong>43</strong> PM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 <strong>11</strong>:24:48 -0600, First. Post<br />
>>>> <occupiersdumberthandirt @invalid.net> wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:49:49 -0700, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 <strong>11</strong>:00:03 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;<strong>CB</strong>@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>>>>>>> <cb @PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without,<br />
>>>>>>>> dumbass. So<br />
>>>>>>>> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would<br />
>>>>>>> have been<br />
>>>>>>> wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
>>>>>>> 1944 24 <strong>23</strong>% 94% $200,000 $2.54M Individual<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> The <strong>HIGH</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Can you tell us why it failed?<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg" >http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg</a><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> I don&#8217;t see any correlation between high taxes and a lack of<br />
>>>>>>> poverty, do<br />
>>>>>>> you?<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> If cutting taxes improved the economy we would be in a boom cycle<br />
>>>>>> right now, dumbass, not a bust.  You people replace knowledge with<br />
>>>>>> stupidity and expect everybody to accept your stupidity as fact.<br />
>>>>>> Won&#8217;t<br />
>>>>>> work moron.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> So you can&#8217;t refute their post.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> And you cannot truthfully state that simply raising taxes will cure a<br />
>>>>> damned thing.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Nobody claimed it would be a total cure for poverty, moron.  That is<br />
>>>> your straw man.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Did doubling or tripling taxes cut poverty by 50%?<br />
>><br />
>> Didn&#8217;t cut it a bit.<br />
>> The only thing that higher taxes accomplish is it gives the<br />
>> bureaucrats more <strong>money</strong> to spend.<br />
>><br />
><br />
> Paid for <strong>WWII</strong> something that bush,jr neglected</p>
<p>Taxpayers paid for both wars&#8230;..   Obama spent more <strong>money</strong> and didn&#8217;t<br />
pay off any war.  Then Obama started a new war in <strong>Libya</strong>.  We paid 80% of<br />
<strong>NATO</strong> war costs.</p>
<p></cb></thendestroyeverything></occupiersdumberthandirt></thendestroyeverything></occupiersdumberthandirt></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-14/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-13/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-13/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 22:27:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cuba]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Germany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ROME]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25102</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 4:44 PM, Sid9 wrote: > > &#8220;Bret Cahill&#8221; wrote in message > news:3ba5dd07-6491-484d-9ace-a1c3779db7fc @&#038;*$?%k5g2000pre.googlegroups.com&#8230; >>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been >>> wiped out in 1944 - >> >> 1944 was the most Keynesian, most income leveling, biggest economic >> boom since July 4, 1776. >> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 4:44 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;Bret Cahill&#8221; <bretcahill @peoplepc.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:3ba5dd07-6491-484d-9ace-a1c3779db7fc<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>k5g2000pre.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>>> If High <strong>taxes</strong> would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
>>> wiped out in 1944 -<br />
>><br />
>> 1944 was the most Keynesian, most income leveling, biggest economic<br />
>> boom since July 4, 1776.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Bret Cahill<br />
>><br />
>><br />
> .<br />
> .<br />
> .<br />
> 12 million of the 130 million American population were in the military<br />
> getting government (socialistic) help.<br />
> They got food<br />
> They got clothing (uniforms)<br />
> They got shelter<br />
> They got medical care<br />
> They got training.<br />
> They got paid a monthly stipend.<br />
><br />
> <strong>Socialism</strong> at work!<br />
><br />
> There was virtually no <strong>unemployment</strong><br />
> Our factories worked at capacity<br />
> We made stuff we put on ships and German submarines sank those ships so<br />
> we had to make more.<br />
> We didn&#8217;t even have to sell the stuff our factories made<br />
> We borrowed <strong>hand</strong> over foot to pay for the war&#8230;.something bush,jr<br />
> neglected to do.</p>
<p>Are you saying that the government can afford to permanently hire <strong>10</strong>% of<br />
the National population?   That works well in <strong>Cuba</strong> and <strong>Russia</strong> and<br />
Socialist states.</p>
<p>Wasn&#8217;t the &#8220;<strong>WAR</strong>&#8221; a manipulated and unsustainable economy, <strong>Rome</strong> and<br />
<strong>Germany</strong> and a few others have tried to create an economy based on <strong>NEW</strong><br />
conquests of their neighbors but they always fail.</p>
<p></bretcahill></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-13/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-12/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-12/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 22:15:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FDR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25100</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 4:26 PM, Sid9 wrote: > > &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221; wrote in > message news:4ECA7583.6000309 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230; >> On 11/21/2011 9:48 AM, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: >>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;CB@PrayForMe.com&#8221; >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> WHAT PAERT OF NO NEW TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU UNDERSTAND? >>>> >>>> >>>> GUBMENT MUST LEARN TO DO [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 4:26 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;BeamMeUpScotty&#8221;
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in<br />
> message news:4ECA7583.6000309<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230;<br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;<strong>CB</strong>@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>> <cb @PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>>><br />
>>> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass.  So<br />
>>> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
>> wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
>> 1944 24 <strong>23</strong>% 94% $200,000 $2.54M Individual<br />
>><br />
>> to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> The <strong>HIGH</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Can you tell us why it failed?<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg" >http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg</a><br />
>><br />
>> I don&#8217;t see any correlation between high taxes and a lack of poverty, do<br />
>> you?<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> &#8211;<br />
>><br />
><br />
> It didn&#8217;t fail.<br />
> Unemployment was non-existent.<br />
> Unlike the borrow and spend Republicans<br />
> <strong>FDR</strong> and the <strong>Democrats</strong> were paying for the war.</p>
<p>Bush had an <strong>unemployment</strong> rate of only 7% and Obama has a 9% <strong>unemployment</strong><br />
rate.  How can that be, Obama has spent more in 3 years than Bush ever<br />
did? Using your analogy we should have a lower <strong>unemployment</strong> rate NOW,<br />
after all the spending.</p>
<p>> Your post is a deceptive <strong>LIE</strong></p>
<p>Your truth is lacking any reality.</p>
<p>> We wouldn&#8217;t be in this situation if bush,jr paid for his war&#8217;s and<br />
> properly funded his big pharma friendly prescription plan.<br />
></p>
<p>Spending is good according to you.  Where the <strong>money</strong> comes from should be<br />
of no consequence because in the end the <strong>money</strong> is from the taxpayers<br />
regardless of the path it took to be spent .  The <strong>money</strong> was spent by<br />
Bush and then even more <strong>money</strong> spent by Obama and we are still at 9%<br />
<strong>unemployment</strong>&#8230;  why?</p>
<p>Taxing more and spending more will NOT help. Just look at Solyndra and<br />
spending that $500 million.  It&#8217;s from the tax payers and it payed for<br />
short term jobs to help <strong>Democrats</strong> re-election campaign.  It has done<br />
nothing to end the economic crash.</p>
<p>If you are pissing in the wind you won&#8217;t notice your peeing all over<br />
yourself during the rain.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s raining NOW, and you&#8217;re pissing in the wind.</p>
<p>> The situation was created by Republicans and now they obstruct solving<br />
> their problems.</p>
<p>Wrong and wrong.</p>
<p></cb></thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-12/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Children are made into sheep and easy targets for the gay sexual predators by the Schools that teach them that it&#8217;s HATE and it&#8217;s illegal to dislike and a HATE CRIME to defend themselves from the gay predators&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/children-are-made-into-sheep-and-easy-targets-for-the-gay-sexual-predators-by-the-schools-that-teach-them-that-its-hate-and-its-illegal-to-dislike-and-a-hate-crime-to-defend-themselves-from-the-gay-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/children-are-made-into-sheep-and-easy-targets-for-the-gay-sexual-predators-by-the-schools-that-teach-them-that-its-hate-and-its-illegal-to-dislike-and-a-hate-crime-to-defend-themselves-from-the-gay-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 20:09:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CITIZENS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constantly Repeating]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRIME]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DOOMING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FACILITIES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FACT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FORCING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GENDER]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HATE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[INTELLIGENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NOTE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PROBLEMS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RAPE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RIGHTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TENS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WORTHLESS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25092</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 10:46 AM, erschroedinger @&#038;*$?%gmail.com wrote: > On Nov 19, 5:20 pm, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: >> Children are made into sheep and easy targets for the gay sexual >> predators by the Schools that teach them that it&#8217;s HATE and it&#8217;s illegal >> to dislike and a HATE CRIME to defend themselves from the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 <strong>10</strong>:46 AM, <a href="mailto:erschroedinger<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>gmail.com">erschroedinger<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>gmail.com</a> wrote:<br />
> On Nov 19, 5:20 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>> Children are made into sheep and easy targets for the gay sexual<br />
>> predators by the Schools that teach them that it&#8217;s <strong>HATE</strong> and it&#8217;s illegal<br />
>> to dislike and a <strong>HATE</strong> <strong>CRIME</strong> to defend themselves from the gay predators&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>> This is the underlying problem with government schools, they teach the<br />
>> Democrat-Socialist agenda hidden as an under the desk education that is<br />
>> forced on all students.<br />
>><br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/19/2011 8:20 AM, (¯`·.¸ Craig Chilton ¸.·´¯)<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://www.TravelForPay.org" >http://www.TravelForPay.org</a> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>      [[[[    RESOURCE POST:  *FACTS* Don't Change.<br />
>>>               And Constantly *Repeating* Them is <strong>DOOMING</strong><br />
>>>               the Bigots' IRRATIONAL Hate-Agendas!   ]]]]<br />
>><br />
>>>     Egalitarians are <strong>INTELLIGENT</strong> enough to know that once FACTS<br />
>>> that are *devastating* to all bigots and their hate-agendas &#8211;<br />
>>> especially the ones that seek to *victimize* <strong>TENS</strong> of MILLIONS of<br />
>>> people by blocking them from (1) having across-the-board EQUAL<br />
>>> rights for all LGBT people, including Marriage Equality&#8230; for abso-<br />
>>> lutely NO good reason, and<br />
>><br />
>> We see one reason that jumped out at us this month, <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> that are after<br />
>> young boys in the public showers&#8230;..<br />
>><br />
>> If <acronym title="Gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> G&*$?%s</span></acronym> are different and need Gay Hate crime laws and need gay<br />
>> Marriage, then they also need *<strong>GENDER</strong> SPECIFIC <strong>FACILITIES</strong>* . and need to<br />
>> be kept out of locker rooms for heterosexuals.  The <acronym title="Gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> G&*$?%s</span></acronym> need a (G) for<br />
>> their sex on their drivers license.  Anyone known to have gay sex should<br />
>> be so designated permanently.    Then when caught in a boys facilities<br />
>> they can be chastised just as boys slipping into the girls bath room<br />
>> are,  and marked as sexual predators or stalkers.  As Men hanging out in<br />
>> the girls bathrooms are.<br />
>><br />
>> Then there&#8217;s military bunks boys camps&#8230;.. and other NOT so private<br />
>> areas where <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> can stalk and cruise for vulnerable situations with<br />
>> boys or men.    <acronym title="Gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> G&*$?%s</span></acronym> <strong>RIGHTS</strong> have been placed above the <strong>RIGHTS</strong> of hetero<br />
>> sexual men&#8230;.   <strong>HATE</strong> LAWS have replaced <strong>social</strong> taboos that once kept<br />
>> <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> from attacking/molesting young men are NOW making hetero sexual men<br />
>> targets for older gay sexual predators.   A fist was once used to<br />
>> warn-off <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> and it is NOW a <strong>HATE</strong> <strong>CRIME</strong>. Children are made into sheep<br />
>> and easy targets for the gay sexual predators by the Schools that teach<br />
>> them that it is illegal to dislike or defend themselves from the gay<br />
>> predators&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>> It is the *government that has created the <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>PROBLEMS</strong>* through <strong>social</strong><br />
>> engineering.<br />
>><br />
>>> (2) IRRATIONALLY seeking to hurl the<br />
>>> USAback into the pre-1973 Dark Ages of <strong>FORCING</strong> girls and wom-<br />
>>> en to gestate <strong>WORTHLESS</strong>-when-UNwanted pregnancies to term<br />
>>> against their will (a very real and unconscionable 9-month-long<br />
>>> form of <strong>RAPE</strong>)&#8230;have been marshalled and presented WELL &#8211;<br />
>>> the BEST way to put those resources to use is to RE-PRESENT<br />
>>> them *every* time that it is appropriate to do so.<br />
>><br />
>> The dark ages when they killed babies? Yes that is true, we are in the<br />
>> darkest of the baby killing ages where millions are killed despite the<br />
>> <strong>FACT</strong> that we have drugs and condoms and sterilization and more that can<br />
>> prevent the fertilization and creation of a person.<br />
>><br />
>> If you can call a corporation a person, isn&#8217;t it obvious that a human<br />
>> baby in or out of a uterus is a person.  First of all there is no<br />
>> specific mention that a person can NOT reside in a uterus. Secondly the<br />
>> GPS coordinates of a person inside the united States territory can be in<br />
>> a uterus. There is no distinction for person-hood.  A person is a live<br />
>> human inside of the united states.<br />
>><br />
>> A &#8220;citizen&#8221; is a person born inside the united states.<br />
>><br />
>> <strong>NOTE</strong> the distinction that a citizen is &#8220;born&#8221; inside the united States<br />
>> or naturalized after their birth, but they are still a person if they<br />
>> are in the united states and are NOT a citizen.<br />
>><br />
>> It isn&#8217;t a question of what &#8220;you&#8221; want, it&#8217;s a question of another<br />
>> persons <strong>RIGHTS</strong>&#8230;..   You get tired of your kids you can *NOT* just kill<br />
>> them under our constitution because they are persons with <strong>RIGHTS</strong>.   As<br />
>> is a person in the uterus.<br />
>><br />
>> The <strong>FACT</strong> you have committed a million murders a year is no reason to<br />
>> keep murdering a million children a year.<br />
>><br />
>> Vegans that can&#8217;t eat meat because they love all the little animals are<br />
>> a measure of your hypocrisy as they are mostly Democrat-Socialists that<br />
>> are willing to kill a human life but then make such a stink over their<br />
>> NOT killing animals to eat.<br />
>><br />
>> The ignorance of the LEFT-WING LOONS is colossal.<br />
><br />
> Most child sexual abuse occurs from heterosexual adults.</p>
<p>Most hand gun murders are black on black&#8230;..  so why do we need hate<br />
crime laws? You Liberals aren&#8217;t very consistent with your support of<br />
laws.  Sort of hypocritical aren&#8217;t you?</p>
<p>Is that what you are saying when you say, &#8220;most sex crimes are by<br />
heterosexuals&#8221;</p>
<p>98% of people are heterosexual.<br />
17% are black<br />
2% are gay</p>
<p>ALL ARE <strong>CITIZENS</strong> and all need to be equal under the law.</p>
<p>The problem with your scenario is that we need equal protection under<br />
the law and <acronym title="gays"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> g&*$?%s</span></acronym> are less than 2% of the population but still need to<br />
have laws that include them as a special hate law does. They need<br />
special Gender designations. That SPECIAL gender designation would be<br />
different than MALE or FEMALE, they would also be separated from the<br />
other GENDERS as the M/F are from each other already.  Or at least you<br />
say so when you say they need special hate crime laws and marriage laws.</p>
<p>They are different and need special treatment like a <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>GENDER</strong> WOULD NEED.</p>
</thendestroyeveryth>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/children-are-made-into-sheep-and-easy-targets-for-the-gay-sexual-predators-by-the-schools-that-teach-them-that-its-hate-and-its-illegal-to-dislike-and-a-hate-crime-to-defend-themselves-from-the-gay-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-11/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-11/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 19:28:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BILL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Great Depression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[La La Land]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Franklin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WORLD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25085</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 1:55 PM, liberal wrote: > On Nov 21, 1:29 pm, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: >> On 11/21/2011 12:43 PM, d&#8230;@dudu.org wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:24:48 -0600, First. Post >>> wrote: >> >>>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:49:49 -0700, d&#8230;@dudu.org wrote: >> >>>>> On Mon, 21 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 1:55 PM, liberal wrote:<br />
> On Nov 21, 1:29 pm, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 12:<strong>43</strong> PM, <a href="mailto:d...@dudu.org">d&#8230;@dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 <strong>11</strong>:24:48 -0600, First. Post<br />
>>> <occupiersdumberthand ...@invalid.net> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:49:49 -0700, <a href="mailto:d...@dudu.org">d&#8230;@dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 <strong>11</strong>:00:03 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:d...@dudu.org">d&#8230;@dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>>>>>> <c ...@PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass.  So<br />
>>>>>>> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
>>>>>> wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
>>>>>> 1944   24      <strong>23</strong>%     94%     $200,000        $2.54M  Individual<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> The <strong>HIGH</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Can you tell us why it failed?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg" >http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg</a><br />
>><br />
>>>>>> I don&#8217;t see any correlation between high taxes and a lack of poverty, do<br />
>>>>>> you?<br />
>><br />
>>>>> If cutting taxes improved the economy we would be in a boom cycle<br />
>>>>> right now, dumbass, not a bust.  You people replace knowledge with<br />
>>>>> stupidity and expect everybody to accept your stupidity as fact. Won&#8217;t<br />
>>>>> work moron.<br />
>><br />
>>>> So you can&#8217;t refute their post.<br />
>><br />
>>>> And you cannot truthfully state that simply raising taxes will cure a<br />
>>>> damned thing.<br />
>><br />
>>> Nobody claimed it would be a total cure for poverty, moron.  That is<br />
>>> your straw man.<br />
>><br />
>> Did doubling or tripling taxes cut poverty by 50%?<br />
>><br />
>> &#8211;<br />
><br />
> In the early 1940s, poverty disappeared in America. Yes, that&#8217;s when<br />
> the federal income tax was raised to 91%.<br />
><br />
> What do you fail to grasp?</p>
<p>["The <strong>Great Depression</strong> and World War II<br />
The <strong>Great Depression</strong> and World War II cast long shadows over American<br />
life in the 1940s. During the 1930s <strong>President Franklin</strong> D. Roosevelt's<br />
New Deal created a sense of economic optimism and eased the suffering of<br />
many, but it did not eradicate poverty or solve the economic crisis. In<br />
1941 as many as 40 percent of all American families lived below poverty<br />
level. Nearly eight million workers earned less than the legal minimum<br />
wage. Another eight million Americans were <strong>unemployed</strong>, and the median<br />
income was only $2,000 per year. While the economic picture improved<br />
during the 1940s, the sense of crisis created by the Depression<br />
permanently altered lifestyles and attitudes. The so-called depression<br />
mentality of fear and economic caution marked an entire generation,"]</p>
<p>Imagine that, things improved after that <strong>WORLD</strong> <strong>WAR</strong>?   Maybe you can tell<br />
me how things could have been getting any worse?   Do you remember the<br />
&#8220;G/I <strong>BILL</strong>&#8220;&#8230;   part of the pay for military service that they collected<br />
when and if they lived to come home.</p>
<p>You live in La-La Land.    I have an 87 year old mother that can tell<br />
you about it, she was there.  My father went home to become a contractor<br />
and builder.  May I remind you that we just had a boom time after 9/<strong>11</strong>,<br />
the economy was roaring and taxes were lower than 94%.</p>
<p>The number of poor on food stamps decreased.</p>
<p></c></thendestroyeveryth></occupiersdumberthand></thendestroyeveryth>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-11/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-10/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-10/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 19:10:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BUY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WWII]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25083</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 12:46 PM, wy wrote: > On Nov 21, 12:24 pm, First. Post > wrote: >> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:49:49 -0700, d&#8230;@dudu.org wrote: >>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:00:03 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty >>> wrote: >> >>>> On 11/21/2011 9:48 AM, d&#8230;@dudu.org wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com&#8221; >>>>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 12:46 PM, wy wrote:<br />
> On Nov 21, 12:24 pm, First. Post <occupiersdumberthand ...@invalid.net><br />
> wrote:<br />
>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:49:49 -0700, <a href="mailto:d...@dudu.org">d&#8230;@dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 <strong>11</strong>:00:03 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>
<thendestroyeveryth ...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:d...@dudu.org">d&#8230;@dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>>>> <c ...@PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>><br />
>>>>> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass.  So<br />
>>>>> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.<br />
>><br />
>>>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
>>>> wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
>>>> 1944    24      <strong>23</strong>%     94%     $200,000        $2.54M  Individual<br />
>><br />
>>>> to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.<br />
>><br />
>>>> The <strong>HIGH</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.<br />
>><br />
>>>> Can you tell us why it failed?<br />
>><br />
>>>> <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg" >http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg</a><br />
>><br />
>>>> I don&#8217;t see any correlation between high taxes and a lack of poverty, do<br />
>>>> you?<br />
>><br />
>>> If cutting taxes improved the economy we would be in a boom cycle<br />
>>> right now, dumbass, not a bust.  You people replace knowledge with<br />
>>> stupidity and expect everybody to accept your stupidity as fact. Won&#8217;t<br />
>>> work moron.<br />
>><br />
>> So you can&#8217;t refute their post.<br />
>><br />
>> And you cannot truthfully state that simply raising taxes will cure a<br />
>> damned thing.<br />
>><br />
>> Try to get you head out of your own simplistic <acronym title="ass"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym> long enough to<br />
>> realize that a single tax break alone does not fully re energize any<br />
>> economy.<br />
>> All the tax cuts in the world will accomplish nothing as long as you<br />
>> have an administration that has openly declared its&#8217; hostility towards<br />
>> businesses and the job creators.<br />
>> The only thing it has accomplished is to drive even more companies<br />
>> (even including those that were given bailout <strong>money</strong>) to <strong>China</strong> and<br />
>> elsewhere.<br />
><br />
> The high taxes in 1944 helped win the war.</p>
<p>AAAaaaaaaahhhhheeeeemmmmm&#8230;.   it was a war and people bought Bonds too<br />
and they rationed and collected rubber and brass and Steel to recycle as<br />
bombs.  Copper pots and pans became bullets.</p>
<p>If you limit people to one meat dinner per week and one pair of shoes<br />
per year while convincing people to <strong>BUY</strong> U.S. Bonds, with a top tax rate<br />
of 94% and the best you can do is say that you could dump the Nation<br />
into the Fascism of <strong>WWII</strong> life 100% of the time just to end poverty and<br />
you still have zero proof that it would work because <strong>WWII</strong> still had poor.</p>
<p>> Or had you forgotten<br />
> that?  And hey, imagine that.  If it could help win a whole big world<br />
> war, imagine how it could solve poverty.  But it seems there&#8217;s no<br />
> <strong>money</strong> to be made for anyone in solving poverty, so I guess you&#8217;re just<br />
> stuck with it.</p>
<p>Is it time for a stupid and futile gesture on someones part?</p>
<p>You actually believe that <strong>money</strong> causes poverty?</p>
<p>Have you NOT been giving <strong>money</strong> to people for 70 years? Aren&#8217;t there just<br />
as many poor people today?</p>
<p></c></thendestroyeveryth></occupiersdumberthand></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-10/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Lobbyist WHO Controls America&#8230;.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/the-lobbyist-who-controls-america/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/the-lobbyist-who-controls-america/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 18:41:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lee Curtis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libertarian Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PARTY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TEA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25075</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 1:19 PM, Lee Curtis wrote: > Z wrote: > >> On Nov 21, 8:29 am, &#8220;6313 Dead, 1456 since 1/20/09&#8243; >> wrote: >>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:28:56 -0500, C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com wrote: >>>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com&#8221; >>>> wrote: >>> >>>>> WHAT PAERT OF NO NEW TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 1:19 PM, <strong>Lee Curtis</strong> wrote:<br />
> Z wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On Nov 21, 8:29 am, &#8220;6313 Dead, 1456 since 1/20/09&#8243; <d ...@gone.com><br />
>> wrote:<br />
>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:28:56 -0500, <a href="mailto:C...@PrayForMe.com">C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com</a> wrote:<br />
>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;C&#8230;@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>>> <c ...@PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>TAXES</strong> CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>>><br />
>>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>>><br />
>>>> As a voter, I&#8217;ll vote anyone out of office who raises my taxes or<br />
>>>> my mean rich bosses.<br />
>>><br />
>>>> Obama hired at least 120 thousand &#8216;new&#8217; federal workers during a<br />
>>>> recession! What new ways are they spending out <strong>money</strong>?<br />
>>><br />
>>> Well, they&#8217;re paying their rent, buying groceries, clothes, going to<br />
>>> restaurants and movies, maybe putting a down on a car&#8230;<br />
>>><br />
>>> You really don&#8217;t understand how an economy works at all, do you?<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>> Lower taxes and less government spending will make it work better.<br />
>> Higher taxes and government wasteful spending will make it worse.<br />
><br />
><br />
>    We should elect Republican like <strong>Reagan</strong> who reduced<br />
> government spending. Oh, wait, he didn&#8217;t. Or maybe elect<br />
> a president like Bush who reduced government spending.<br />
> Oh, wait, he didn&#8217;t either. Or maybe Romney or Perry.<br />
> Oh, wait&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.<br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
WE need a new type of politician that spends less.</p>
<p>The <strong>TEA</strong> <strong>PARTY</strong> is on that track.</p>
<p></c></d></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/the-lobbyist-who-controls-america/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-7/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-7/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 18:29:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25071</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 12:43 PM, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:24:48 -0600, First. Post > wrote: > >> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:49:49 -0700, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:00:03 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 11/21/2011 9:48 AM, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: >>>>> On Mon, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 12:<strong>43</strong> PM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 <strong>11</strong>:24:48 -0600, First. Post<br />
> <occupiersdumberthandirt @invalid.net> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:49:49 -0700, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 <strong>11</strong>:00:03 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>>>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;<strong>CB</strong>@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>>>> <cb @PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass.  So<br />
>>>>> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
>>>> wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
>>>> 1944 	24 	<strong>23</strong>% 	94% 	$200,000 	$2.54M 	Individual<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The <strong>HIGH</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Can you tell us why it failed?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg" >http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg</a><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> I don&#8217;t see any correlation between high taxes and a lack of poverty, do<br />
>>>> you?<br />
>>><br />
>>> If cutting taxes improved the economy we would be in a boom cycle<br />
>>> right now, dumbass, not a bust.  You people replace knowledge with<br />
>>> stupidity and expect everybody to accept your stupidity as fact. Won&#8217;t<br />
>>> work moron.<br />
>><br />
>> So you can&#8217;t refute their post.<br />
>><br />
>> And you cannot truthfully state that simply raising taxes will cure a<br />
>> damned thing.<br />
><br />
> Nobody claimed it would be a total cure for poverty, moron.  That is<br />
> your straw man.</p>
<p>Did doubling or tripling taxes cut poverty by 50%?</p>
<p></cb></thendestroyeverything></occupiersdumberthandirt></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-7/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-5/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-5/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 18:00:03 +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[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[heart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SUPPLY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25065</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 11:40 AM, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 10:54:35 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: > >> On 11/21/2011 9:48 AM, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: >>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;CB@PrayForMe.com&#8221; >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> WHAT PAERT OF NO NEW TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU UNDERSTAND? >>>> >>>> >>>> GUBMENT [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 <strong>11</strong>:40 AM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 <strong>10</strong>:54:35 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;<strong>CB</strong>@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>> <cb @PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>>><br />
>>> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass.  So<br />
>>> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
>> wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
>> 1944 	24 	<strong>23</strong>% 	94% 	$200,000 	$2.54M 	Individual<br />
>><br />
>> to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> The <strong>HIGH</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Can you tell us why it failed?<br />
><br />
> <a href="http://people.stern.nyu.edu/nroubini/SUPPLY.HTM" >http://people.stern.nyu.edu/nroubini/SUPPLY.HTM</a></p>
<p>The <strong>heart</strong> of this garbage you linked is ignoring that&#8230; it isn&#8217;t<br />
claimed that the ratio of <strong>GDP</strong> to Treasury coffers income was going to<br />
<strong>change</strong>.</p>
<p>It is a given that 18% of the <strong>GDP</strong> is the average that the treasury will<br />
CONSUME.  But 18% of a 16trillion dollar <strong>GDP</strong> is MORE than 18% of a<br />
13trillion dollar <strong>GDP</strong>.</p>
<p>You really aren&#8217;t &#8220;getting it&#8221; are you?</p>
<p></cb></thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-5/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-4/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:37:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GIF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TREASURY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25063</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 11:49 AM, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:00:03 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: > >> On 11/21/2011 9:48 AM, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: >>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;CB@PrayForMe.com&#8221; >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> WHAT PAERT OF NO NEW TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU UNDERSTAND? >>>> >>>> >>>> GUBMENT [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 <strong>11</strong>:49 AM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 <strong>11</strong>:00:03 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;<strong>CB</strong>@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>> <cb @PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>>><br />
>>> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass.  So<br />
>>> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
>> wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
>> 1944 	24 	<strong>23</strong>% 	94% 	$200,000 	$2.54M 	Individual<br />
>><br />
>> to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> The <strong>HIGH</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Can you tell us why it failed?<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg" >http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg</a><br />
>><br />
>> I don&#8217;t see any correlation between high taxes and a lack of poverty, do<br />
>> you?<br />
><br />
> If cutting taxes improved the economy we would be in a boom cycle<br />
> right now, dumbass, not a bust.  You people replace knowledge with<br />
> stupidity and expect everybody to accept your stupidity as fact. Won&#8217;t<br />
> work moron.</p>
<p>So we are in a bust due to spending NOT due to low taxes.    Taxes will<br />
NOT increase the income to fill the treasury&#8230;.   but spending more<br />
than 18% of <strong>GDP</strong> will empty the Treasury.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&#038;id=1324" >http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&#038;id=1324</a><br />
*Bottom of the page in charts*</p>
<p>The income to the treasury when the taxes were 94% was no boon to the<br />
<strong>TREASURY</strong> and it does crush the economy.  The way to get more taxes into<br />
the Treasury is to keep income taxes low enough to encourage economic<br />
growth, without growth you hit the glass ceiling of 18% Treasury<br />
receipts and stop.  Stopping growth then stops more income into the<br />
treasury.  So raising taxes will leave the treasury and economy smaller<br />
than the original lower taxes.</p>
<p>Raising Taxes is not a linear function.</p>
<p>But Democrat-<strong>Socialists</strong> are too stupid to understand it.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/Content/GIF/hist_receipt_source_GDP.gif" >http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/Content/GIF/hist_receipt_source_GDP.gif</a></p>
<p>No matter what the taxes are raised to, you will only get an average of<br />
18% of the <strong>GDP</strong>, at that point when you raise taxes more, you will<br />
decrease the size/growth of the economy.</p>
<p></cb></thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-4/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-3/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:33:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUBMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LEARN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAERT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TREASURY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNDERSTAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTHOUT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25061</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 11:49 AM, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:00:03 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty > wrote: > >> On 11/21/2011 9:48 AM, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: >>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;CB@PrayForMe.com&#8221; >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> WHAT PAERT OF NO NEW TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU UNDERSTAND? >>>> >>>> >>>> GUBMENT [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 <strong>11</strong>:49 AM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 <strong>11</strong>:00:03 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty<br />
>
<thendestroyeverything @blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
>>> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;<strong>CB</strong>@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
>>> <cb @PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> WHAT <strong>PAERT</strong> OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU <strong>UNDERSTAND</strong>?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> <strong>GUBMENT</strong> MUST <strong>LEARN</strong> TO DO <strong>WTHOUT</strong>!<br />
>>><br />
>>> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass.  So<br />
>>> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
>> wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
>> 1944 	24 	<strong>23</strong>% 	94% 	$200,000 	$2.54M 	Individual<br />
>><br />
>> to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> The <strong>HIGH</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> Can you tell us why it failed?<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg" >http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg</a><br />
>><br />
>> I don&#8217;t see any correlation between high taxes and a lack of poverty, do<br />
>> you?<br />
><br />
> If cutting taxes improved the economy we would be in a boom cycle<br />
> right now, dumbass, not a bust.  You people replace knowledge with<br />
> stupidity and expect everybody to accept your stupidity as fact. Won&#8217;t<br />
> work moron.</p>
<p>So we are in a bust due to spending NOT due to low taxes.    Taxes will<br />
NOT increase the income to fill the treasury&#8230;.   but spending more<br />
than 18% of <strong>GDP</strong> will empty the Treasury.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&#038;id=1324" >http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&#038;id=1324</a><br />
*Bottom of the page in charts*</p>
<p>The income to the treasury when the taxes were 94% was no boon to the<br />
<strong>TREASURY</strong> and it does crush the economy.  The way to get more taxes into<br />
the Treasury is to keep income taxes low enough to encourage economic<br />
growth, without growth you hit the glass ceiling of 18% Treasury<br />
receipts and stop.  Stopping growth then stops more income into the<br />
treasury.  So raising taxes will leave the treasury and economy smaller<br />
than the original lower taxes.</p>
<p>Raising Taxes is not a linear function.</p>
<p>But Democrat-<strong>Socialists</strong> are too stupid to understand it.</p>
<p></cb></thendestroyeverything>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 16:00:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25059</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 9:48 AM, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;CB@PrayForMe.com&#8221; > wrote: > >> >> >> WHAT PAERT OF NO NEW TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU UNDERSTAND? >> >> >> GUBMENT MUST LEARN TO DO WTHOUT! > > It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass. So [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;<strong>CB</strong>@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
> <cb @PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> WHAT PAERT OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU UNDERSTAND?<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> GUBMENT MUST LEARN TO DO WTHOUT!<br />
><br />
> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass.  So<br />
> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.</p>
<p>If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.</p>
<p>Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
1944 	24 	<strong>23</strong>% 	94% 	$200,000 	$2.54M 	Individual</p>
<p>to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.</p>
<p>The HIGH <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.</p>
<p>Can you tell us why it failed?</p>
<p><a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg" >http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg</a></p>
<p>I don&#8217;t see any correlation between high taxes and a lack of poverty, do<br />
you?</p>
<p></cb></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If High taxes would solve all our problem then poverty would have been wiped out in 1944 when income taxes were at 98%.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 15:54:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Mon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=25057</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/21/2011 9:48 AM, deep @&#038;*$?%dudu.org wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;CB@PrayForMe.com&#8221; > wrote: > >> >> >> WHAT PAERT OF NO NEW TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU UNDERSTAND? >> >> >> GUBMENT MUST LEARN TO DO WTHOUT! > > It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass. So [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/21/2011 9:48 AM, <a href="mailto:deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org">deep<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dudu.org</a> wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Mon</strong>, 21 Nov 2011 09:18:26 -0500, &#8220;<strong>CB</strong>@PrayForMe.com&#8221;<br />
> <cb @PrayForMe.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> WHAT PAERT OF NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES CAN&#8217;T YOU UNDERSTAND?<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> GUBMENT MUST LEARN TO DO WTHOUT!<br />
><br />
> It&#8217;s not the &#8220;gubment&#8221; that going to have to do without, dumbass.  So<br />
> who&#8217;s benefits get cut?  Oh I know, everybody&#8217;s but yours.</p>
<p>If High taxes would solve all our problems then poverty would have been<br />
wiped out in 1944 &#8211; 1986 when income taxes were as high as 94%.</p>
<p>Income Tax Act of 1944<br />
1944 	24 	<strong>23</strong>% 	94% 	$200,000 	$2.54M 	Individual</p>
<p>to 1981 where it was 70% and dropped in 1986 to 38%.</p>
<p>The HIGH <strong>TAX</strong> wasn&#8217;t a cure for poverty.</p>
<p>Can you tell us why it failed?</p>
<p></cb></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/21/if-high-taxes-would-solve-all-our-problem-then-poverty-would-have-been-wiped-out-in-1944-when-income-taxes-were-at-98/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>George Soros Is An Infamous $Billionaire Socialist From Kenya Who Ran A Nazi Death Camp When He Was 11 With Bill Ayers.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/18/george-soros-is-an-infamous-billionaire-socialist-from-kenya-who-ran-a-nazi-death-camp-when-he-was-11-with-bill-ayers/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/18/george-soros-is-an-infamous-billionaire-socialist-from-kenya-who-ran-a-nazi-death-camp-when-he-was-11-with-bill-ayers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:10:01 +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[43]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACORN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Ayers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Soros]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Thu]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=24977</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/17/2011 10:47 PM, Georgious wrote: > 6313 Dead, 1456 since 1/20/09 wrote >> >> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 19:42:52 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty wrote: >> >>> On 11/17/2011 7:37 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote: >>>> On 11/17/2011 11:43 AM, CB @&#038;*$?%PrayForMe.com wrote: >>>> >>>> ACORN does not exist, kooker. >>> >>> The son of ACORN >>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/17/2011 <strong>10</strong>:47 PM, Georgious wrote:<br />
> 6313 Dead, 1456 since 1/20/09 wrote<br />
>><br />
>> <strong>On Thu</strong>, 17 Nov 2011 19:42:52 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> On <strong>11</strong>/17/2011 7:<strong>37</strong> PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/17/2011 <strong>11</strong>:<strong>43</strong> AM, <a href="mailto:CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com">CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com</a> wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> <strong>ACORN</strong> does not exist, kooker.<br />
>>><br />
>>> The son of <strong>ACORN</strong><br />
>>><br />
>>> <strong>ACORN</strong> II<br />
>>><br />
>>> The Ghost of <strong>ACORN</strong><br />
>>><br />
>>> <strong>ACORN</strong> REVISITED<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> <strong>ACORN</strong> HAS A <strong>NEW</strong> NAME&#8230;  BUT THE SONG REMAINS THE SAME.<br />
>><br />
>> And heaven forbid that lots of Americans should be able to vote.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
><br />
> Unemployed <acronym title="assholes"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym> like white trash &#8220;Beam Me Up&#8221; do not contribute to society.</p>
<p>And where is the law that says anyone must &#8220;contribute to Society&#8221;</p>
<p>Whether I do or do NOT is only of interest to BUSY BODY little old<br />
ladies&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>But I&#8217;ll place my attributes against what you have done in you life.<br />
I&#8217;m confident I have done more than some and less than others.   Which<br />
is really NOT your concern.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/18/george-soros-is-an-infamous-billionaire-socialist-from-kenya-who-ran-a-nazi-death-camp-when-he-was-11-with-bill-ayers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ACORN, George Soros and the core of the Democratic Party is materially supports OWS anarchy</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/17/acorn-george-soros-and-the-core-of-the-democratic-party-is-materially-supports-ows-anarchy/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/17/acorn-george-soros-and-the-core-of-the-democratic-party-is-materially-supports-ows-anarchy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 00:42:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[37]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACORN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anarchy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democratic Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Soros]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lamont Cranston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OWS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=24943</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/17/2011 7:37 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote: > On 11/17/2011 11:43 AM, CB @&#038;*$?%PrayForMe.com wrote: > > ACORN does not exist, kooker. The son of ACORN ACORN II The Ghost of ACORN ACORN REVISITED ACORN HAS A NEW NAME&#8230; BUT THE SONG REMAINS THE SAME.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/17/2011 7:<strong>37</strong> PM, <strong>Lamont Cranston</strong> wrote:<br />
> On <strong>11</strong>/17/2011 <strong>11</strong>:<strong>43</strong> AM, <a href="mailto:CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com">CB<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>PrayForMe.com</a> wrote:<br />
><br />
> <strong>ACORN</strong> does not exist, kooker.</p>
<p>The son of <strong>ACORN</strong></p>
<p><strong>ACORN</strong> II</p>
<p>The Ghost of <strong>ACORN</strong></p>
<p><strong>ACORN</strong> REVISITED</p>
<p><strong>ACORN</strong> HAS A <strong>NEW</strong> NAME&#8230;  BUT THE SONG REMAINS THE SAME.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/17/acorn-george-soros-and-the-core-of-the-democratic-party-is-materially-supports-ows-anarchy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bank of AmeriKa Dumps $75 Trillion In Derivatives On Taxpayers &#8211; Super Committee Looks Away &lt; &lt; &lt; Seize Bank of AmeriKa Now!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/13/bank-of-amerika-dumps-75-trillion-in-derivatives-on-taxpayers-super-committee-looks-away-seize-bank-of-amerika-now/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/13/bank-of-amerika-dumps-75-trillion-in-derivatives-on-taxpayers-super-committee-looks-away-seize-bank-of-amerika-now/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Nov 2011 17:28:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexual Harassment Panda]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=24701</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/13/2011 12:04 AM, Old Pif wrote: > On Nov 12, 8:23 pm, Sexual Harassment Panda wrote: > >> >>> If it is illegal it can be challenged in court. >> >> I think the Senate may hold a hearing on this transfer. At least I read about >> that a few days ago. >> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/13/2011 12:04 AM, Old Pif wrote:<br />
> On Nov 12, 8:<strong>23</strong> pm, <strong>Sexual Harassment Panda</strong> <bi ...@hotmail.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>><br />
>>> If it is illegal it can be challenged in court.<br />
>><br />
>> I think the Senate may hold a hearing on this transfer. At least I read about<br />
>> that a few days ago.<br />
>><br />
><br />
> Post a link. I will write my two senators right away.</p>
<p>Vote them out, ALL <strong>NEW</strong> people, tea Party that has promised to NOT follow<br />
the OLD ones that created this mess.</p>
<p></bi></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/13/bank-of-amerika-dumps-75-trillion-in-derivatives-on-taxpayers-super-committee-looks-away-seize-bank-of-amerika-now/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Socialism is collapsing</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/10/socialism-is-collapsing/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/10/socialism-is-collapsing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2011 20:14:33 +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>
		<category><![CDATA[Capitalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COMMUNIST]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Evil Empire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[owned]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Read Marx]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialist #]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Somalia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[STATE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[utopia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wealth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=24567</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/10/2011 3:07 PM, liberal wrote: > On Nov 5, 2:50 pm, Nickname unavailable wrote: >> On Nov 5, 9:59 am, &#8220;TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher&#8221; >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote: >>> On Nov 4, 9:28 pm, Harold Burton wrote: >> >>>> In article >>>> , >>>> &#8220;TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher&#8221; >> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/<strong>10</strong>/2011 3:07 PM, liberal wrote:<br />
> On Nov 5, 2:50 pm, Nickname unavailable <vide ...@tcq.net> wrote:<br />
>> On Nov 5, 9:59 am, &#8220;TibetanMonkey, the <strong>Beach Cruiser Philosopher</strong>&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> <comandante .ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>> On Nov 4, 9:28 pm, Harold Burton <hal .i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> In article<br />
>>>> <a6c11d65 -2f91-44f0-8030-c6650763c...@h5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,<br />
>>>>  &#8220;TibetanMonkey, the <strong>Beach Cruiser Philosopher</strong>&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>>>  <comandante .ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>> On Nov 2, <strong>10</strong>:41 pm, Marvin the Martian <mar ...@ontomars.org> wrote:<br />
>>>>>> On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 19:25:19 -0700, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Philosopher wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On Nov 2, 12:45 pm, Old Baye <o ...@in.valid> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> On <strong>11</strong>/2/2011 7:17 AM, TibetanMonkey, the <strong>Beach Cruiser Philosopher</strong><br />
>>>>>>>> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 1, 7:44 pm, Nickname unavailable<vide ...@tcq.net>  wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>   the old economy(free market economics, free trade, globalism)is<br />
>>>>>>>>>> collapsing.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Yes, it is.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>>> No, it is NOT.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> Yes, you are broke. That&#8217;s why <strong>Europe</strong> is turning to <strong>China</strong> for help. Our<br />
>>>>>>> survival depends on a communist nation, not terribly evil like the Evil<br />
>>>>>>> Empire though.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> And you are proud to say, &#8220;NO <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>TAXES</strong>!&#8221; You must admit the Chinese are<br />
>>>>>>> smarter.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> <strong>Capitalism</strong> is disappearing, and the socialism that is replacing it is<br />
>>>>>> collapsing.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> <strong>Capitalism</strong> depends upon government to protect property rights, but with<br />
>>>>>> the invention of fiat <strong>money</strong> based on debt to privately <strong>owned</strong> central<br />
>>>>>> banks, government itself has created the <strong>system</strong> for the central banks to<br />
>>>>>> steal trillions of dollars from the people.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> <strong>Capitalism</strong> and Communism are both complementary and competitive, but<br />
>>>>> capitalism can beat starvation communism and consumer communism . . .<br />
>><br />
>>>> Hahahahahaha. Care to explain &#8220;consumer communism&#8221;?  Thought not.<br />
>><br />
>>>> snicker<br />
>><br />
>>> <strong>China</strong> is the perfect example. Wasn&#8217;t that obvious. Usually communism<br />
>>> discourages consumption but <strong>China</strong> is the black sheep in that regard.<br />
>>> And it works better than capitalism. Of course, it works better for<br />
>>> the <strong>system</strong>, NOT the workers.<br />
>><br />
>>  correct. there is very little difference between free market<br />
>> capitalism(fascism), and communism(marxism), in either <strong>system</strong>, almost<br />
>> all <strong>wealth</strong> and <strong>power</strong> ends up in the hands of a few.<br />
>><br />
>>  so far not one conservative/libertarian/fascist/commie sympathizer<br />
>> has been able to refute the above.<br />
><br />
> Well, then you need me to explain the difference.<br />
><br />
> You, apparently, think <strong>China</strong> is a communist society. It isn&#8217;t. It is a<br />
> *<strong>SOCIALIST</strong>* society. <strong>Read Marx</strong>. Marx said there has to be a<br />
> &#8220;whithering away&#8221; of the **<strong>STATE</strong>** in order to &#8220;progress&#8221; to the<br />
> &#8220;true&#8221; ***<strong>COMMUNIST</strong>*** society. You see, in fact, a communist economy<br />
> is very much like a libertarian economy. No government, no<br />
> rules&#8230;.Why? Because both philosophies assume a population of totally<br />
> moral and totally cooperative citizens. Thus no government and no<br />
> rules needed.<br />
><br />
> From Philosophy 103 (overview of economic theories) :<br />
><br />
> Feudalism > capitalism > socialism > whithering away of the state ><br />
> communism&#8230;.</p>
<p>Feudalism > capitalism > socialism > whithering away of the state ><br />
communism > Somalia&#8230;.</p>
<p>Somalia has become the Socialist <strong>UTOPIA</strong>.</p>
<p></vide></o></mar></comandante></a6c11d65></hal></comandante></vide></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/10/socialism-is-collapsing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Globalist Attack on National Sovereignty in Libya &lt; &lt; &lt; GO NWO!!!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/07/the-globalist-attack-on-national-sovereignty-in-libya-go-nwo/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/07/the-globalist-attack-on-national-sovereignty-in-libya-go-nwo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2011 15:34:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Al Qaeda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATION]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NWO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ORDER]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prime Minister]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RICH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WORLD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=24327</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/5/2011 3:52 PM, Möebius Pretzel wrote: > The Globalist Attack on National Sovereignty in Libya > > Ethan Jacobs, J.D. > Activist Post > > Video and photographic evidence obtained by Global Post demonstrates > that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was literally sodomized before being > murdered by NATO/U.S.-backed Al-Qaeda rebel forces. > > [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/5/2011 3:52 PM, Möebius Pretzel wrote:<br />
> The Globalist Attack on National Sovereignty in <strong>Libya</strong><br />
><br />
> Ethan Jacobs, J.D.<br />
> Activist Post<br />
><br />
> Video and photographic evidence obtained by <strong>Global</strong> Post demonstrates<br />
> that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was literally sodomized before being<br />
> murdered by <strong>NATO</strong>/U.S.-backed Al-Qaeda rebel forces.<br />
><br />
> The footage reveals the mindset of the <strong>NATO</strong> backed forces, violent thugs<br />
> that U.S. taxpayers are funding as their homes are foreclosed.<br />
><br />
> It is a mindset that clearly knows no bounds and has been unleashed on<br />
> sovereign nations worldwide &#8230;<br />
><br />
> 1/libya-globalist-attack-on-national.html</a></p>
<p><strong>Libya</strong> is another &#8220;New World Order&#8221; Nation created by <strong>NATO</strong>, the mercenary<br />
army of the <strong>RICH</strong> Bankers.</p>
<p><strong>NATO</strong> is out of control,</p>
<p>Then the <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>WORLD</strong> <strong>ORDER</strong> told the Greek <strong>Prime Minister</strong> to get in line<br />
and accept the <strong>Economic</strong> theft of his <strong>NATION</strong> or he would be driven from<br />
office.  The New World Order, is moving faster and faster and people are<br />
getting poorer and poorer&#8230;&#8230;    One world Government is the problem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/07/the-globalist-attack-on-national-sovereignty-in-libya-go-nwo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Capitalism is finally collapsing but there&#8217;s hope</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/02/capitalism-is-finally-collapsing-but-theres-hope/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/02/capitalism-is-finally-collapsing-but-theres-hope/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2011 03:28:11 +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>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NYC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wall St]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=24183</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/2/2011 10:25 PM, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher wrote: > On Nov 2, 12:45 pm, Old Baye wrote: >> On 11/2/2011 7:17 AM, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher wrote: >> >>> On Nov 1, 7:44 pm, Nickname unavailable wrote: >> >>>> the old economy(free market economics, free trade, globalism)is >>>> collapsing. >> >>> Yes, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>11</strong>/2/2011 <strong>10</strong>:25 PM, TibetanMonkey, the <strong>Beach Cruiser Philosopher</strong> wrote:<br />
> On Nov 2, 12:45 pm, Old Baye <o ...@in.valid> wrote:<br />
>> On <strong>11</strong>/2/2011 7:17 AM, TibetanMonkey, the <strong>Beach Cruiser Philosopher</strong> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> On Nov 1, 7:44 pm, Nickname unavailable<vide ...@tcq.net>  wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>>   the old economy(free market economics, free trade, globalism)is<br />
>>>> collapsing.<br />
>><br />
>>> Yes, it is.<br />
>><br />
>> No, it is NOT.<br />
><br />
> Yes, you are broke. That&#8217;s why Europe is turning to <strong>China</strong> for help.<br />
> Our survival depends on a communist nation, not terribly evil like the<br />
> Evil Empire though.<br />
><br />
> And you are proud to say, &#8220;NO <strong>NEW</strong> TAXES!&#8221; You must admit the Chinese<br />
> are smarter.</p>
<p>Yes they would have sent tanks to clear out Occupy <strong>Wall St</strong>.-<strong>NYC</strong>-<br />
Zuccotti Square&#8230;</p>
<p>I can see the smart in that.</p>
<p></vide></o></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/11/02/capitalism-is-finally-collapsing-but-theres-hope/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A founder of ‘Occupy Wall Street’ talks about movement’s origin &amp; what co mes next</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/10/24/a-founder-of-%e2%80%98occupy-wall-street%e2%80%99-talks-about-movement%e2%80%99s-origin-what-co-mes-next/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/10/24/a-founder-of-%e2%80%98occupy-wall-street%e2%80%99-talks-about-movement%e2%80%99s-origin-what-co-mes-next/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2011 02:25:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Captain Compassion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wall Street]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=23943</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/24/2011 10:09 PM, Captain Compassion wrote: > &#8220;The universe is eight billion years old, the last two billion of > which have produced intelligent life. Does this person have inside Knowledge of the universe and that no intelligence, was born before ours anywhere in the universe? The big question is, why has there been [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On <strong>10</strong>/24/2011 <strong>10</strong>:09 PM, <strong>Captain Compassion</strong> wrote:<br />
> &#8220;The universe is eight billion years old, the last two billion of<br />
> which have produced intelligent life.</p>
<p>Does this person have inside Knowledge of the universe and that no<br />
intelligence, was born before ours anywhere in the universe?</p>
<p>The big question is, why has there been NO <strong>NEW</strong> intelligent life that has<br />
different <strong>DNA</strong> from the humans already on earth.</p>
<p>Shouldn&#8217;t <strong>NEW</strong> forms of life be created everyday on earth, we have all<br />
the elements on earth so new life with different <strong>DNA</strong> should be all<br />
around us? Yet we don&#8217;t see it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/10/24/a-founder-of-%e2%80%98occupy-wall-street%e2%80%99-talks-about-movement%e2%80%99s-origin-what-co-mes-next/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Original plan that could have stopped this insanity</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/10/18/the-original-plan-that-could-have-stopped-this-insanity/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/10/18/the-original-plan-that-could-have-stopped-this-insanity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2011 01:57:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Border]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GREEN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ITEM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prostitutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smugglers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=23703</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[*HOW TO ALLOW AMERICA TO SURVIVE* And give America back to Americans Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and competition would help us get out of this depression. End the &#8220;war on [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>*HOW TO ALLOW AMERICA TO SURVIVE*<br />
And give America back to Americans</p>
<p>Reducing <strong>regulations</strong> is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more <strong>regulations</strong>, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
<strong>regulations</strong> are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
<strong>prostitutes</strong> when there are so many legal tax paying <strong>prostitutes</strong> out there?</p>
<p><a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the <strong>USA</strong> and Original Green<br />
money outside the <strong>USA</strong>&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to <strong>Mexico</strong> would be useless as the <strong>RED</strong><br />
money would be useless in <strong>Mexico</strong> since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the <strong>USA</strong> would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“<strong>NEW</strong> <strong>ITEM</strong>” SALES <strong>TAX</strong> *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A <strong>VAT</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
<strong>DRUG</strong> DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the <strong>RED</strong> money<br />
for <strong>GREEN</strong> money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an <strong>amendment</strong> withdrawing the 16th <strong>amendment</strong>&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (<strong>Federal</strong> sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A <strong>VAT</strong> or VALUE ADDED <strong>TAX</strong>* with the same <strong>amendment</strong> that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a <strong>Federal</strong> *<strong>NEW</strong> <strong>ITEM</strong>* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*<strong>GREEN</strong>* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the <strong>amendment</strong> that *if congress raises any tax by* 1% *they are forced*<br />
*to cut*<br />
every single expenditure of the *government by* 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern <strong>Border</strong> to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the <strong>Border</strong> patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
<strong>Federal</strong> trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the <strong>USA</strong>. That will make it harder for <strong>smugglers</strong> to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch <strong>smugglers</strong>. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less <strong>welfare</strong> and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an <strong>amendment</strong> to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional <strong>amendment</strong> to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an <strong>amendment</strong>, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy idea by<br />
saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another <strong>amendment</strong> creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP <strong>CONGRESS</strong> FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING <strong>MONEY</strong>.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *<strong>social</strong> taboos* , we<br />
need to take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;<strong>social</strong> engineer&#8221; businesses or<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend <strong>10</strong>% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
<strong>TAX</strong> <strong>amendment</strong> to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of <strong>10</strong>% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing, we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;. the above<br />
drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by at least that<br />
<strong>10</strong>% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO <strong>welfare</strong> to corporations, and cut <strong>welfare</strong> to private people by <strong>10</strong>%<br />
each year until it is <strong>10</strong>% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/10/18/the-original-plan-that-could-have-stopped-this-insanity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama will be giving a speech</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/09/06/obama-will-be-giving-a-speech/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/09/06/obama-will-be-giving-a-speech/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 14:41:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Border]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GREEN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ITEM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prostitutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smugglers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=23320</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have written and added to and rewritten this several times since the late Bush and early Obama Regimes created and made worse our economic problems. I heard Obama will be giving a speech that would call for less &#8220;regulation&#8221; and tax incentives and stability&#8230; Interestingly this is Obama paying lip service to the ideas [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have written and added to and rewritten this several times since the<br />
late Bush and early Obama Regimes created and made worse our economic<br />
problems.</p>
<p>I heard Obama will be giving a speech that would call for less<br />
&#8220;regulation&#8221; and tax incentives and stability&#8230;</p>
<p>Interestingly this is Obama paying lip service to the ideas that he has<br />
been against and been doing the opposite of, over the past three years.</p>
<p>+&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;+<br />
Reducing <strong>regulations</strong> is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more <strong>regulations</strong>, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
<strong>regulations</strong> are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
<strong>prostitutes</strong> when there are so many legal tax paying <strong>prostitutes</strong> out there?</p>
<p><a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the <strong>USA</strong> and Original Green<br />
money outside the <strong>USA</strong>&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to <strong>Mexico</strong> would be useless as the <strong>RED</strong><br />
money would be useless in <strong>Mexico</strong> since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the <strong>USA</strong> would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“<strong>NEW</strong> <strong>ITEM</strong>” SALES <strong>TAX</strong> *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A <strong>VAT</strong> <strong>TAX</strong> WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
<strong>DRUG</strong> DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the <strong>RED</strong> money<br />
for <strong>GREEN</strong> money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an <strong>amendment</strong> withdrawing the 16th <strong>amendment</strong>&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (<strong>Federal</strong> sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A <strong>VAT</strong> or VALUE ADDED <strong>TAX</strong>* with the same <strong>amendment</strong> that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a <strong>Federal</strong> *<strong>NEW</strong> <strong>ITEM</strong>* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*<strong>GREEN</strong>* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the <strong>amendment</strong> that if congress raises tax by 1% they are forced to cut<br />
every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern <strong>Border</strong> to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the <strong>Border</strong> patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
<strong>Federal</strong> trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the <strong>USA</strong>. That will make it harder for <strong>smugglers</strong> to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch <strong>smugglers</strong>. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less <strong>welfare</strong> and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an <strong>amendment</strong> to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional <strong>amendment</strong> to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an <strong>amendment</strong>, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy idea by<br />
saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another <strong>amendment</strong> creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP <strong>CONGRESS</strong> FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING <strong>MONEY</strong>.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *<strong>social</strong> taboos* , we<br />
need to take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;<strong>social</strong> engineer&#8221; businesses or<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend <strong>10</strong>% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
<strong>TAX</strong> <strong>amendment</strong> to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of <strong>10</strong>% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing, we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;. the above<br />
drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by at least that<br />
<strong>10</strong>% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO <strong>welfare</strong> to corporations, and cut <strong>welfare</strong> to private people by <strong>10</strong>%<br />
each year until it is <strong>10</strong>% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/09/06/obama-will-be-giving-a-speech/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Conservatives Hate America</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/10/conservatives-hate-america/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/10/conservatives-hate-america/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:51:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ARMY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIRE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Neo Cons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OIL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PARTY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TEA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=23087</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 8/10/2011 8:42 PM, Waldo wrote: > I&#8217;ve noticed the Neo-Cons use America for their plans of &#8220;Empire&#8221; > What does the T-Party have to say about Wars for OIL>? The TEA PARTY wasn&#8217;t around when the wars started, except Obama&#8217;s NEW Libya war. (Is that a war for OIL?) The TEA PARTY is for [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 8/<strong>10</strong>/2011 8:42 PM, Waldo wrote:<br />
> I&#8217;ve noticed the Neo-Cons use America for their plans of &#8220;Empire&#8221;<br />
> What does the T-Party have to say about Wars for <strong>OIL</strong>>?</p>
<p>The <strong>TEA</strong> <strong>PARTY</strong> wasn&#8217;t around when the wars started, except Obama&#8217;s <strong>NEW</strong><br />
<strong>Libya</strong> war.  (Is that a war for <strong>OIL</strong>?)</p>
<p>The <strong>TEA</strong> <strong>PARTY</strong> is for a strong constitutional defence/military. Other<br />
than that they have no opinion on any Obama war.  We don&#8217;t need a war<br />
for oil, we have a lot of oil right here in America, going to war for<br />
what we already have would be stupid wouldn&#8217;t it?  All Obama needs to do<br />
is let America drill for their own oil so the premise and the scenario<br />
is NOT legitimate.</p>
<p>Strong Defence<br />
<strong>Constitutional</strong> Government<br />
<strong>Economic</strong> sanity</p>
<p>These are the only three issues of the true <strong>TEA</strong> <strong>PARTY</strong>.</p>
<p>If Obama followed the constitution rather than <strong>HIRE</strong> a mercenary <strong>ARMY</strong><br />
called <strong>NATO</strong> to bypass the constitutional responsibilities of the<br />
Commander in Chief, he would be supported.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/10/conservatives-hate-america/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LOOKS LIKE THIS PLAN WAS CORRECT</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/06/looks-like-this-plan-was-correct/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/06/looks-like-this-plan-was-correct/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Aug 2011 21:29:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Border]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CORRECT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GREEN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ITEM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LOOKS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prostitutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smugglers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=22865</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[*LOOKS LIKE THIS PLAN WAS CORRECT * And gives America back to Americans Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and competition would help us get out of this depression. End the &#8220;war [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>*<strong>LOOKS</strong> LIKE THIS PLAN WAS <strong>CORRECT</strong> *<br />
And gives America back to Americans</p>
<p>Reducing <strong>regulations</strong> is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more <strong>regulations</strong>, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
<strong>regulations</strong> are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
<strong>prostitutes</strong> when there are so many legal tax paying <strong>prostitutes</strong> out there?</p>
<p><a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the <strong>USA</strong> and Original Green<br />
money outside the <strong>USA</strong>&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the <strong>RED</strong><br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the <strong>USA</strong> would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“<strong>NEW</strong> <strong>ITEM</strong>” SALES <strong>TAX</strong> *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT <strong>TAX</strong> WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
<strong>DRUG</strong> DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the <strong>RED</strong> money<br />
for <strong>GREEN</strong> money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an <strong>amendment</strong> withdrawing the 16th <strong>amendment</strong>&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (<strong>Federal</strong> sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED <strong>TAX</strong>* with the same <strong>amendment</strong> that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a <strong>Federal</strong> *<strong>NEW</strong> <strong>ITEM</strong>* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*<strong>GREEN</strong>* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the <strong>amendment</strong> that if congress raises tax by 1% they are forced to cut<br />
every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern <strong>Border</strong> to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the <strong>Border</strong> patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
<strong>Federal</strong> trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the <strong>USA</strong>. That will make it harder for <strong>smugglers</strong> to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch <strong>smugglers</strong>. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less <strong>welfare</strong> and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an <strong>amendment</strong> to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional <strong>amendment</strong> to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an <strong>amendment</strong>, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy idea by<br />
saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another <strong>amendment</strong> creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP <strong>CONGRESS</strong> FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING <strong>MONEY</strong>.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *<strong>social</strong> taboos* , we<br />
need to take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;<strong>social</strong> engineer&#8221; businesses or<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend <strong>10</strong>% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
<strong>TAX</strong> <strong>amendment</strong> to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of <strong>10</strong>% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing, we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;. the above<br />
drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by at least that<br />
<strong>10</strong>% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO <strong>welfare</strong> to corporations, and cut <strong>welfare</strong> to private people by <strong>10</strong>%<br />
each year until it is <strong>10</strong>% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/06/looks-like-this-plan-was-correct/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NO NEW GREEN HOUSE GAS IS BEING ADDED, IT IS EXCHANGED.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/02/no-new-green-house-gas-is-being-added-it-is-exchanged/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/02/no-new-green-house-gas-is-being-added-it-is-exchanged/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 21:05:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ADDED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ALARMISTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CO2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EXCHANGED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GAS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GREEN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HOUSE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NASA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nobel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Tue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richard Steel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[STUDY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SUPPLIED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[URL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAPOR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WATER]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=22737</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 8/2/2011 2:10 PM, Shiny Side Down wrote: > On Tue, 02 Aug 2011 02:19:09 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote: > >> On 8/2/2011 12:55 AM, Richard Steel wrote: >> >>> When objective NASA satellite data, reported in a peer-reviewed >>> scientific journal, show a “huge discrepancy” between alarmist climate >>> models and real-world [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 8/2/2011 2:10 PM, Shiny Side Down wrote:<br />
> <strong>On Tue</strong>, 02 Aug 2011 02:19:09 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On 8/2/2011 12:55 AM, <strong>Richard Steel</strong> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> When objective <strong>NASA</strong> satellite data, reported in a peer-reviewed<br />
>>> scientific journal, show a “huge discrepancy” between alarmist <strong>climate</strong><br />
>>> models and real-world facts, <strong>climate</strong> scientists, the media and our<br />
>>> elected officials would be wise to take notice. Whether or not they do<br />
>>> so will tell us a great deal about how honest the purveyors of global<br />
>>> warming alarmism truly are.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> They should have asked why all that <strong>CO2</strong> and other gas added to the<br />
>> atmosphere then heated has neither expanded the atmosphere<br />
><br />
> How much do you think it should have expanded the atmosphere?<br />
> How would you go about measuring it?<br />
><br />
>> nor has it<br />
>> cause the atmospheric pressure to rise&#8230;..<br />
><br />
> How much would you expect the pressure to rise?<br />
> How would you go about measuring it?<br />
><br />
><br />
>> If they had done the<br />
>> simple <strong>BASIC</strong> physics they would know that every action like heating the<br />
>> atmosphere and/or adding mass to it, would cause a reaction.<br />
><br />
> So write a paper and win a <strong>Nobel</strong>.<br />
><br />
>> What is<br />
>> the reaction that the <strong>ALARMISTS</strong> have seen, didn&#8217;t they use simple<br />
>> satellite photos to see it?<br />
><br />
> What makes you think it would be visible in the satellite data?<br />
><br />
><br />
>> They have never told us WHY physics has<br />
>> ceased to exist in the world of <strong>Global</strong> Warming.<br />
><br />
> Bullshit lie.<br />
><br />
><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> If the infusion of new mass and heating the Atmosphere has creating no<br />
>> change,<br />
><br />
> Prove it.<br />
><br />
>> what is happening&#8230;.?<br />
> You brain is rotting into a pile of something disgusting?<br />
><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> I suggested that rather than increasing atmospheric volume or<br />
>> atmospheric pressure, the simplest result is that a gas or something had<br />
>> to leave to make room rather than expansion of the atmosphere, or the<br />
>> atmospheric pressure rise, and that would be water vapor.<br />
><br />
> Water Vapor Confirmed as Major Player in Climate Change<br />
> <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html" >http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html</a></p>
<p>Which supports MY hypothesis that replacing Water Vapor with <strong>CO2</strong> in the<br />
atmosphere will create no new or added green house effect.</p>
<p>Which is also supported by the fact that we are NOT warming.</p>
<p>*FROM THE <strong>URL</strong> YOU <strong>SUPPLIED</strong>*<br />
["Everyone agrees that if you add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, then<br />
warming will result,” Dessler said. “So the real question is, how much<br />
warming?"]</p>
<p>NO <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>GREEN</strong> <strong>HOUSE</strong> <strong>GAS</strong> IS BEING <strong>ADDED</strong>, IT IS <strong>EXCHANGED</strong>.</p>
<p>The problem is they have yet to examine the FACT that adding <strong>CO2</strong> will<br />
increase the volume or atmospheric pressure, and what happens when<br />
neither are reacting to the increase in <strong>CO2</strong> put into the atmosphere?</p>
<p>Thanks for the link it confirms my hypothesis with one more supporting<br />
page that says replacing <strong>WATER</strong> <strong>VAPOR</strong> with <strong>CO2</strong> will result in little<br />
change in <strong>GREEN</strong> <strong>HOUSE</strong> effect.  IT also confirms that they have yet to<br />
rule out that water vapor is leaving the atmosphere as part of the<br />
atmosphere seeking its equilibrium.</p>
<p><strong>NEW</strong> <strong>STUDY</strong><br />
["The study also rebuts a second major prediction of the Co2 theory of<br />
warming: that Co2 warming is amplified by increased water vapor. Co2<br />
alone cannot fit the <strong>climate</strong> models, and they all have a plug factor put<br />
in for <strong>climate</strong> sensitivity. The most important physical mechanism for<br />
the plug factor is an increase in humidity (water vapor) at the<br />
greenhouse layer. Water vapor absorbs more infrared than Co2. The study<br />
found that humidity actually was decreasing in the greenhouse layer,<br />
negating the effect of Co2."]<br />
<a href="http://wallstreetpit.com/32342-co2-negated-as-cause-of-global-warming" >http://wallstreetpit.com/32342-co2-negated-as-cause-of-global-warming</a></p>
<p>DAMN that&#8217;s another web page that confirms that my hypothesis may be a<br />
theory and here is the path to support my theory.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/02/no-new-green-house-gas-is-being-added-it-is-exchanged/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CNN &#8211; Housing starts rose in July</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/02/cnn-housing-starts-rose-in-july/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/02/cnn-housing-starts-rose-in-july/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 19:29:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CNN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[YORK]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=22723</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 8/2/2011 2:20 PM, Repubs Lost Both Wars wrote: > Existing homes selling fast &#8211; record fast > > NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) &#8212; &#8220;Sales of existing homes rose in July for > the fourth consecutive month&#8221; And at this hyper pace&#8230;. how many years will it take to clear the books of all the foreclosed [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 8/2/2011 2:20 PM, Repubs Lost Both Wars wrote:<br />
> Existing homes selling fast &#8211; record fast<br />
><br />
> <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>YORK</strong> (CNNMoney.com) &#8212; &#8220;Sales of existing homes rose in July for<br />
> the fourth consecutive month&#8221;</p>
<p>And at this hyper pace&#8230;.  how many years will it take to clear the<br />
books of all the foreclosed assets?   <strong>CNN</strong> are all Liberal liars so you<br />
might as well fess up and admit that you&#8217;re spreading a ton of<br />
propaganda and NOT a pound of gold.</p>
<p>There are <strong>10</strong> years of houses in reserve to be sold.</p>
<p>But hey, why not make a ton of <acronym title="shit"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> s&*$?%t</span></acronym> sound like a pound of gold.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/02/cnn-housing-starts-rose-in-july/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>**SWINDLED** AGAIN by a Congress too GUTLESS to Live Within Its Means!!  It&#8217;s 2008 All Over Again!!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/02/swindled-again-by-a-congress-too-gutless-to-live-within-its-means-its-2008-all-over-again/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/02/swindled-again-by-a-congress-too-gutless-to-live-within-its-means-its-2008-all-over-again/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:32:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bureaucracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Craig Chilton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dennis Ross]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European Commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General Assembly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OBAMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Donates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senator Barry Goldwater]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TIME]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=22707</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 8/2/2011 10:12 AM, (¯`·.¸ Craig Chilton ¸.·´¯) http://www.TravelForPay.org wrote: > > The American People have been **SWINDLED** AGAIN > by a Congress too GUTLESS to Live Within Its Means! > It&#8217;s 2008 All Over Again!! > > > Check to see how YOUR Congressperson and Senators voted. > > And tell them it&#8217;s PAYBACK [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 8/2/2011 10:12 AM, (¯`·.¸ <strong>Craig Chilton</strong> ¸.·´¯)<br />
<a href="http://www.TravelForPay.org" >http://www.TravelForPay.org</a> wrote:<br />
><br />
>              The American People have been **SWINDLED** AGAIN<br />
>                by a <strong>Congress</strong> too GUTLESS to Live Within Its Means!<br />
>                                      It&#8217;s 2008 All Over Again!!<br />
><br />
><br />
>        Check to see how YOUR Congressperson and Senators voted.<br />
><br />
>        And tell them it&#8217;s PAYBACK <strong>TIME</strong> on their next Election Day! &#8211;<br />
><br />
>         &#8212;  If they voted AGAINST the Swindle &#8212; RE-ELECT them!<br />
>         &#8212;  If they voted FOR the Swindle &#8212; Chuck them OUT of office!<br />
><br />
>        The LESSON to the remaining ones might FINALLY be learned:<br />
><br />
>         &#8212; NEXT time a &#8220;Debt Ceiling Deadline&#8221; comes along &#8212; vote it<br />
>             DOWN or you *WILL* become a *job-hunter!*<br />
></p>
<p>*<strong>OBAMA</strong> AND THE OTHERS KNEW THAT THEY WOULD GET A <strong>NEW</strong> DEBT CEILING*</p>
<p>Their only problem was deciding how to force feed it to *YOU*</p>
<p>So they had already done what&#8217;s below&#8212;-></p>
<p><strong>President Donates</strong> $100 Billion to the United Nations</p>
<p>Posted By Paul L. Williams On October 6, 2010 @ 3:21 pm In Guest Columns<br />
| Comments Disabled</p>
<p>The U. S. <strong>State Department</strong> yesterday announced that the Obama<br />
Administration has agreed to contribute $4 billion to the United Nations<br />
<strong>Global</strong> Fund to fight AIDs, Tuberculosis, and Malaria from 2011 to 2013.</p>
<p>The $4 billion represents a 38% increase over the previous U.S.<br />
commitment to the fund.</p>
<p>United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said that a total of $11.7<br />
billion has been raised from 40 countries, the <strong>European Commission</strong>,<br />
faith-based organizations, private foundations, and various corporations.</p>
<p>This means that over one-third of the <strong>money</strong> will come from the pockets<br />
of <strong>US</strong> taxpayers.</p>
<p>Oil-rich nations like Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, and the United Arab<br />
Emirates contribute next to nothing, and <strong>China</strong>, which holds most of the<br />
<strong>US</strong> $14 trillion debt, agreed to provide a measly $14 million.</p>
<p>In addition to the annual gift of $1.33 billion to the <strong>Global</strong> Fund,<br />
President Obama has agreed to provide billions more for <strong>UN</strong> projects.</p>
<p>These allocations are set forth in a 28 page document as follows:</p>
<p>Funnel $63 billion to the <strong>Global</strong> Health Initiative during the next<br />
six years<br />
Make $1 billion annually to education programs<br />
Give $475 million to the <strong>Global</strong> Agricultural and Food Security Program’<br />
Provide $800 million from the Overseas Private Investment<br />
Corporation to Muslim-majority countries in the Middle East and North<br />
Africa. An additional $3.2 billion will be provided by private equity<br />
capital sources to these Muslim nations<br />
Shell out millions more available through USAID for developing tech<br />
hubs in Uganda, Kenya, Cameroon, South Africa, and Senegal.<br />
Dole out $80 million through the Overseas Private Investment<br />
Corporation for small to medium enterprises in the Middle East and North<br />
Africa.<br />
Cough up $2.5 billion annually to 90 countries to “strengthen<br />
governance and democratic institutions.”<br />
Make available $30 billion through the Obama’s Climate Change<br />
Initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, $100 billion<br />
a year will be provided through taxpayer and private resources to deal<br />
with the alleged threat of global <strong>climate</strong> change [1].</p>
<p>The United States is assessed at 22% of the U.N. regular budget [2] and<br />
more than 27% for U.N. the peacekeeping budget. Mr. Obama has requested<br />
$516.3 million for the U.N. regular budget and more than $2.182 billion<br />
for the peacekeeping budget for 2011.</p>
<p>The United States is also assessed for numerous other United Nations<br />
organizations as well. More than $6.347 billion went to U.N.<br />
organizations in FY 2009.</p>
<p>The United States also provides <strong>money</strong> to the U.N. through the State<br />
Department, Department of Agriculture, Department of Energy, Department<br />
of Health and Human Services, and other agencies.</p>
<p>Andrea Lafferty of The Traditional Values Coalition writes: “The U.S.<br />
taxpayer is forced to pay billions to an inefficient organization run by<br />
world leaders who hate America and the free market system. This doesn’t<br />
make any sense – nor does our paying 22% of the cost to keep this<br />
<strong>bureaucracy</strong> alive when we have only one vote in the <strong>General Assembly</strong>.”</p>
<p>Several candidates have called for the U.S. to sever its relationship<br />
with the United Nations. The list includes <strong>Dennis Ross</strong>, a Republican<br />
candidate for <strong>Congress</strong> from the 12th Congressional District of Florida.</p>
<p>In a statement to The New American, Mr. Ross said:</p>
<p>An organization that allows nations like <strong>Iran</strong> and <strong>Libya</strong> to chair<br />
committees dedicated to human and women’s rights makes a mockery of<br />
both. The <strong>UN</strong>, like any <strong>bureaucracy</strong>, must constantly be evaluated and put<br />
to the test, and if found lacking, be dismantled. I believe the <strong>US</strong><br />
government is perfectly capable of conducting bilateral and multilateral<br />
relations with other nations on our own. Despots, human rights<br />
violators, and tyrants should be confronted, not congratulated.</p>
<p>Such concerns over the U.S. involvement with the <strong>UN</strong> are not new.</p>
<p><strong>Senator Barry Goldwater</strong> was quoted in 1971 by the Congressional Record<br />
as saying:</p>
<p>The time has come to recognize the U.N. for the anti-American,<br />
anti-freedom organization that it has become. The time has come for us<br />
to cut off all financial help, withdraw as a member, and ask the U.N. to<br />
find a headquarters location outside the United States that is more in<br />
keeping with the philosophy of the majority of voting members, someplace<br />
like Moscow or Peking.</p>
<p>Article printed from Accuracy In Media: <a href="http://www.aim.org" >http://www.aim.org</a></p>
<p>URL to article:<br />
<a href="http://www.aim.org/guest-column/president-donates-100-billion-to-the-united-nations/" >http://www.aim.org/guest-column/president-donates-100-billion-to-the-united-nations/</a></p>
<p>URLs in this post:</p>
<p>[1] global <strong>climate</strong> change:<br />
<a href="http://www.traditionalvalues.org/read/3802/climategate-scandal-may-derail-global-governance-plans" >http://www.traditionalvalues.org/read/3802/climategate-scandal-may-derail-global-governance-plans</a></p>
<p>[2] The United States is assessed at 22% of the U.N. regular budget:<br />
<a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/08/us-funding-of-the-united-nations-reaches-all-time-high" >http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/08/us-funding-of-the-united-nations-reaches-all-time-high</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/08/02/swindled-again-by-a-congress-too-gutless-to-live-within-its-means-its-2008-all-over-again/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>All money spent by government, comes from taxes.  SO every dollar that Obama spends, has 40 cents of NEW taxes.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/07/31/all-money-spent-by-government-comes-from-taxes-so-every-dollar-that-obama-spends-has-40-cents-of-new-taxes/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/07/31/all-money-spent-by-government-comes-from-taxes-so-every-dollar-that-obama-spends-has-40-cents-of-new-taxes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2011 03:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BILLION]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Juris Diction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=22685</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 7/31/2011 2:20 AM, Scout wrote: > > > &#8220;DogDiesel&#8221; wrote in message > news:j12qrn$44e$1 @&#038;*$?%dogdiesel.eternal-september.org&#8230; >> >> &#8220;Juris Diction&#8221; wrote in message >> news:iwas-7A0156.16535630072011 @&#038;*$?%news.shawcable.net&#8230; >>> In article &#60;4e347ca4$0$7916$9a6e19ea @&#038;*$?%news.newshosting.com>, >>> &#8220;Ray Keller&#8221; wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> The only &#8220;good news&#8221; is that the nation regrettably needs to hit >>>> rock bottom >>>> at [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 7/31/2011 2:20 AM, Scout wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> &#8220;DogDiesel&#8221; <nospam @nospam.none> wrote in message<br />
> news:j12qrn$44e$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>dogdiesel.eternal-september.org&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;<strong>Juris Diction</strong>&#8221; <iwas @thebeach.com> wrote in message<br />
>> news:iwas-7A0156.16535630072011<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>news.shawcable.net&#8230;<br />
>>> In article &lt;4e347ca4$0$7916$9a6e19ea<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>news.newshosting.com>,<br />
>>> &#8220;Ray Keller&#8221; <leftard TROLLS ARE DESPERATE> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> The only &#8220;good news&#8221; is that the nation regrettably needs to hit<br />
>>>> rock bottom<br />
>>>> at this time, as a complete and final wake-up call for revolution!<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> Any true American wouldn&#8217;t want the <strong>US</strong> to fail, so you are probably<br />
>>> working for the al Queda.<br />
>>><br />
>>  All true American patriots want the us government to last forever .<br />
>> And that requires no debt or deficits and small er govrenment and low<br />
>> <strong>taxes</strong>. And balanced budgets and no borrowing.<br />
>><br />
>> And that was what this country was created for.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> To stop government from stealing .from the people<br />
><br />
> Interesting. When you consider that in the first year of the government<br />
> debt record way back when <strong>GW</strong> took office, the <strong>US</strong> national debt was a bit<br />
> over $75 milllion dollars.<br />
><br />
> Assuming a simple interest loan at an average interest rate of 3%, we<br />
> have paid over the years over $5BILLION dollars just in interest, and we<br />
> STILL owe the $75 million dollars borrowed way back then.<br />
><br />
> Now when you figure we typically borrowed that interest then it&#8217;s really<br />
> a compound interest load, when you calculate it that way with the same<br />
> interest rate and a monthly compounding it works out to be over $5.7<br />
> <strong>BILLION</strong> dollars paid in interest.<br />
><br />
> In short we have paid some 6666%- 7600% of the principle in interest<br />
> payments.<br />
><br />
> Today about $1 of every $5 collected by the federal government goes JUST<br />
> to pay the interest on the <strong>National Debt</strong>.<br />
><br />
> Meanwhile about $4 of ever $<strong>10</strong> the federal government spends is borrowed.</p>
<p>Where will they get that <strong>money</strong> that isn&#8217;t taxed but is spent?</p>
<p>All <strong>money</strong> spent by government, comes from <strong>taxes</strong>.  <strong>SO</strong> every dollar that<br />
Obama spends, has 40 cents of <strong>NEW</strong> <strong>taxes</strong>.</p>
<p>The only question is WHEN will this new tax paid?</p>
<p></leftard></iwas></nospam></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/07/31/all-money-spent-by-government-comes-from-taxes-so-every-dollar-that-obama-spends-has-40-cents-of-new-taxes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A TEA PARTY BAIL OUT</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/07/21/a-tea-party-bail-out/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/07/21/a-tea-party-bail-out/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 02:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BAIL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Border]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GREEN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ITEM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PARTY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prostitutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smugglers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TEA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=22469</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[*A TEA PARTY BAIL OUT* give America back to Americans Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and competition would help us get out of this depression. End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>*A TEA PARTY BAIL OUT*<br />
give America back to Americans</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?<br />
<a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises tax by 1% they are forced to cut<br />
every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy idea by<br />
saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we<br />
need to take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; businesses or<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
TAX amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing, we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;. the above<br />
drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by at least that<br />
10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/07/21/a-tea-party-bail-out/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>An amendment that if congress raises tax by 1% they are forced to cut,every single expenditure of the government by 3%</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/07/13/an-amendment-that-if-congress-raises-tax-by-1-they-are-forced-to-cutevery-single-expenditure-of-the-government-by-3/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/07/13/an-amendment-that-if-congress-raises-tax-by-1-they-are-forced-to-cutevery-single-expenditure-of-the-government-by-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 19:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Border]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GREEN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ITEM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prostitutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smugglers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=22359</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[*HOW TO ALLOW AMERICA TO SURVIVE* And give America back to Americans Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and competition would help us get out of this depression. End the &#8220;war on [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>*HOW TO ALLOW AMERICA TO SURVIVE*<br />
And give America back to Americans</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?</p>
<p><a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises tax by 1% they are forced to cut<br />
every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy idea by<br />
saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we<br />
need to take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; businesses or<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
TAX amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing, we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;. the above<br />
drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by at least that<br />
10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/07/13/an-amendment-that-if-congress-raises-tax-by-1-they-are-forced-to-cutevery-single-expenditure-of-the-government-by-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>the budget is cut $3.00 for every new $1.00 dollar in new, tax and spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/23/the-budget-is-cut-3-00-for-every-new-1-00-dollar-in-new-tax-and-spending/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/23/the-budget-is-cut-3-00-for-every-new-1-00-dollar-in-new-tax-and-spending/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 17:16:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=21677</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 6/23/2011 12:37 PM, RD Sandman wrote: > Beam Me Up Scotty wrote > in news:4E023C99.3030507 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com: > >> On 6/22/2011 12:13 PM, RD Sandman wrote: >>> Beam Me Up Scotty >>> wrote in news:4E01F572.2020502 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com: >>> >>>> On 6/21/2011 8:14 PM, RD Sandman wrote: >>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty >>> wrote >>>>> in news:4E0130C3.6050709 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 6/23/2011 12:37 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote<br />
> in news:4E023C99.3030507<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
><br />
>> On 6/22/2011 12:13 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>> Beam Me Up Scotty </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>> wrote in news:4E01F572.2020502<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> On 6/21/2011 8:14 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>> wrote<br />
>>>>> in news:4E0130C3.6050709<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> On 6/21/2011 6:17 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>> wrote<br />
>>>>>>> in news:4E010603.60505<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> On 6/21/2011 11:24 AM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty<br />
>>>>>>>>> </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in<br />
>>>>>>>>> news:4DFFBDE5.90903<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/20/2011 4:32 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> Bob LeChevalier <lojbab @lojban.org> wrote in<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> news:6t9vv6tjfpo0epjidfbkr7o26ahclclhi9<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-<br />
>>> <a href="mailto:Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com">Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com</a>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/20/2011 9:28 AM, Bob LeChevalier wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; <crwlrjeff @yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One&#8217;s right to health does not limit my right to wealth.<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What right is that?<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have the right not to have your property taken without<br />
>>> due<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> process, but taxes are covered by due process.<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ObamaCare will tax me to cover the cost of your health<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> care,<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So?  Governments have the power to tax.  Freedom from<br />
>>> taxation<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is<br />
>>>>>>>>> not<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a right.<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So&#8230;.  you and Obama are liars,<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> No.<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you said you would NOT raise taxes.<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> I said no such thing.  I have been consistently in favor of<br />
>>>>> higher<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> taxes to balance the budget, ever since the recession ended.<br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> you support Obama<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Just where did you get that idea?<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> and Obama said no taxes.  Until he passed ObamaCare<br />
>>>>>>>>>> which was a tax in disguise.  It&#8217;s all about perception with<br />
>>>>>>>>>> Liberal-Socialists.<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> In many cases, yes&#8230;&#8230;.of course, the conservatives do the<br />
>>>>>>>>> same damn thing.<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> New taxes will do what ObamaCare is doing, it will kill the<br />
>>>>> economy.<br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> We<br />
>>>>>>>>>> will all spend more time trying to keep what we earn rather<br />
>>>>>>>>>> than going out and earning more.   That means less income to<br />
>>>>>>>>>> tax and<br />
>>>>> less<br />
>>>>>>>>>> tax receipts into the Treasury.<br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> And second is&#8230;. *WHAT DO YOU INTEND TO SPEND NEW TAXES ON* ?<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Pay for some of the programs we are already paying on so we<br />
>>>>>>>>> don&#8217;t have to borrow 41 cents on the dollar or learn to speak<br />
>>>>>>>>> Mandarin.<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> To pay for more wasted deficit spending like ObamaCare?<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> Nope, that increase in taxes also needs to be accompanied by<br />
>>>>> reducing<br />
>>>>>>>>> government spending.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> So then why don&#8217;t you suggest with your tax hike, there be a<br />
>>>>>>>> three<br />
>>> to<br />
>>>>>>>> one cut in spending,<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Because that is what you want, not me.  You need to present it.<br />
>>>>>>> <img src='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> where every one dollar in taxes Obama and<br />
>>>>>>>> Democrats create in new spending&#8230;  they have to cut across the<br />
>>>>>>>> government equally every single expenditure in Federal<br />
>>>>>>>> government spending on and off budget *three dollars*<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> This way it hurts to the government and it&#8217;s employees when they<br />
>>>>> raise<br />
>>>>>>>> my taxes and hurt me.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> raise taxes by 33% and they would be forced to cut spending to<br />
>>> zero.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Your idea will never happen.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> Only because it would work.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Then we would have all that revenue and nothing to spend it on&#8230;<br />
>>>>> <img src='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> $15 Trillion in debt to spend it on.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> $1.4 Trillion per year in new debt that you can spend it on&#8230;.  it<br />
>>>> would take 50 to 1000 years to pay off the waste that they&#8217;ve<br />
>>>> already stuck America with.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Not really.  If you cut all spending, there would be no $1.4T per<br />
>>> year in new debt.  Additionally, the one could get $5.2T more in<br />
>>> revenue in 10 years by ending the extended Bush tax cuts to both the<br />
>>> rich and the middle class.  Our current revenue even with that tax<br />
>>> cut is $2.2T per year or for 10 years $22T.  That would be a total of<br />
>>> $27.2T in 10 years with no outlay (per your scenario) or a surplus of<br />
>>> $12.9T in 10 years or zero debt in 5 years.<br />
>>><br />
>>>> Then you have the money/services promised to medicare and Medicaid<br />
>>>> and all the rest that they don&#8217;t have.<br />
>>><br />
>>> IOW, your scenario didn&#8217;t mean to cut all spending. <img src='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
>>><br />
>><br />
>> Cut all spending but that doesn&#8217;t pay for money already promised and<br />
>> &#8220;already&#8221; spent but NOT yet paid out.<br />
>><br />
>> Everything I mentioned is debt that we owe, even the unfunded promises<br />
>> that we have been legally obligated to pay.<br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
>>> That means that the parties would spend the next 10 years arguing<br />
>>> about what should be cut&#8230;&#8230;..ergo, no progress.<br />
>><br />
>> NO I said nothing about what should be cut other than everything in<br />
>> and out of the budget is cut $3.00 for every new $1.00 dollar in new<br />
>> tax and spending.<br />
><br />
> Then you added that if taxes went up 33% all spending would be shut off.<br />
><br />
> &#8220;&#8230;raise taxes by 33% and they would be forced to cut spending to<br />
> zero.&#8221;<br />
><br />
> Do you remember posting that?  <img src='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>First you would have to cap all spending at current levels to NOT allow<br />
any attempt at fudging.</p>
<p>Yes the outcome of raising the tax would be.  Everything is cut equal<br />
from paperclips to nuclear weapons to welfare.</p>
<p>There is nothing to fight about except &#8220;how much&#8221; to raise taxes.<br />
Government raises taxes 10% and We the people will see government<br />
spending drop by 30%. There are no questions about what to cut, it&#8217;s all<br />
cut, paychecks to jet planes&#8230;&#8230;  all of it.</p>
<p></crwlrjeff></then></lojbab></then>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/23/the-budget-is-cut-3-00-for-every-new-1-00-dollar-in-new-tax-and-spending/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If Anthony Weiner isn&#8217;t going to live up to his MARRIAGE vows then he also won&#8217;t live up to his OATH OF OFFICE.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/22/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-76/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/22/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-76/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:03:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Anthony Weiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MARRIAGE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OATH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=21645</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 6/22/2011 12:13 PM, RD Sandman wrote: > Beam Me Up Scotty wrote > in news:4E01F572.2020502 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com: > >> On 6/21/2011 8:14 PM, RD Sandman wrote: >>> Beam Me Up Scotty > wrote >>> in news:4E0130C3.6050709 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com: >>> >>>> On 6/21/2011 6:17 PM, RD Sandman wrote: >>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty >>> wrote >>>>> in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 6/22/2011 12:13 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote<br />
> in news:4E01F572.2020502<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
><br />
>> On 6/21/2011 8:14 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>> Beam Me Up Scotty </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
> wrote<br />
>>> in news:4E0130C3.6050709<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> On 6/21/2011 6:17 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>> wrote<br />
>>>>> in news:4E010603.60505<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> On 6/21/2011 11:24 AM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>>> wrote in news:4DFFBDE5.90903<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> On 6/20/2011 4:32 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> Bob LeChevalier <lojbab @lojban.org> wrote in<br />
>>>>>>>>> news:6t9vv6tjfpo0epjidfbkr7o26ahclclhi9<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com:<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-<br />
> <a href="mailto:Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com">Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com</a>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/20/2011 9:28 AM, Bob LeChevalier wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; <crwlrjeff @yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> One&#8217;s right to health does not limit my right to wealth.<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> What right is that?<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> You have the right not to have your property taken without<br />
> due<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> process, but taxes are covered by due process.<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ObamaCare will tax me to cover the cost of your health care,<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> So?  Governments have the power to tax.  Freedom from<br />
> taxation<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> is<br />
>>>>>>> not<br />
>>>>>>>>>>>> a right.<br />
>>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> So&#8230;.  you and Obama are liars,<br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> No.<br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> you said you would NOT raise taxes.<br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> I said no such thing.  I have been consistently in favor of<br />
>>> higher<br />
>>>>>>>>>> taxes to balance the budget, ever since the recession ended.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> you support Obama<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Just where did you get that idea?<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> and Obama said no taxes.  Until he passed ObamaCare<br />
>>>>>>>> which was a tax in disguise.  It&#8217;s all about perception with<br />
>>>>>>>> Liberal-Socialists.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> In many cases, yes&#8230;&#8230;.of course, the conservatives do the same<br />
>>>>>>> damn thing.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> New taxes will do what ObamaCare is doing, it will kill the<br />
>>> economy.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> We<br />
>>>>>>>> will all spend more time trying to keep what we earn rather than<br />
>>>>>>>> going out and earning more.   That means less income to tax and<br />
>>> less<br />
>>>>>>>> tax receipts into the Treasury.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> And second is&#8230;. *WHAT DO YOU INTEND TO SPEND NEW TAXES ON* ?<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Pay for some of the programs we are already paying on so we don&#8217;t<br />
>>>>>>> have to borrow 41 cents on the dollar or learn to speak Mandarin.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> To pay for more wasted deficit spending like ObamaCare?<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Nope, that increase in taxes also needs to be accompanied by<br />
>>> reducing<br />
>>>>>>> government spending.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> So then why don&#8217;t you suggest with your tax hike, there be a three<br />
> to<br />
>>>>>> one cut in spending,<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Because that is what you want, not me.  You need to present it. <img src='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> where every one dollar in taxes Obama and<br />
>>>>>> Democrats create in new spending&#8230;  they have to cut across the<br />
>>>>>> government equally every single expenditure in Federal government<br />
>>>>>> spending on and off budget *three dollars*<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> This way it hurts to the government and it&#8217;s employees when they<br />
>>> raise<br />
>>>>>> my taxes and hurt me.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> raise taxes by 33% and they would be forced to cut spending to<br />
> zero.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Your idea will never happen.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>> Only because it would work.<br />
>>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> Then we would have all that revenue and nothing to spend it on&#8230;  <img src='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> $15 Trillion in debt to spend it on.<br />
>><br />
>> $1.4 Trillion per year in new debt that you can spend it on&#8230;.  it<br />
>> would take 50 to 1000 years to pay off the waste that they&#8217;ve already<br />
>> stuck America with.<br />
><br />
> Not really.  If you cut all spending, there would be no $1.4T per year in<br />
> new debt.  Additionally, the one could get $5.2T more in revenue in 10<br />
> years by ending the extended Bush tax cuts to both the rich and the<br />
> middle class.  Our current revenue even with that tax cut is $2.2T per<br />
> year or for 10 years $22T.  That would be a total of $27.2T in 10 years<br />
> with no outlay (per your scenario) or a surplus of $12.9T in 10 years or<br />
> zero debt in 5 years.<br />
><br />
>> Then you have the money/services promised to medicare and Medicaid and<br />
>> all the rest that they don&#8217;t have.<br />
><br />
> IOW, your scenario didn&#8217;t mean to cut all spending. <img src='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
></p>
<p>Cut all spending but that doesn&#8217;t pay for money already promised and<br />
&#8220;already&#8221; spent but NOT yet paid out.</p>
<p>Everything I mentioned is debt that we owe, even the unfunded promises<br />
that we have been legally obligated to pay.</p>
<p>> That means that the parties would spend the next 10 years arguing about<br />
> what should be cut&#8230;&#8230;..ergo, no progress.</p>
<p>NO I said nothing about what should be cut other than everything in and<br />
out of the budget is cut $3.00 for every new $1.00 dollar in new tax and<br />
spending.</p>
<p></crwlrjeff></then></lojbab></then>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/22/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-76/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If Anthony Weiner isn&#8217;t going to live up to his MARRIAGE vows then he also won&#8217;t live up to his OATH OF OFFICE.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/22/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-75/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/22/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-75/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 18:56:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Anthony Weiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MARRIAGE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OATH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=21643</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 6/22/2011 12:02 PM, Bob LeChevalier wrote: > Beam Me Up Scotty > wrote: >>>>> you said you would NOT raise taxes. >>>> >>>> I said no such thing. I have been consistently in favor of higher >>>> taxes to balance the budget, ever since the recession ended. >> >> you support Obama > > [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 6/22/2011 12:02 PM, Bob LeChevalier wrote:<br />
> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
> wrote:<br />
>>>>> you said you would NOT raise taxes.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> I said no such thing.  I have been consistently in favor of higher<br />
>>>> taxes to balance the budget, ever since the recession ended.<br />
>><br />
>> you support Obama<br />
><br />
> Sometimes.<br />
><br />
>> and Obama said no taxes.<br />
><br />
> He was wrong.<br />
><br />
>> New taxes will do what ObamaCare is doing, it will kill the economy.<br />
><br />
> Nonsense.<br />
><br />
> Daddy Bush and Clinton raised taxes and the economy grew.<br />
><br />
>> And second is&#8230;. *WHAT DO YOU INTEND TO SPEND NEW TAXES ON* ?<br />
><br />
> reducing the deficit.</p>
<p>So far Obama has only grown the deficit and grown government and paid<br />
off political operatives with every penny he can steal from America.</p>
<p>What proof do you have that Obama won&#8217;t lie again and waste all the new<br />
taxes also.</p>
</then>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/22/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-75/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If Anthony Weiner isn&#8217;t going to live up to his MARRIAGE vows then he also won&#8217;t live up to his OATH OF OFFICE.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/22/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-63/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/22/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-63/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 14:00:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Anthony Weiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MARRIAGE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OATH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=21616</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 6/21/2011 8:14 PM, RD Sandman wrote: > Beam Me Up Scotty wrote > in news:4E0130C3.6050709 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com: > >> On 6/21/2011 6:17 PM, RD Sandman wrote: >>> Beam Me Up Scotty > wrote >>> in news:4E010603.60505 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com: >>> >>>> On 6/21/2011 11:24 AM, RD Sandman wrote: >>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty >>>>> wrote in news:4DFFBDE5.90903 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 6/21/2011 8:14 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote<br />
> in news:4E0130C3.6050709<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
><br />
>> On 6/21/2011 6:17 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>> Beam Me Up Scotty </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
> wrote<br />
>>> in news:4E010603.60505<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> On 6/21/2011 11:24 AM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>> wrote in news:4DFFBDE5.90903<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> On 6/20/2011 4:32 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> Bob LeChevalier <lojbab @lojban.org> wrote in<br />
>>>>>>> news:6t9vv6tjfpo0epjidfbkr7o26ahclclhi9<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com:<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> On 6/20/2011 9:28 AM, Bob LeChevalier wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>> &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; <crwlrjeff @yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>>>> One&#8217;s right to health does not limit my right to wealth.<br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> What right is that?<br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> You have the right not to have your property taken without due<br />
>>>>>>>>>> process, but taxes are covered by due process.<br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>>> ObamaCare will tax me to cover the cost of your health care,<br />
>>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>>> So?  Governments have the power to tax.  Freedom from taxation<br />
>>>>>>>>>> is<br />
>>>>> not<br />
>>>>>>>>>> a right.<br />
>>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> So&#8230;.  you and Obama are liars,<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> No.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> you said you would NOT raise taxes.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> I said no such thing.  I have been consistently in favor of<br />
> higher<br />
>>>>>>>> taxes to balance the budget, ever since the recession ended.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> you support Obama<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Just where did you get that idea?<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> and Obama said no taxes.  Until he passed ObamaCare<br />
>>>>>> which was a tax in disguise.  It&#8217;s all about perception with<br />
>>>>>> Liberal-Socialists.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> In many cases, yes&#8230;&#8230;.of course, the conservatives do the same<br />
>>>>> damn thing.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> New taxes will do what ObamaCare is doing, it will kill the<br />
> economy.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>> We<br />
>>>>>> will all spend more time trying to keep what we earn rather than<br />
>>>>>> going out and earning more.   That means less income to tax and<br />
> less<br />
>>>>>> tax receipts into the Treasury.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> And second is&#8230;. *WHAT DO YOU INTEND TO SPEND NEW TAXES ON* ?<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Pay for some of the programs we are already paying on so we don&#8217;t<br />
>>>>> have to borrow 41 cents on the dollar or learn to speak Mandarin.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> To pay for more wasted deficit spending like ObamaCare?<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Nope, that increase in taxes also needs to be accompanied by<br />
> reducing<br />
>>>>> government spending.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> So then why don&#8217;t you suggest with your tax hike, there be a three to<br />
>>>> one cut in spending,<br />
>>><br />
>>> Because that is what you want, not me.  You need to present it. <img src='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
>>><br />
>>> where every one dollar in taxes Obama and<br />
>>>> Democrats create in new spending&#8230;  they have to cut across the<br />
>>>> government equally every single expenditure in Federal government<br />
>>>> spending on and off budget *three dollars*<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> This way it hurts to the government and it&#8217;s employees when they<br />
> raise<br />
>>>> my taxes and hurt me.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> raise taxes by 33% and they would be forced to cut spending to zero.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Your idea will never happen.<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>> Only because it would work.<br />
>><br />
><br />
> Then we would have all that revenue and nothing to spend it on&#8230;  <img src='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>$15 Trillion in debt to spend it on.</p>
<p>$1.4 Trillion per year in new debt that you can spend it on&#8230;.  it<br />
would take 50 to 1000 years to pay off the waste that they&#8217;ve already<br />
stuck America with.</p>
<p>Then you have the money/services promised to medicare and Medicaid and<br />
all the rest that they don&#8217;t have.</p>
<p></crwlrjeff></then></lojbab></then>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/22/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-63/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If Anthony Weiner isn&#8217;t going to live up to his MARRIAGE vows then he also won&#8217;t live up to his OATH OF OFFICE.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/21/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-58/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/21/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-58/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 00:01:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Anthony Weiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MARRIAGE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OATH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=21606</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 6/21/2011 6:17 PM, RD Sandman wrote: > Beam Me Up Scotty wrote > in news:4E010603.60505 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com: > >> On 6/21/2011 11:24 AM, RD Sandman wrote: >>> Beam Me Up Scotty >>> wrote in news:4DFFBDE5.90903 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com: >>> >>>> On 6/20/2011 4:32 PM, RD Sandman wrote: >>>>> Bob LeChevalier wrote in >>>>> news:6t9vv6tjfpo0epjidfbkr7o26ahclclhi9 @&#038;*$?%4ax.com: >>>>> >>>>>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 6/21/2011 6:17 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote<br />
> in news:4E010603.60505<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
><br />
>> On 6/21/2011 11:24 AM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>> Beam Me Up Scotty </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>> wrote in news:4DFFBDE5.90903<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> On 6/20/2011 4:32 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>>>> Bob LeChevalier <lojbab @lojban.org> wrote in<br />
>>>>> news:6t9vv6tjfpo0epjidfbkr7o26ahclclhi9<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On 6/20/2011 9:28 AM, Bob LeChevalier wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; <crwlrjeff @yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>>> One&#8217;s right to health does not limit my right to wealth.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> What right is that?<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> You have the right not to have your property taken without due<br />
>>>>>>>> process, but taxes are covered by due process.<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>>> ObamaCare will tax me to cover the cost of your health care,<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> So?  Governments have the power to tax.  Freedom from taxation<br />
>>>>>>>> is<br />
>>> not<br />
>>>>>>>> a right.<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> So&#8230;.  you and Obama are liars,<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> No.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> you said you would NOT raise taxes.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> I said no such thing.  I have been consistently in favor of higher<br />
>>>>>> taxes to balance the budget, ever since the recession ended.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> you support Obama<br />
>>><br />
>>> Just where did you get that idea?<br />
>>><br />
>>> and Obama said no taxes.  Until he passed ObamaCare<br />
>>>> which was a tax in disguise.  It&#8217;s all about perception with<br />
>>>> Liberal-Socialists.<br />
>>><br />
>>> In many cases, yes&#8230;&#8230;.of course, the conservatives do the same<br />
>>> damn thing.<br />
>>><br />
>>>> New taxes will do what ObamaCare is doing, it will kill the economy.<br />
>>>><br />
>>> We<br />
>>>> will all spend more time trying to keep what we earn rather than<br />
>>>> going out and earning more.   That means less income to tax and less<br />
>>>> tax receipts into the Treasury.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> And second is&#8230;. *WHAT DO YOU INTEND TO SPEND NEW TAXES ON* ?<br />
>>><br />
>>> Pay for some of the programs we are already paying on so we don&#8217;t<br />
>>> have to borrow 41 cents on the dollar or learn to speak Mandarin.<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>>> To pay for more wasted deficit spending like ObamaCare?<br />
>>><br />
>>> Nope, that increase in taxes also needs to be accompanied by reducing<br />
>>> government spending.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> So then why don&#8217;t you suggest with your tax hike, there be a three to<br />
>> one cut in spending,<br />
><br />
> Because that is what you want, not me.  You need to present it. <img src='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
><br />
> where every one dollar in taxes Obama and<br />
>> Democrats create in new spending&#8230;  they have to cut across the<br />
>> government equally every single expenditure in Federal government<br />
>> spending on and off budget *three dollars*<br />
>><br />
>> This way it hurts to the government and it&#8217;s employees when they raise<br />
>> my taxes and hurt me.<br />
>><br />
>> raise taxes by 33% and they would be forced to cut spending to zero.<br />
><br />
> Your idea will never happen.<br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
Only because it would work.</p>
<p></crwlrjeff></then></lojbab></then>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/21/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-58/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If Anthony Weiner isn&#8217;t going to live up to his MARRIAGE vows then he also won&#8217;t live up to his OATH OF OFFICE.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/21/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-56/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/21/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-56/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 20:58:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Anthony Weiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MARRIAGE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OATH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=21600</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 6/21/2011 11:24 AM, RD Sandman wrote: > Beam Me Up Scotty wrote > in news:4DFFBDE5.90903 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com: > >> On 6/20/2011 4:32 PM, RD Sandman wrote: >>> Bob LeChevalier wrote in >>> news:6t9vv6tjfpo0epjidfbkr7o26ahclclhi9 @&#038;*$?%4ax.com: >>> >>>> Beam Me Up Scotty >>>> wrote: >>>>> On 6/20/2011 9:28 AM, Bob LeChevalier wrote: >>>>>> &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; wrote: >>>>>>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 6/21/2011 11:24 AM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote<br />
> in news:4DFFBDE5.90903<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com:<br />
><br />
>> On 6/20/2011 4:32 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
>>> Bob LeChevalier <lojbab @lojban.org> wrote in<br />
>>> news:6t9vv6tjfpo0epjidfbkr7o26ahclclhi9<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>> wrote:<br />
>>>>> On 6/20/2011 9:28 AM, Bob LeChevalier wrote:<br />
>>>>>> &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; <crwlrjeff @yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> One&#8217;s right to health does not limit my right to wealth.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> What right is that?<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> You have the right not to have your property taken without due<br />
>>>>>> process, but taxes are covered by due process.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> ObamaCare will tax me to cover the cost of your health care,<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> So?  Governments have the power to tax.  Freedom from taxation is<br />
> not<br />
>>>>>> a right.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> So&#8230;.  you and Obama are liars,<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> No.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> you said you would NOT raise taxes.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> I said no such thing.  I have been consistently in favor of higher<br />
>>>> taxes to balance the budget, ever since the recession ended.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> you support Obama<br />
><br />
> Just where did you get that idea?<br />
><br />
> and Obama said no taxes.  Until he passed ObamaCare<br />
>> which was a tax in disguise.  It&#8217;s all about perception with<br />
>> Liberal-Socialists.<br />
><br />
> In many cases, yes&#8230;&#8230;.of course, the conservatives do the same damn<br />
> thing.<br />
><br />
>> New taxes will do what ObamaCare is doing, it will kill the economy.<br />
> We<br />
>> will all spend more time trying to keep what we earn rather than going<br />
>> out and earning more.   That means less income to tax and less tax<br />
>> receipts into the Treasury.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> And second is&#8230;. *WHAT DO YOU INTEND TO SPEND NEW TAXES ON* ?<br />
><br />
> Pay for some of the programs we are already paying on so we don&#8217;t have to<br />
> borrow 41 cents on the dollar or learn to speak Mandarin.<br />
><br />
><br />
>> To pay for more wasted deficit spending like ObamaCare?<br />
><br />
> Nope, that increase in taxes also needs to be accompanied by reducing<br />
> government spending.</p>
<p>So then why don&#8217;t you suggest with your tax hike, there be a three to<br />
one cut in spending, where every one dollar in taxes Obama and Democrats<br />
create in new spending&#8230;  they have to cut across the government<br />
equally every single expenditure in Federal government spending on and<br />
off budget *three dollars*</p>
<p>This way it hurts to the government and it&#8217;s employees when they raise<br />
my taxes and hurt me.</p>
<p>raise taxes by 33% and they would be forced to cut spending to zero.</p>
<p>Reality bites.</p>
<p></crwlrjeff></then></lojbab></then>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/21/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-56/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If Anthony Weiner isn&#8217;t going to live up to his MARRIAGE vows then he also won&#8217;t live up to his OATH OF OFFICE.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/20/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-45/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/20/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-45/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 21:38:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Anthony Weiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wealth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MARRIAGE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OATH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=21558</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 6/20/2011 4:32 PM, RD Sandman wrote: > Bob LeChevalier wrote in > news:6t9vv6tjfpo0epjidfbkr7o26ahclclhi9 @&#038;*$?%4ax.com: > >> Beam Me Up Scotty >> wrote: >>> On 6/20/2011 9:28 AM, Bob LeChevalier wrote: >>>> &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; wrote: >>>>> One&#8217;s right to health does not limit my right to wealth. >>>> >>>> What right is that? >>>> >>>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 6/20/2011 4:32 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
> Bob LeChevalier <lojbab @lojban.org> wrote in<br />
> news:6t9vv6tjfpo0epjidfbkr7o26ahclclhi9<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com:<br />
><br />
>> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
>> wrote:<br />
>>> On 6/20/2011 9:28 AM, Bob LeChevalier wrote:<br />
>>>> &#8220;Jeff Strickland&#8221; <crwlrjeff @yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>> One&#8217;s right to health does not limit my right to wealth.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> What right is that?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> You have the right not to have your property taken without due<br />
>>>> process, but taxes are covered by due process.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>>> ObamaCare will tax me to cover the cost of your health care,<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> So?  Governments have the power to tax.  Freedom from taxation is not<br />
>>>> a right.<br />
>>><br />
>>> So&#8230;.  you and Obama are liars,<br />
>><br />
>> No.<br />
>><br />
>>> you said you would NOT raise taxes.<br />
>><br />
>> I said no such thing.  I have been consistently in favor of higher<br />
>> taxes to balance the budget, ever since the recession ended.</p>
<p>you support Obama and Obama said no taxes.  Until he passed ObamaCare<br />
which was a tax in disguise.  It&#8217;s all about perception with<br />
Liberal-Socialists.</p>
<p>New taxes will do what ObamaCare is doing, it will kill the economy.  We<br />
will all spend more time trying to keep what we earn rather than going<br />
out and earning more.   That means less income to tax and less tax<br />
receipts into the Treasury.</p>
<p>And second is&#8230;. *WHAT DO YOU INTEND TO SPEND NEW TAXES ON* ?</p>
<p>To pay for more wasted deficit spending like ObamaCare?</p>
<p></crwlrjeff></then></lojbab></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/20/if-anthony-weiner-isnt-going-to-live-up-to-his-marriage-vows-then-he-also-wont-live-up-to-his-oath-of-office-45/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HEY &#8212; AMERICAN  STUPIDS!   DON&#8217;T READ FARTHER!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/12/hey-american-stupids-dont-read-farther/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/12/hey-american-stupids-dont-read-farther/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:27:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Socialism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wealth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[increased]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[share]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=21278</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 6/12/2011 10:41 AM, Obwon-Gandalf-Hope IV wrote: > NOTICE TO READERS: > > If you are of low IQ, bereft of brains, of shallow education &#8212; or > simply seeking to pile-on more Obama-blame for YOUR perceived > financial troubles &#8212; don&#8217;t bother to read Pearlstein&#8217;s piece. You > simply won&#8217;t comprehend its import. > [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 6/12/2011 10:41 AM, Obwon-Gandalf-Hope IV wrote:<br />
> NOTICE TO READERS:<br />
><br />
> If you are of low IQ, bereft of brains, of shallow education &#8212; or<br />
> simply seeking to pile-on more Obama-blame for YOUR perceived<br />
> financial troubles &#8212; don&#8217;t bother to read Pearlstein&#8217;s piece. You<br />
> simply won&#8217;t comprehend its import.<br />
><br />
> But for fair-minded non-racists and other rational thinkers, it is<br />
> among the most near-excellent exposition we&#8217;ve read recently of the<br />
> reasons why the Sadly-Un-United States is floundering &#8212; under the<br />
> burdens of globalization and economic leveling.<br />
><br />
> &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br />
> &#8220;The trials of measuring and managing in a global economy&#8221;<br />
><br />
> Op-Ed<br />
> By Steven Pearlstein<br />
> June 11, 2011<br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
> MAYBE YOU&#8217;VE NOTICED that the economy has been acting strange lately:</p>
<p>Yes it is because it is NO longer an economy it is NOW a Department of<br />
the federal Government, kind of like GM.</p>
<p>> Corporate profits and stock prices have grown much faster than the<br />
> economy,</p>
<p>Grown on taxpayers money stolen by government and given to the<br />
corporations that agree with Obama.</p>
<p>> while economic growth has significantly outpaced job growth.<br />
> In the past, these things moved more in synch with each other.</p>
<p>Right in the opening statement the <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym> is shoveled.  There were no<br />
shovel ready jobs except for the government ones Obama handed out to<br />
people willing to shovel the propaganda Obama was spewing.</p>
<p>> The cause of this disconnect was assumed to be the rising productivity<br />
> of American workers,</p>
<p>Like hell.</p>
<p>> which would be a good thing for the economy over<br />
> the long run. Unlike past productivity gains, however, these haven’t<br />
> generated increased incomes for most workers. Nor has this improved<br />
> competitiveness translated into much improvement in the merchandise<br />
> trade deficit.</p>
<p>It was all your imagination so why would it produce anything?</p>
<p>> And then there is the ongoing disconnect between short-term interest<br />
> rates, longer-term rates and the pace of economic growth, which has<br />
> frustrated the efforts of the Federal Reserve to bolster the recovery.</p>
<p>Frustrated their printing of money and NO interest loans? Spreading the<br />
wealth around was a ridiculous and simple minded plan to begin with.</p>
<p>> The simplest explanation for all of these seeming abnormalities may be<br />
> globalization,</p>
<p>Or it may be space aliens, but more likely it&#8217;s Obama&#8217;s plan to spend<br />
and print and borrow and regulate and tax.   It is called stagflation<br />
and it&#8217;s here thanks to Obama.  This time it will make Jimmy &#8220;the loser&#8221;<br />
Carter look like a competent President in comparison.</p>
<p>> which has fundamentally altered the structure and<br />
> dynamic of economic activity. And because of the dramatic increase in<br />
> the flow of goods and capital across borders, the vocabulary we use to<br />
> talk about the economy, the statistics we have to measure it and some<br />
> of the tools we have used to manage it have become obsolete.</p>
<p>So you want to redefine everything in much more favorable terms for your<br />
&#8220;NEW&#8221; Socialism that you want.</p>
<p>> A frequent mistake — one of which I am as guilty as anyone — is using<br />
> the performance of the broad U.S. stock market indexes, and the<br />
> companies that comprise them, as a proxy for the performance of the<br />
> U.S. economy.</p>
<p>They are all winners they drop the losers so it&#8217;s NOT an economic<br />
measure it is only a measure of winners.  The losers are dropped and<br />
never heard from again.  Why would you measure your economics against an<br />
international corporation?</p>
<p>> Until the late 1990s, that might have been a reasonable<br />
> presumption. Since then, however, most of the large companies<br />
> reflected in those indexes have transformed themselves into global<br />
> enterprises with global supply chains, global sales, global workforces<br />
> and global sources of capital. That their shares are listed on a U.S.<br />
> stock exchange is something of an historical artifact.<br />
><br />
> Standard &#038; Poor analyst Howard Silverblatt calculates that, for the<br />
> 250 companies in the S&#038;P 500 that break out sales by geographic<br />
> region, roughly half of sales and profits now come from overseas. This<br />
> probably overstates the situation for the S&#038;P 500 as a whole, because<br />
> the companies that don’t break out foreign sales tend to be smaller or<br />
> operate domestically. But even if you figure that the average for the<br />
> entire group is closer to a third, this is no longer your<br />
> grandfather’s S&#038;P 500.</p>
<p>This is all stuff you should have already known.   Obama touts the<br />
market is UP and yet it&#8217;s meaningless to me since I don&#8217;t do business<br />
around the world and I don&#8217;t get government bail out cash.</p>
<p>> Since 1989, the Commerce Department has surveyed large U.S.-based<br />
> multinationals — the most global of U.S. companies — to determine the<br />
> scope of their foreign activities. The results are pretty striking.<br />
> Among nonbank multinationals, the portion of sales attributed to<br />
> foreign-owned affiliates has jumped from 33 percent in 1989 to 62<br />
> percent in 2009. During the same period, the foreign share of total<br />
> employment has jumped from 21 percent to 33 percent, while the foreign<br />
> share of capital expenditures has risen from 22 percent to 27 percent.<br />
><br />
> This data confirm the anecdotal impression one gets from corporate<br />
> executives that big U.S. companies are growing much faster abroad than<br />
> they are at home. And it is largely because of this that their profits<br />
> are near record levels despite the lackluster recovery at home.</p>
<p>Because of Obama regulation and taxes and Redistribution, the<br />
corporations are expanding away from the United States.</p>
<p>> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/the-trials-of-measuring-and-managing-in-a-global-economy/2011/06/06/AGZxdbQH_story.html?nav=emailpage" >http://www.washingtonpost.com/the-trials-of-measuring-and-managing-in-a-global-economy/2011/06/06/AGZxdbQH_story.html?nav=emailpage</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/12/hey-american-stupids-dont-read-farther/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;U.S. Government Is Defaulting on the Average American All the Time.&#8221; &lt; &lt; &lt; GO NWO!!!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/07/u-s-government-is-defaulting-on-the-average-american-all-the-time-go-nwo/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/07/u-s-government-is-defaulting-on-the-average-american-all-the-time-go-nwo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 17:52:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=21052</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 6/7/2011 1:37 PM, Uno Hu wrote: > Mr.B1ack wrote in message > news:rthsu6htmnjtjtfke59obm85sc4djugbc2 @&#038;*$?%4ax.com > >> Möebius Pretzel wrote: >> >>> Ron Paul: &#8220;U.S. Government Is Defaulting on the Average American All >>> the Time.&#8221; >>> >>> >> >> >> Yea ? Well, those Average Americans have had decades, indeed >> centuries now, to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 6/7/2011 1:37 PM, Uno Hu wrote:<br />
> Mr.B1ack <bw @barrk.net> wrote in message<br />
> news:rthsu6htmnjtjtfke59obm85sc4djugbc2<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com<br />
><br />
>> Möebius Pretzel <m0bius_p_pretzel @yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> Ron Paul: &#8220;U.S. Government Is Defaulting on the Average American All<br />
>>> the Time.&#8221;<br />
>>><br />
>>> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KkYoHbike1I&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>    Yea ? Well, those Average Americans have had decades, indeed<br />
>>    centuries now, to surge into DC and leave a corrupt or idiot<br />
>>    faux-&#8217;representative&#8217; dangling from every handy tree. They<br />
>>    haven&#8217;t done it. Even that little thing in 1860 was a very<br />
>>    indirect way of addressing bad reps.<br />
>><br />
>>    Some countries flush the toilet on an almost regular basis.<br />
>>    Doesn&#8217;t take much to piss-off the population. However in<br />
>>    the USA &#8230;. seems Americans will put up with ANYTHING.<br />
>>    Unfortunately, the &#8216;leadership&#8217; KNOWS this &#8230;&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>>    And hence the problem.<br />
>><br />
><br />
> The recent LIES to the american public is a NEW thing.<br />
> It has never been as bad as it has become since Carter.<br />
><br />
> The wretched neocon/republicans changed the game.. they&#8217;ve become<br />
> out-and out LIARS and rapacious thieves. Criminals.</p>
<p>Fighting fire with fire&#8230;..</p>
<p></m0bius_p_pretzel></bw></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/07/u-s-government-is-defaulting-on-the-average-american-all-the-time-go-nwo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Government jobs are the NEW WELFARE</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/06/government-jobs-are-the-new-welfare/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/06/government-jobs-are-the-new-welfare/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 15:31:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wealth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Progressives]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=20970</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 6/5/2011 12:04 PM, Bret Cahill wrote: > http://consortiumnews.com/2011/06/03/making-the-us-economy-scream/ > > The problem with the Republicans&#8217; slash and burn approach is their > party has already acquired the approval rating of a schizophrenic > libertarian spree shooter. > > They ended up slashing and burning their own party. > > This is true any time [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 6/5/2011 12:04 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:<br />
> <a href="http://consortiumnews.com/2011/06/03/making-the-us-economy-scream/" >http://consortiumnews.com/2011/06/03/making-the-us-economy-scream/</a><br />
><br />
> The problem with the Republicans&#8217; slash and burn approach is their<br />
> party has already acquired the approval rating of a schizophrenic<br />
> libertarian spree shooter.<br />
><br />
> They ended up slashing and burning their own party.<br />
><br />
> This is true any time but it is particularly true nowadays with dirt<br />
> cheap communications.  The pseudo liberal media cannot do a whole lot<br />
> to keep up the facade that the U. S. is a vibrant democracy when the<br />
> GOP is very openly and brazenly trying to destroy the U. S. economy.<br />
><br />
><br />
> Bret Cahill</p>
<p>The Republicans moved to far towards the Progressives&#8230;  that&#8217;s what<br />
gets them the &#8220;approval rating of a schizophrenic&#8221; Democrat-Progressive<br />
&#8220;spree shooter.&#8221;</p>
<p>Obama is the one trying to destroy the capitalist economy with his<br />
Progressive REDISTRIBUTION.</p>
<p>You can&#8217;t have Social Justice and Equal Justice at the same time, they<br />
can NOT coexist.  That goes for Capitalism and<br />
Progressive-Redistribution&#8230;  they can NOT coexist.  When you forcibly<br />
take the wealth from one person and give it to others, suddenly the<br />
people that had worked for money no longer have any need to work for money.</p>
<p>There isn&#8217;t enough money to allow the Nation to sit back and NOT work.</p>
<p>*Government jobs are the NEW WELFARE*</p>
<p>Look at the government police and the other government workers, their as<br />
fat as the welfare queens ever were.</p>
<p>Government jobs are like welfare, they both sit on their <acronym title="ass"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym> and collect<br />
a government check for doing nothing.</p>
<p>Are you going to believe Bret Cahill or your Lying eyes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/06/government-jobs-are-the-new-welfare/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Don&#8217;t Right To Lifers Support Government Paying 50% of Child Support?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/02/why-dont-right-to-lifers-support-government-paying-50-of-child-support-12/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/02/why-dont-right-to-lifers-support-government-paying-50-of-child-support-12/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 15:09:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=20944</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 6/1/2011 9:36 PM, Clave wrote: > &#8220;Beam Me Up Scotty&#8221; wrote in > message news:4DE6D5B8.5050906 @&#038;*$?%blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230; > > < ...most immigration offenses are CIVIL...> > >> so he says a paper work SNAFU is NOT a criminal act&#8230;.. that happens >> 1000 times a year. > > Too complicated for you? > > Jim [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 6/1/2011 9:36 PM, Clave wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Beam Me Up Scotty&#8221;
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in<br />
> message news:4DE6D5B8.5050906<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com&#8230;<br />
><br />
> < ...most immigration offenses are CIVIL...><br />
><br />
>> so he says a paper work SNAFU is NOT a criminal act&#8230;..   that happens<br />
>> 1000 times a year.<br />
><br />
> Too complicated for you?<br />
><br />
> Jim</p>
<p>You&#8217;re the one not able to see that only a few illegals are NOT<br />
criminals&#8230;.  they are paperwork violators and once caught the<br />
paperwork should be reconciled and either deport them or file the<br />
paperwork.</p>
<p>Once deported they can only come back as a &#8220;CRIMINAL&#8221;.</p>
<p>Get rid of income tax and replace it with a NEW ITEM sales tax, and cut<br />
out welfare and free stuff for anyone in America and make drugs legal<br />
and get prostitution legalized in more States and then you could open<br />
the borders without all the paperwork and all illegals could be here to<br />
work and do it legally like all the people that have done it legally in<br />
the past.</p>
</then>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/06/02/why-dont-right-to-lifers-support-government-paying-50-of-child-support-12/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sign the Christian Coalition of America&#8217;s Petition for the Repeal of ObamaCare</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/05/27/sign-the-christian-coalition-of-americas-petition-for-the-repeal-of-obamacare-54/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/05/27/sign-the-christian-coalition-of-americas-petition-for-the-repeal-of-obamacare-54/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 16:19:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOVERNMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=20842</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/27/2011 8:47 AM, SaPeIsMa wrote: > &#8220;Bob LeChevalier&#8221; wrote in message > news:saput6577s0qeqqn05da02bebr7jihqras @&#038;*$?%4ax.com&#8230; >> &#8220;SaPeIsMa&#8221; wrote: >>> &#8220;Bob LeChevalier&#8221; wrote in message >>> news:hrlst6toonvbl3hkub117s90j4rr24k483 @&#038;*$?%4ax.com&#8230; >> >>>> I do. You obviously don&#8217;t. &#8220;Waiver&#8221; does not generally mean >>>> &#8220;individual mandate&#8221;. >>> >>> Do you really enjoy mental masturbation on a public forum ? [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/27/2011 8:47 AM, SaPeIsMa wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Bob LeChevalier&#8221; <lojbab @lojban.org> wrote in message<br />
> news:saput6577s0qeqqn05da02bebr7jihqras<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com&#8230;<br />
>> &#8220;SaPeIsMa&#8221; <sapeisma @Hotmail.com> wrote:<br />
>>> &#8220;Bob LeChevalier&#8221; <lojbab @lojban.org> wrote in message<br />
>>> news:hrlst6toonvbl3hkub117s90j4rr24k483<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>>>> I do.  You obviously don&#8217;t.  &#8220;Waiver&#8221; does not generally mean<br />
>>>> &#8220;individual mandate&#8221;.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Do you really enjoy mental masturbation on a public forum ?<br />
>>> So I&#8217;ll keep it simple for the simpletons&#8230;<br />
>>><br />
>>> a)    A group (in the name of the individuals of said group)<br />
>><br />
>> The waiver is NOT &#8220;in the name of the individuals&#8221;.  In general it is<br />
>> a waiver on whether the insurance they offer has to meet all of the<br />
>> standards of Obamacare, which standards are pretty high.  A waiver<br />
>> might exempt them from one or two provisions, or it might be providing<br />
>> care in a different way than the Obamacare standards were intended<br />
>> for.  But it is the company or organization providing the insurance<br />
>> that gets a waiver for THEMSELVES, from provisions that require THEM<br />
>> to meet certain obligations.</p>
<p>>> b) is false.  The individual mandate is merely a requirement that you<br />
>> get insurance, or pay an assessment.  If a waiver is granted to an<br />
>> organization, individuals still have to buy insurance or pay an<br />
>> assessment.  It might mean that the insurance that you get from your<br />
>> company, or the AARP, is below the Obamacare standards in some aspect<br />
>> (or it might mean that it simply deals with something in a way<br />
>> incompatible with the Obamacare standards, but still provides<br />
>> equivalent coverage).  But it is still insurance, and thus you are<br />
>> following the individual mandate if you have it.</p>
<p>Obama has set the stage to force our Insurance coverage to change to<br />
ObamaCare standards&#8230;.  that is causing Insurance companies to say they<br />
will follow the Obama law and they will change the policy and the cost<br />
to you the customer.</p>
<p>The companies and unions and States that offer insurance with a job<br />
often pay a portion of your cost of the insurance so their costs will<br />
rise as well as the cost to the customer using the insurance.</p>
<p>Obama is Handing out *WAIVERS*  so that twelve months before his<br />
re-election, ObamaCare won&#8217;t be tossing people off of their insurance<br />
plans that Obama said they could keep.  Obviously ObamaCare can&#8217;t do<br />
both. ObamaCare will either be in effect and dump hundreds of thousands<br />
off their current health care due to insurance companies closing or<br />
changing their present package or Obama has to give out waivers to stave<br />
off the dumping of all the people that are in insurance plans that are<br />
NOT ObamaCare compliant.</p>
<p>Obama has to give waivers to any entity that will kill their insurance<br />
plan or he will be facing an angry electorate in November 2012.</p>
<p>This amounts to *BUYING VOTES*  by using waivers to allow voters to keep<br />
their present sub ObamaCare insurance until after the Obama Campaign<br />
Election is past&#8230;..</p>
<p>*AFTER THE ELECTION, ALL YOU PEOPLE ON WAIVERS WILL BE TOSSED OFF*<br />
*YOUR INSURANCE PLANS AND BE FORCED TO GET NEW PLANS THAT WILL*<br />
*COST MORE, SO THAT YOUR INSURANCE WILL MEET OBAMACARE STANDARDS*</p>
<p>*GOOD LUCK AFFORDING IT*</p>
<p>*AT SOME POINT YOU WILL LIKELY BE FORCED INTO A SUBSIDIZED*<br />
*GOVERNMENT INSURANCE POOL*</p>
<p></lojbab></sapeisma></lojbab></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/05/27/sign-the-christian-coalition-of-americas-petition-for-the-repeal-of-obamacare-54/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sign the Christian Coalition of America&#8217;s Petition for the Repeal of ObamaCare</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/05/25/sign-the-christian-coalition-of-americas-petition-for-the-repeal-of-obamacare-40/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/05/25/sign-the-christian-coalition-of-americas-petition-for-the-repeal-of-obamacare-40/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2011 22:00:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=20756</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5/25/2011 4:46 PM, RD Sandman wrote: > Bob LeChevalier wrote in > news:ua4qt6tb38jbk0sn106jordujtj1n82p58 @&#038;*$?%4ax.com: > >> Beam Me Up Scotty >> wrote: >>> On 5/24/2011 6:13 PM, Scout wrote: >> >>>> Then they should pay for ALL school lunches for ALL individuals. >>>> >>>> Otherwise your excuse of national security doesn&#8217;t hold up. >>> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 5/25/2011 4:46 PM, RD Sandman wrote:<br />
> Bob LeChevalier <lojbab @lojban.org> wrote in<br />
> news:ua4qt6tb38jbk0sn106jordujtj1n82p58<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com:<br />
><br />
>> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>blackhole.nebulax.com>
>> wrote:<br />
>>> On 5/24/2011 6:13 PM, Scout wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> Then they should pay for ALL school lunches for ALL individuals.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Otherwise your excuse of national security doesn&#8217;t hold up.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Excellent point, National security means that the government hands<br />
> every<br />
>>> soldier their gun and feeds them while in the military&#8230;.   if<br />
> children<br />
>>> need to eat to prepare, then they all need the same food for the same<br />
>>> reason.<br />
>>><br />
>>> all or none&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>> By that reasoning, ever person in the country would be handed a gun,<br />
>> not just every soldier, and everyone would be in the military from<br />
>> birth to death.<br />
>><br />
>> Sorry, but that is not a constitutional requirement.<br />
><br />
> Article I(8)(16)<br />
><br />
> &#8220;To provide for organizing, *ARMING*, and disciplining, the Militia&#8230;..&#8221;<br />
><br />
> 10 USC 311<br />
><br />
> &#8220;TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 311<br />
><br />
> § 311. Militia: composition and classes<br />
><br />
> (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at<br />
> least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32,<br />
> under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of<br />
> intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens<br />
> of the United States who are members of the National Guard.<br />
> (b) The classes of the militia are—<br />
> (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the<br />
> Naval Militia; and<br />
> (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia<br />
> who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.&#8221;<br />
><br />
> Now, I would not get a free gun as I am over 45 years of age.</p>
<p>You have just proven that legally, children&#8217;s lunches are NOT National<br />
Security as per the Militia and National Guard. The Militia/Guard are<br />
already tasked with that and school children are too young to be sucked<br />
into National Security by law.</p>
<p>I guess that the military will be forced to take malnourished American<br />
RUNTS that don&#8217;t get enough to eat&#8230;.  WON&#8217;T THAT BE A NEW PROBLEM!</p>
</then></lojbab></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/05/25/sign-the-christian-coalition-of-americas-petition-for-the-repeal-of-obamacare-40/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>OH Canada!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/30/oh-canada/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/30/oh-canada/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Apr 2011 20:04:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=20004</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[> On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 23:30:40 -0700, &#8220;spameraser&#8221; > wrote: > >> >> &#8220;429,000 More Workers Fired in Obamaconomy&#8221; >> wrote in message news:IiLup.29278$8U5.26593 @&#038;*$?%newsfe20.iad&#8230; >>> http://gasbuddy.com/GB_Price_List.aspx Why did McDonald&#8217;s commit to hire 50,000 and Lowe&#8217;s and Home Depot hire &#8220;new&#8221; people and make a big propaganda deal about it, was it pay back [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>> On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 23:30:40 -0700, &#8220;spameraser&#8221;<br />
> <spameraser @hotmail.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>><br />
>> &#8220;429,000 More Workers Fired in Obamaconomy&#8221; <unemployment rate soars 429,000 @ Hussein.gov><br />
>> wrote in message news:IiLup.29278$8U5.26593<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>newsfe20.iad&#8230;<br />
>>> <a href="http://gasbuddy.com/GB_Price_List.aspx" >http://gasbuddy.com/GB_Price_List.aspx</a></p>
<p>Why did McDonald&#8217;s commit to hire 50,000 and Lowe&#8217;s and Home Depot hire<br />
&#8220;new&#8221; people and make a big propaganda deal about it, was it pay back<br />
for getting an *OBAMACARE WAIVERS* ?</p>
<p>Something smells&#8230;..</p>
<p>Obama knew this month was going to see bad numbers.  Is this like the<br />
Clinton&#8217;s 100,000 NEW cops on the streets that never came to pass, and<br />
it turns out was more like 30,000 cops and most of them were fired and<br />
rehired or transferred to a &#8220;new job&#8221; so they could be called &#8220;NEW&#8221; on<br />
the job.</p>
<p>Is this an Obama scam that&#8217;s up and running.  But the numbers are<br />
sticking in Obama&#8217;s craw.  Did McDonald&#8217;s fire 40,000 workers and hire<br />
50,000 new ones? Is this a case of a new shell game being run on the<br />
people that believe what they see on TV?</p>
<p>Hiring and firing are up, the NET gain for the Obama-economy is that<br />
there are more people collecting unemployment this week.</p>
<p></unemployment></spameraser></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/30/oh-canada/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is Ron Paul turning wimpy on illegal immigration?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/30/is-ron-paul-turning-wimpy-on-illegal-immigration/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/30/is-ron-paul-turning-wimpy-on-illegal-immigration/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Apr 2011 18:45:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IRS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=19994</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[> > > &#8220;Iconoclast&#8221; wrote in message > news:ce12eaa8-4bf4-4fa8-89ae-7b600af2d169 @&#038;*$?%t19g2000prd.googlegroups.com&#8230; > > On Apr 30, 9:05 am, &#8220; J&#038;*$?%a&#8221; wrote: >> Does anyone have a solution to the illegal immigration problem? If you >> believe there is a solution, what is the solution? >> And give America back to Americans Reducing regulations is primary since [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>><br />
><br />
> &#8220;Iconoclast&#8221;  wrote in message<br />
> news:ce12eaa8-4bf4-4fa8-89ae-7b600af2d169<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>t19g2000prd.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
><br />
> On Apr 30, 9:05 am, &#8220;<acronym title="Jerry Okamura"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> J&*$?%a</span></acronym>&#8221; <okamuraj ...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:<br />
>> Does anyone have a solution to the illegal immigration problem?  If you<br />
>> believe there is a solution, what is the solution?<br />
>></p>
<p>And give America back to Americans</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?</p>
<p><a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/1011PSISBBVD/PPSIM280/PR" >http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/1011PSISBBVD/PPSIM280/PR</a></p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises sales tax by 1% they are forced to<br />
cut every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy Socialist<br />
idea by saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY. The way to limit<br />
some of the Presidents spending is to put an amendment in the<br />
constitution, and limit the Executive branch to 1% of the Nations income<br />
for foreign aid. That should reduce the Presidents buying of other<br />
Nations &#8220;friendship&#8221;.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we need to<br />
take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; the businesses or the<br />
private people by removing the governments use of IRS tax code to<br />
manipulate people. Getting rid of the Income tax and IRS as suggested<br />
above will do that.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending cap at 20% of GDP and then across the<br />
board cuts on the government spending, to include a law in our TAX<br />
amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing(fewer laws), we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;.<br />
and the above drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by<br />
at least that 10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
<p></okamuraj></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/30/is-ron-paul-turning-wimpy-on-illegal-immigration/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Conservatives should demand 15% decrease in Defense spending.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/13/conservatives-should-demand-15-decrease-in-defense-spending/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/13/conservatives-should-demand-15-decrease-in-defense-spending/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2011 01:36:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IRS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=19316</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/13/2011 6:18 PM, Robert not Roberto wrote: > &#8220;walt tonne&#8221; wrote in message > news:817b185f-dfe2-4e78-a26d-bda7094b15ce @&#038;*$?%a21g2000prj.googlegroups.com&#8230; >> Current levels of spending are obscene. Almost a billion to date in >> Libya, 54 thousand milititary >> in Germany, 35 thousand in South Korea. Thousands scattered around the >> middle east. >> Bring em&#8217; home, put [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/13/2011 6:18 PM, Robert not Roberto wrote:<br />
> &#8220;walt tonne&#8221; <tonnewalt487 @gmail.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:817b185f-dfe2-4e78-a26d-bda7094b15ce<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>a21g2000prj.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
>> Current levels of spending are obscene. Almost a billion to date in<br />
>> Libya, 54 thousand milititary<br />
>> in Germany, 35 thousand in South Korea. Thousands scattered around the<br />
>> middle east.<br />
>> Bring em&#8217; home, put 20,000 on the borders. Cheaper to discharge many<br />
>> and put them on unemployment.<br />
><br />
> I&#8217;m a Conservative and I agree with you.  The Republicans would have a lot<br />
> more credibility if they put everything on the chopping block including<br />
> defense.<br />
><br />
></p>
<p>And give America back to Americans</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?</p>
<p><a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises sales tax by 1% they are forced to<br />
cut every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy Socialist<br />
idea by saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY. The way to limit<br />
some of the Presidents spending is to put an amendment in the<br />
constitution, and limit the Executive branch to 1% of the Nations income<br />
for foreign aid. That should reduce the Presidents buying of other<br />
Nations &#8220;friendship&#8221;.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we need to<br />
take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; the businesses or the<br />
private people by removing the governments use of IRS tax code to<br />
manipulate people. Getting rid of the Income tax and IRS as suggested<br />
above will do that.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending cap at 20% of GDP and then across the<br />
board cuts on the government spending, to include a law in our TAX<br />
amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing(fewer laws), we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;.<br />
and the above drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by<br />
at least that 10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
<p></tonnewalt487></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/13/conservatives-should-demand-15-decrease-in-defense-spending/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The GOP Path to Prosperity (Video)</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/05/the-gop-path-to-prosperity-video/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/05/the-gop-path-to-prosperity-video/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 18:28:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IRS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=18944</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/5/2011 11:23 AM, Seth wrote: > The GOP Path to Prosperity (Video) > > This budget cuts $6.2 trillion in spending from the president&#8217;s budget > over the next 10 years and puts the nation on track to pay off our > national debt. > > And give America back to Americans Reducing regulations [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/5/2011 11:23 AM, Seth wrote:<br />
> The GOP Path to Prosperity (Video)<br />
><br />
> This budget cuts $6.2 trillion in spending from the president&#8217;s budget<br />
> over the next 10 years and puts the nation on track to pay off our<br />
> national debt.<br />
><br />
> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Xwv5EbxXSmE&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>And give America back to Americans</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?</p>
<p><a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises sales tax by 1% they are forced to<br />
cut every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy Socialist<br />
idea by saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY. The way to limit<br />
some of the Presidents spending is to put an amendment in the<br />
constitution, and limit the Executive branch to 1% of the Nations income<br />
for foreign aid. That should reduce the Presidents buying of other<br />
Nations &#8220;friendship&#8221;.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we need to<br />
take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; the businesses or the<br />
private people by removing the governments use of IRS tax code to<br />
manipulate people. Getting rid of the Income tax and IRS as suggested<br />
above will do that.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending cap at 20% of GDP and then across the<br />
board cuts on the government spending, to include a law in our TAX<br />
amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing(fewer laws), we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;.<br />
and the above drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by<br />
at least that 10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/05/the-gop-path-to-prosperity-video/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>It is unconstitutional to create *ex post facto law*  Which is what judges interpreting laws is&#8230;.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/02/it-is-unconstitutional-to-create-ex-post-facto-law-which-is-what-judges-interpreting-laws-is/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/02/it-is-unconstitutional-to-create-ex-post-facto-law-which-is-what-judges-interpreting-laws-is/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Apr 2011 08:41:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crazy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATION]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Thu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unconstitutional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yoorghis Jurgis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=18743</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/1/2011 3:42 PM, Art Sowers wrote: > > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2011, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote: > >> On 4/1/2011 12:16 PM, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: >>> On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 10:50:49 -0400, Animal 07 >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 4/1/2011 9:14 AM, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/1/2011 3:42 PM, Art Sowers wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On 4/1/2011 12:16 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 Fri, 01 Apr 2011 10:50:49 -0400, Animal 07 <wherewasi @friday.com><br />
>>> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> On 4/1/2011 9:14 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 />
>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 18:18:55 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty<br />
>>>>>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Blackhole.NebulaX.com>  wrote:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> On 3/31/2011 5:34 PM, <a href="mailto:Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net">Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 16:30:24 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty<br />
>>>>>>> </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Blackhole.NebulaX.com>  wrote:<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> Where is your power to interpret the constitution, in the<br />
>>>>>>>> constitution?<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
><br />
>>>>> the constitution to be law.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> This idea of case law is its self against the tenets of equal justice<br />
>>>>>> since they are using predetermined conclusions from unrelated cases.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Thats babbling<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> &#8220;beamed&#8221; misses the fact that &#8220;reading&#8221; requires interpretation<br />
>><br />
>> Reading requires understanding, we call it comprehension NOT<br />
>> interpreting.<br />
><br />
> Most reasonable and wise people already know that what a conservative<br />
> means when he uses the word _freedom_ is diferent than when a liberal<br />
> uses it.<br />
><br />
>   The point is to comprehend what the words mean not what<br />
>> the author was thinking or meant to say but didn&#8217;t.<br />
><br />
> Reading what is on alt.politics.economics shows me that there is endless<br />
> arguing about this.<br />
><br />
>   That would be mind<br />
>> reading and while you may be good at it,<br />
><br />
> Since you used the word _reading_, that would mean that there was<br />
> something readable in another mind, meaning absolute knowledge and<br />
> symbology (such as numbers and math).<br />
><br />
>  in our legal system we don&#8217;t<br />
>> allow it in courts.<br />
><br />
> Mind reading doesn&#8217;t exist anywhere, and juries always interpret the<br />
> evidence.</p>
<p>I might accept it as a word describing the Juries job, they weigh the<br />
testimony and they evaluate evidence but I&#8217;m not ready to say they<br />
interpret evidence, consultants give testimony evaluating technical<br />
evidence.  I&#8217;m not all that sure that it&#8217;s constitutional to have<br />
someone &#8220;tell you what evidence means&#8221; since that is second hand<br />
information and not direct evidence. If you can&#8217;t see what evidence<br />
means then it really isn&#8217;t evidence is it, it is someone telling you<br />
that it is evidence.</p>
<p>>> It&#8217;s funny that you tell me &#8220;WE&#8221; in the constitution means we all have<br />
>> to do things together not individually and yet here you expound the idea<br />
>> that judges have the right to interpret meaning and not simply<br />
>> comprehend the words meaning on the actual meaning that &#8220;WE&#8221; have all<br />
>> agreed the words represent.<br />
><br />
> The judge has the authority, not you.</p>
<p>As I have said the Judge doesn&#8217;t have constitutional authority to<br />
rewrite any law. The judge can read it and use it but NOT change it.</p>
<p>>  You want to redefine the words as you want<br />
>> the judges to interpret the laws.<br />
>><br />
>> If you interpret everything on a minute by minute basis, nothing ever<br />
>> written is worth the paper is was written on,<br />
><br />
> Oh, yes it is. Microscopic amounts of ink add calorimetricly greater<br />
> amounts of stored enegy along with that, preexisting, of the paper under<br />
> the ink.</p>
<p>But then you have to recycle it which makes it cost more with ink which<br />
has to be bleached.</p>
<p>><br />
>  maybe I should interpret<br />
>> the Judges interpretation and so on.<br />
><br />
> You can&#8217;t. You can only say whether you like or not like what the judge<br />
> did. Or, you can have</p>
<p>Which is what a judge can do.</p>
<p>>   Every judge can interpret the<br />
>> newest interpretation and by the time you get to the end of this gossip<br />
>> circle the entire idea has become convoluted&#8230;<br />
><br />
> Just like Usenet.</p>
<p>Yes.  Including the 3rd grade educations.</p>
<p>>   Surely in 3rd grade<br />
>> you stood in a circle in class and someone would read a sentence from a<br />
>> paper and whisper in the ear of the person to their left and as each kid<br />
>> whispers the sentence they heard until it goes around and back to where<br />
>> it started, only to have the last kid say out loud what they were told.<br />
>> It never matched the sentence that was written on the paper.<br />
><br />
> Its called the &#8220;psychology of rumor&#8221; and is taught in all college<br />
> courses in social psychology.</p>
<p>3rd grade was where I learned it and I can&#8217;t recall it being in my<br />
College psych class.  It would be a good internet lesson to tech on teh<br />
internet some how.</p>
<p>>   You want<br />
>> laws created by a gossip circle.<br />
><br />
> Your choice: be a member or not of that circle.<br />
><br />
>   Are we a NATION of laws or a NATION<br />
>> of GOSSIP circles?<br />
><br />
> The later.<br />
><br />
>><br />
>>> The poor <acronym title="asshole"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%e</span></acronym> just publicly claimed that &#8220;NO interpretation of law<br />
>>> was possible&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> If you are a judge interpreting a law, how was I supposed to obey a law<br />
>> that was never &#8220;interpreted&#8221; for me until you the judge has done it?<br />
><br />
> By reading about it in the media.</p>
<p>But the interpretation can&#8217;t be done until that case is done and someone<br />
has finally been dragged to court with all that expense to be found<br />
innocent or guilty for the interpretation that did NOT exist until after<br />
the case was over.</p>
<p>It is unconstitutional to create *ex post facto law* and make the law<br />
after the &#8220;crime&#8221; &#8211; then prosecute so it is the chicken or the egg<br />
argument.  You can&#8217;t Prosecute someone with your NEW interpreted law<br />
until it is a written law because that is the ex post facto. Obviously<br />
any Judge that is &#8220;manipulating or interpreting&#8221; a law is creating ex<br />
post facto law.</p>
<p>["""[Section. 9.<br />
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now<br />
existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the<br />
Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a<br />
Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten<br />
dollars for each Person.</p>
<p>The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended,<br />
unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may<br />
require it.</p>
<p>*No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed* .]&#8220;&#8221;"]</p>
<p>>> Isn&#8217;t that too late, shouldn&#8217;t I have known what the law meant when it<br />
>> was written&#8230;.    Are you such a fool?<br />
><br />
> Courts and judges are &#8220;interpreting&#8221; laws since courts and judges,<br />
> thousands of years ago, started doing that.<br />
></p>
<p>Is that why we had Slavery for thousands of years?</p>
<p>>> Once interpreted, why isn&#8217;t it then re-voted on and enacted as a law so<br />
>> that I can find the new interpreted version in the law books of the<br />
>> land? Is it because that would be a constitutional way to do it?<br />
><br />
> Its easier and cheaper to listen to the gossip in the gossip circle.</p>
<p>It costs $24,000 per year per student&#8230;..  average 30 per class.</p>
<p>and yes cheap is good unless it is an excuse to steal my freedom.   Than<br />
it equates to me being a slave to the government who is going to treat<br />
me like they own me.</p>
<p>>> That is why judges can *only* find a law constitutional or NOT.<br />
><br />
> No, they can interpret it, and issue a court order to make it work.</p>
<p>They do, but it is unconstitutional.</p>
<p>><br />
>> What they say beyond that is irrelevant unless the next step is taken to<br />
>> make the new version into a law.<br />
><br />
> &#8230;with a court order.</p>
<p>If they want to order the congress to do their job, I&#8217;d pay to watch it<br />
on cable TV.</p>
<p>><br />
>> So apparently Judges can&#8217;t interpret a law&#8230;. if it isn&#8217;t written then<br />
>> I can&#8217;t follow it as law and if it isn&#8217;t passed by congress it isn&#8217;t<br />
>> written law.<br />
><br />
> Even that would be interpreted.</p>
<p>Has ObamaCare Health care law been &#8220;interpreted&#8221; yet?</p>
<p>Part of the problem there is they haven&#8217;t written it all yet&#8230;  So do<br />
you suppose they will write the law before the Judges interpret the law<br />
that hasn&#8217;t been witten?</p>
<p>>> All the Judge has done is file a meaningless &#8220;opinion&#8221;, that is just for<br />
>> other judges and lawyers to quote to one another, for the sake of time<br />
>> saving.<br />
><br />
> Um&#8230;.how come you forgot to get an anti-socialist commment in here,<br />
> anywhere, in this post?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure it was just that I was distracted by the crazy idea that Judges<br />
and government can ignore the constitution, that seems to be more than<br />
just a Socialist disease.</p>
</then></wherewasi></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/02/it-is-unconstitutional-to-create-ex-post-facto-law-which-is-what-judges-interpreting-laws-is/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>out broken record tape loop..</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/01/out-broken-record-tape-loop/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/01/out-broken-record-tape-loop/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:35:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crazy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NATION]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Thu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unconstitutional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yoorghis Jurgis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=18713</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/1/2011 3:42 PM, Art Sowers wrote: > > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2011, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote: > >> On 4/1/2011 12:16 PM, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: >>> On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 10:50:49 -0400, Animal 07 >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 4/1/2011 9:14 AM, Yoorghis @&#038;*$?%Jurgis.net wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/1/2011 3:42 PM, Art Sowers wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On 4/1/2011 12:16 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 Fri, 01 Apr 2011 10:50:49 -0400, Animal 07 <wherewasi @friday.com><br />
>>> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> On 4/1/2011 9:14 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 />
>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 18:18:55 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty<br />
>>>>>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Blackhole.NebulaX.com>  wrote:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> On 3/31/2011 5:34 PM, <a href="mailto:Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net">Yoorghis<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Jurgis.net</a> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 16:30:24 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty<br />
>>>>>>> </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Blackhole.NebulaX.com>  wrote:<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>>> Where is your power to interpret the constitution, in the<br />
>>>>>>>> constitution?<br />
>>>>>>>><br />
><br />
>>>>> the constitution to be law.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> This idea of case law is its self against the tenets of equal justice<br />
>>>>>> since they are using predetermined conclusions from unrelated cases.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Thats babbling<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> &#8220;beamed&#8221; misses the fact that &#8220;reading&#8221; requires interpretation<br />
>><br />
>> Reading requires understanding, we call it comprehension NOT<br />
>> interpreting.<br />
><br />
> Most reasonable and wise people already know that what a conservative<br />
> means when he uses the word _freedom_ is diferent than when a liberal<br />
> uses it.<br />
><br />
>   The point is to comprehend what the words mean not what<br />
>> the author was thinking or meant to say but didn&#8217;t.<br />
><br />
> Reading what is on alt.politics.economics shows me that there is endless<br />
> arguing about this.<br />
><br />
>   That would be mind<br />
>> reading and while you may be good at it,<br />
><br />
> Since you used the word _reading_, that would mean that there was<br />
> something readable in another mind, meaning absolute knowledge and<br />
> symbology (such as numbers and math).<br />
><br />
>  in our legal system we don&#8217;t<br />
>> allow it in courts.<br />
><br />
> Mind reading doesn&#8217;t exist anywhere, and juries always interpret the<br />
> evidence.</p>
<p>I might accept it as a word describing the Juries job, they weigh the<br />
testimony and they evaluate evidence but I&#8217;m not ready to say they<br />
interpret evidence, consultants give testimony evaluating technical<br />
evidence.  I&#8217;m not all that sure that it&#8217;s constitutional to have<br />
someone &#8220;tell you what evidence means&#8221; since that is second hand<br />
information and not direct evidence. If you can&#8217;t see what evidence<br />
means then it really isn&#8217;t evidence is it, it is someone telling you<br />
that it is evidence.</p>
<p>>> It&#8217;s funny that you tell me &#8220;WE&#8221; in the constitution means we all have<br />
>> to do things together not individually and yet here you expound the idea<br />
>> that judges have the right to interpret meaning and not simply<br />
>> comprehend the words meaning on the actual meaning that &#8220;WE&#8221; have all<br />
>> agreed the words represent.<br />
><br />
> The judge has the authority, not you.</p>
<p>As I have said the Judge doesn&#8217;t have constitutional authority to<br />
rewrite any law. The judge can read it and use it but NOT change it.</p>
<p>>  You want to redefine the words as you want<br />
>> the judges to interpret the laws.<br />
>><br />
>> If you interpret everything on a minute by minute basis, nothing ever<br />
>> written is worth the paper is was written on,<br />
><br />
> Oh, yes it is. Microscopic amounts of ink add calorimetricly greater<br />
> amounts of stored enegy along with that, preexisting, of the paper under<br />
> the ink.</p>
<p>But then you have to recycle it which makes it cost more with ink which<br />
has to be bleached.</p>
<p>><br />
>  maybe I should interpret<br />
>> the Judges interpretation and so on.<br />
><br />
> You can&#8217;t. You can only say whether you like or not like what the judge<br />
> did. Or, you can have</p>
<p>Which is what a judge can do.</p>
<p>>   Every judge can interpret the<br />
>> newest interpretation and by the time you get to the end of this gossip<br />
>> circle the entire idea has become convoluted&#8230;<br />
><br />
> Just like Usenet.</p>
<p>Yes.  Including the 3rd grade educations.</p>
<p>>   Surely in 3rd grade<br />
>> you stood in a circle in class and someone would read a sentence from a<br />
>> paper and whisper in the ear of the person to their left and as each kid<br />
>> whispers the sentence they heard until it goes around and back to where<br />
>> it started, only to have the last kid say out loud what they were told.<br />
>> It never matched the sentence that was written on the paper.<br />
><br />
> Its called the &#8220;psychology of rumor&#8221; and is taught in all college<br />
> courses in social psychology.</p>
<p>3rd grade was where I learned it and I can&#8217;t recall it being in my<br />
College psych class.  It would be a good internet lesson to tech on teh<br />
internet some how.</p>
<p>>   You want<br />
>> laws created by a gossip circle.<br />
><br />
> Your choice: be a member or not of that circle.<br />
><br />
>   Are we a NATION of laws or a NATION<br />
>> of GOSSIP circles?<br />
><br />
> The later.<br />
><br />
>><br />
>>> The poor <acronym title="asshole"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%e</span></acronym> just publicly claimed that &#8220;NO interpretation of law<br />
>>> was possible&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> If you are a judge interpreting a law, how was I supposed to obey a law<br />
>> that was never &#8220;interpreted&#8221; for me until you the judge has done it?<br />
><br />
> By reading about it in the media.</p>
<p>But the interpretation can&#8217;t be done until that case is done and someone<br />
has finally been dragged to court with all that expense to be found<br />
innocent or guilty for the interpretation that did NOT exist until after<br />
the case was over.</p>
<p>It is unconstitutional to create *ex post facto law* and make the law<br />
after the &#8220;crime&#8221; &#8211; then prosecute so it is the chicken or the egg<br />
argument.  You can&#8217;t Prosecute someone with your NEW interpreted law<br />
until it is a written law because that is the ex post facto. Obviously<br />
any Judge that is &#8220;manipulating or interpreting&#8221; a law is creating ex<br />
post facto law.</p>
<p>["""[Section. 9.<br />
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now<br />
existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the<br />
Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a<br />
Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten<br />
dollars for each Person.</p>
<p>The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended,<br />
unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may<br />
require it.</p>
<p>*No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed* .]&#8220;&#8221;"]</p>
<p>>> Isn&#8217;t that too late, shouldn&#8217;t I have known what the law meant when it<br />
>> was written&#8230;.    Are you such a fool?<br />
><br />
> Courts and judges are &#8220;interpreting&#8221; laws since courts and judges,<br />
> thousands of years ago, started doing that.<br />
></p>
<p>Is that why we had Slavery for thousands of years?</p>
<p>>> Once interpreted, why isn&#8217;t it then re-voted on and enacted as a law so<br />
>> that I can find the new interpreted version in the law books of the<br />
>> land? Is it because that would be a constitutional way to do it?<br />
><br />
> Its easier and cheaper to listen to the gossip in the gossip circle.</p>
<p>It costs $24,000 per year per student&#8230;..  average 30 per class.</p>
<p>and yes cheap is good unless it is an excuse to steal my freedom.   Than<br />
it equates to me being a slave to the government who is going to treat<br />
me like they own me.</p>
<p>>> That is why judges can *only* find a law constitutional or NOT.<br />
><br />
> No, they can interpret it, and issue a court order to make it work.</p>
<p>They do, but it is unconstitutional.</p>
<p>><br />
>> What they say beyond that is irrelevant unless the next step is taken to<br />
>> make the new version into a law.<br />
><br />
> &#8230;with a court order.</p>
<p>If they want to order the congress to do their job, I&#8217;d pay to watch it<br />
on cable TV.</p>
<p>><br />
>> So apparently Judges can&#8217;t interpret a law&#8230;. if it isn&#8217;t written then<br />
>> I can&#8217;t follow it as law and if it isn&#8217;t passed by congress it isn&#8217;t<br />
>> written law.<br />
><br />
> Even that would be interpreted.</p>
<p>Has ObamaCare Health care law been &#8220;interpreted&#8221; yet?</p>
<p>Part of the problem there is they haven&#8217;t written it all yet&#8230;  So do<br />
you suppose they will write the law before the Judges interpret the law<br />
that hasn&#8217;t been witten?</p>
<p>>> All the Judge has done is file a meaningless &#8220;opinion&#8221;, that is just for<br />
>> other judges and lawyers to quote to one another, for the sake of time<br />
>> saving.<br />
><br />
> Um&#8230;.how come you forgot to get an anti-socialist commment in here,<br />
> anywhere, in this post?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure it was just that I was distracted by the crazy idea that Judges<br />
and government can ignore the constitution, that seems to be more than<br />
just a Socialist disease.</p>
</then></wherewasi></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/01/out-broken-record-tape-loop/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>It&#8217;s Time For Ground Troops or For US To Concede Defeat And President Admit Libya Was A Mistake</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/01/its-time-for-ground-troops-or-for-us-to-concede-defeat-and-president-admit-libya-was-a-mistake/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/01/its-time-for-ground-troops-or-for-us-to-concede-defeat-and-president-admit-libya-was-a-mistake/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2011 14:22:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terrorists]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=18663</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 4/1/2011 7:21 AM, Sean Cullen wrote: > &#8220;We&#8217;ve reached the point where we should either send in troops or > President Obama should concede defeat and admit that Libya > intervention was a mistake.&#8221; > > If Obama decides to train and arm, people in Libya, what happens when those people start killing women [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 4/1/2011 7:21 AM, Sean Cullen wrote:<br />
> &#8220;We&#8217;ve reached the point where we should either send in troops or<br />
> President Obama should concede defeat and admit that Libya<br />
> intervention was a mistake.&#8221;<br />
><br />
> <embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/y_1THCYTgGI&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>If Obama decides to train and arm, people in Libya, what happens when<br />
those people start killing women and children, or take their new weapons<br />
and training to kill Israeli women and children.</p>
<p>Obama is *LITERALLY MAKING NEW TERRORISTS* and we are paying for it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/04/01/its-time-for-ground-troops-or-for-us-to-concede-defeat-and-president-admit-libya-was-a-mistake/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rejected Obama Libya Mission Names</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/03/23/rejected-obama-libya-mission-names/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/03/23/rejected-obama-libya-mission-names/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2011 22:59:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Libya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=18209</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 3/23/2011 6:40 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote: &#62; On 3/22/2011 8:40 AM, No Surrender @&#038;*$?%never.net wrote: &#62; &#62; There is no &#8220;Obama Libya Mission,&#8221; Twinkie racist Denis. &#62; &#62; Obama is already running from his decision to fight a NEW war&#8230;.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 3/23/2011 6:40 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote:<br />
&gt; On 3/22/2011 8:40 AM, No <a href="mailto:Surrender<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>never.net">Surrender<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>never.net</a> wrote:<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt; There is no &#8220;Obama Libya Mission,&#8221; Twinkie racist Denis.<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt;<br />
Obama is already running from his decision to fight a NEW war&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/03/23/rejected-obama-libya-mission-names/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;That&#8217;s Not Theirs, That&#8217;s A National Resource, It&#8217;s Ours&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/03/20/thats-not-theirs-thats-a-national-resource-its-ours/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/03/20/thats-not-theirs-thats-a-national-resource-its-ours/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Mar 2011 17:34:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IRS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=18067</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 3/20/2011 11:18 AM, Obveeus wrote: > &#8220;Mason Barge&#8221; wrote: > >> I also think they lowering of taxes on stock dividends below the rate for >> earned income is a&#038;*$?%s-backwards. I can remember when earned income was >> taxed at the lowest rate of any income, which seems to me to reflect the >> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 3/20/2011 11:18 AM, Obveeus wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Mason Barge&#8221; <masonbarge @gmail.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> I also think they lowering of taxes on stock dividends below the rate for<br />
>> earned income is <acronym title="ass"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> a&*$?%s</span></acronym>-backwards.  I can remember when earned income was<br />
>> taxed at the lowest rate of any income, which seems to me to reflect the<br />
>> traditional values of America.<br />
><br />
> I agree, but what I&#8217;d really like to see happen is a &#8216;sales&#8217; tax of sort on<br />
> stocks.  Something akin to the backend load on a mutual fund.  Any time a<br />
> person sells any stock, apply a 5% sales tax.  That would encourage people<br />
> to actually invest in companies rather than &#8216;play the market&#8217; because people<br />
> would be encouraged to actually make long term investments in a company&#8217;s<br />
> future.</p>
<p>The entire tax system should be the same&#8230;.  tax on new Items so that<br />
people use things really want or need them, NOT a tax on working and<br />
earning but on wasting.  A 10% sales tax on new items with a limiting<br />
twist that says any raise in tax will be allowed with a cut across the<br />
board of three times that by all Federal spending.  That way a 1% tax<br />
increase will result in a 3% Federal wide spending cut&#8230;..</p>
<p>33% sales tax increase would mean a 99% spending reduction across the<br />
Board. That would put government out of business.</p>
<p>*And give America back to Americans*</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?</p>
<p><a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises sales tax by 1% they are forced to<br />
cut every single expenditure of the government by 3% evenly.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy Socialist<br />
idea by saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY. The way to limit<br />
some of the Presidents spending is to put an amendment in the<br />
constitution, and limit the Executive branch to 1% of the Nations income<br />
for foreign aid. That should reduce the Presidents buying of other<br />
Nations &#8220;friendship&#8221;.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we need to<br />
take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; the businesses or the<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people. Getting rid of the Income tax and IRS as suggested above will do<br />
that.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
TAX amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing(fewer laws), we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;.<br />
and the above drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by<br />
at least that 10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
<p></masonbarge></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/03/20/thats-not-theirs-thats-a-national-resource-its-ours/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Such economic illiteracy</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/02/28/such-economic-illiteracy/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/02/28/such-economic-illiteracy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:50:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IRS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=17268</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 2/28/2011 10:13 AM, Colonel Kurtz wrote: > On 27-Feb-2011, No Surrender @&#038;*$?%never.net wrote: > >> FROM AMERICAN THINKER >> >> HEAD: Raising taxes will create jobs: AFL-CIO chief >> >> SUB-HEAD: Such economic illiteracy is unusual, even for a labor union >> chief: >> By Rick Moran >> >> >> What&#8217;s the best way [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 2/28/2011 10:13 AM, Colonel Kurtz wrote:<br />
> On 27-Feb-2011, No <a href="mailto:Surrender<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>never.net">Surrender<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>never.net</a> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> FROM AMERICAN THINKER<br />
>><br />
>> HEAD: Raising taxes will create jobs: AFL-CIO chief<br />
>><br />
>> SUB-HEAD: Such economic illiteracy is unusual, even for a labor union<br />
>> chief:<br />
>> By Rick Moran<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>> What&#8217;s the best way to get Americans back to work?</p>
<p>*HOW TO ALLOW AMERICA TO SURVIVE*<br />
And give America back to Americans</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?</p>
<p><a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises sales tax by 1% they are forced to<br />
cut every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy Socialist<br />
idea by saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY. The way to limit<br />
some of the Presidents spending is to put an amendment in the<br />
constitution, and limit the Executive branch to 1% of the Nations income<br />
for foreign aid. That should reduce the Presidents buying of other<br />
Nations &#8220;friendship&#8221;.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we need to<br />
take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; the businesses or the<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people. Getting rid of the Income tax and IRS as suggested above will do<br />
that.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
TAX amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing(fewer laws), we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;.<br />
and the above drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by<br />
at least that 10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/02/28/such-economic-illiteracy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tenth Amendment says Supreme Court NOT allowed to interpret constitution</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/02/28/tenth-amendment-says-supreme-court-not-allowed-to-interpret-constitution-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/02/28/tenth-amendment-says-supreme-court-not-allowed-to-interpret-constitution-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 16:58:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LIBERALS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[On Sun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=17235</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 2/27/2011 10:28 PM, Ray Fischer wrote: > Dave Heil wrote: >> On 2/27/2011 20 22, Ray Fischer wrote: >>> Marvin wrote: >>>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 09:11:25 +0000, Ray Fischer wrote: >>>>> Marvin wrote: >>> >>>>>> The constitution is in plain English. It doesn&#8217;t need &#8220;interpreting&#8221;. >>>>> >>>>> Thus, when the 2nd amendment [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 2/27/2011 10:28 PM, Ray Fischer wrote:<br />
> Dave Heil  <k8mn @frontiernet.net> wrote:<br />
>> On 2/27/2011 20 22, Ray Fischer wrote:<br />
>>> Marvin<marvin @ontmars.org>  wrote:<br />
>>>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 09:11:25 +0000, Ray Fischer wrote:<br />
>>>>> Marvin</marvin><marvin @ontmars.org>  wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>>>> The constitution is in plain English. It doesn&#8217;t need &#8220;interpreting&#8221;.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Thus, when the 2nd amendment refers to &#8220;arms&#8221; we can see quite cleasrly<br />
>>>>> that it refers to the two appendages attached to most people&#8217;s shoulders<br />
>>>>> and not to weapons.<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Dumbass rightard.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> You&#8217;re the idiot who doesn&#8217;t know what arms means with respect to the 2nd<br />
>>><br />
>>> Oh, so we&#8217;re expected to believe your insane claims when we can read<br />
>>> quite clearly that the 2nd amendment refers to &#8220;arms&#8221; and makes no<br />
>>> mention of &#8220;guns&#8221;.<br />
>><br />
>> Thanks snarling Ray.<br />
><br />
> You&#8217;re welcome, Sig.  The dumbass Marvin insists that the US<br />
> Constitution needs no interpretation from judges.  Apparently you<br />
> agree with him.</p>
<p>The questions isn&#8217;t Whether the constitution *NEEDS* interpretation, the<br />
question is &#8220;by what authority you are presently doing it&#8221;?</p>
<p>There is NO constitutional authority for you or Judges to interpret a<br />
law and that &#8220;NEW&#8221; interpretation that didn&#8217;t exist yesterday to be a<br />
&#8220;NEW&#8221; law today, without first being voted on by congress and then<br />
signed into law or vetoed by the President.</p>
<p>If the Judges opinion was what the Congress and the President intended<br />
then they will vote and sign it into law as they had done the first<br />
time. But making an opinion a De`Facto law is unconstitutional.</p>
<p></marvin></k8mn></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/02/28/tenth-amendment-says-supreme-court-not-allowed-to-interpret-constitution-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>47</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rethugs to terminate both PBS &amp; NPR. Fat chance</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/02/15/rethugs-to-terminate-both-pbs-npr-fat-chance-4/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/02/15/rethugs-to-terminate-both-pbs-npr-fat-chance-4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:03:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IRS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=16908</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 2/15/2011 9:56 AM, Curly Surmudgeon wrote: > On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 09:03:15 -0500, &#8220;Scout&#8221; > wrote: > >> However, you have my attention, so tell me what programs YOU think we >> should be cutting to save money, and they can not be anything that helps >> regular middle class and poor Americans. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 2/15/2011 9:56 AM, Curly Surmudgeon wrote:<br />
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 09:03:15 -0500, &#8220;Scout&#8221;<br />
> <me4guns @verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> However, you have my attention, so tell me what programs YOU think we<br />
>> should be cutting to save money, and they can not be anything that helps<br />
>> regular middle class and poor Americans.<br />
><br />
> &#8211; Abolish foreign aid.<br />
> &#8211; Cut military spending 15% per year for eight years.<br />
> &#8211; Abolish progressive taxation.<br />
> &#8211; Abolish tax incentives, deductions, exemptions, exclusions and credits.<br />
> &#8211; Abolish farm subsidies &#038; raise tariffs.<br />
> &#8211; Abolish NAFTA and GATT &#038; raise tariffs.<br />
> &#8211; Close most foreign military bases.<br />
> &#8211; Halt the use of our military to enforce failed foreign diplomacy.<br />
> &#8211; Leave Iraq yesterday.<br />
> &#8211; Leave Afghanistan the day before that.<br />
><br />
> for starters&#8230;<br />
><br />
Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?</p>
<p><a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises sales tax by 1% they are forced to<br />
cut every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy Socialist<br />
idea by saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY. The way to limit<br />
some of the Presidents spending is to put an amendment in the<br />
constitution, and limit the Executive branch to 1% of the Nations income<br />
for foreign aid. That should reduce the Presidents buying of other<br />
Nations &#8220;friendship&#8221;.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we need to<br />
take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; the businesses or the<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people. Getting rid of the Income tax and IRS as suggested above will do<br />
that.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
TAX amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing(fewer laws), we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;.<br />
and the above drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by<br />
at least that 10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to WE THE PEOPLE by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
<p></me4guns></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/02/15/rethugs-to-terminate-both-pbs-npr-fat-chance-4/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama plans are SPEND SPEND SPEND/// and ///cut cut cut&#8230;.?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/25/obama-plans-are-spend-spend-spend-and-cut-cut-cut-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/25/obama-plans-are-spend-spend-spend-and-cut-cut-cut-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2011 04:10:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=16239</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Obama spoke from both of his two faces&#8230; Obama will cut spending and create NEW spending on more projects. Which time was Obama lying? More regulations for everything and cut regulations on everything. Obama is schizophrenic.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama spoke from both of his two faces&#8230;</p>
<p>Obama will cut spending and create NEW spending on more projects.</p>
<p>Which time was Obama lying?</p>
<p>More regulations for everything and cut regulations on everything.</p>
<p>Obama is schizophrenic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/25/obama-plans-are-spend-spend-spend-and-cut-cut-cut-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama plans are SPEND SPEND SPEND/// and ///cut cut cut&#8230;.?</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/25/obama-plans-are-spend-spend-spend-and-cut-cut-cut/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/25/obama-plans-are-spend-spend-spend-and-cut-cut-cut/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2011 04:07:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=16237</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Obama spoke from both of his two faces&#8230; Obama will cut spending and create NEW spending on more projects. Which time was Obama lying?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama spoke from both of his two faces&#8230;</p>
<p>Obama will cut spending and create NEW spending on more projects.</p>
<p>Which time was Obama lying?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/25/obama-plans-are-spend-spend-spend-and-cut-cut-cut/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>UAW needs more NEW people in their retirement PONZI scheme&#8230;..  before it collapses like Bernie Maddoff&#8217;s Ponzi scheme</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/25/uaw-needs-more-new-people-in-their-retirement-ponzi-scheme-before-it-collapses-like-bernie-maddoffs-ponzi-scheme/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/25/uaw-needs-more-new-people-in-their-retirement-ponzi-scheme-before-it-collapses-like-bernie-maddoffs-ponzi-scheme/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2011 19:05:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cap_and_trade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=16206</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/25/2011 1:39 PM, No Surrender @&#038;*$?%never.net wrote: &#62; FROM WSJ &#62; &#62; HEAD: The UAW&#8217;s Next Act &#62; &#62; SUB-HEAD: Saved by Washington, the union wants to write its own labor laws &#62; &#62; The top priority for the #United-Auto-Workers this year is to organize one of the foreign, or so-called &#8220;transplant,&#8221; car &#62; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/25/2011 1:39 PM, No <a href="mailto:Surrender<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>never.net">Surrender<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>never.net</a> wrote:<br />
&gt; FROM WSJ<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt; HEAD: The UAW&#8217;s Next Act<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt; SUB-HEAD: Saved by Washington, the union wants to write its own labor laws<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt; The top priority for the <a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/united-auto-workers/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#United-Auto-Workers</a> this year is to organize one of the foreign, or so-called &#8220;transplant,&#8221; car<br />
&gt; makers. That makes perfect sense—for the <a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/uaw/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#UAW</a>. Their rich labor contracts and stifling work rules helped bring low Detroit&#8217;s<br />
&gt; Big Three, so the union needs new dues-paying members.</p>
<p>They need more NEW people in their retirement <a href='http://outsourcenews.net/ng/tag/ponzi/' rel='tag' class="hashtag">#PONZI</a> scheme&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/25/uaw-needs-more-new-people-in-their-retirement-ponzi-scheme-before-it-collapses-like-bernie-maddoffs-ponzi-scheme/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>States Look to Bankruptcy to Escape Debt, Pension Obligations</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/22/states-look-to-bankruptcy-to-escape-debt-pension-obligations/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/22/states-look-to-bankruptcy-to-escape-debt-pension-obligations/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Jan 2011 03:03:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ACT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ann Barnhardt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[April Gaede]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ben Gurion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CBOC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Central Intelligence Agency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COOLING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Doc Martian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DOOMING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Exactly Private Sector]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FACILITIES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flathead Baldwin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GENDER]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Go Gault]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[His Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Home Yes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[INTCMM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[INTELLIGENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liberal Hypocrites]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liberal Logic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MANDATES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OccupyAMERICA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[p116816]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[p38883]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PALESTINIANS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[post440295]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RIDE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPECIFICALLY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ta Ping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TENS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Title Acidifying]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TODAY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tourette Tunderbar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Veterans Affairs Committee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WRI]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=16075</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/22/2011 9:23 PM, Ray Fischer wrote: > Möebius Pretzel wrote: >> States Look to Bankruptcy to Escape Debt, Pension Obligations >> >> NY Times >> January 20, 2011 >> >> Policy makers are working behind the scenes to come up with a way to >> let states declare bankruptcy and get out from under [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/22/2011 9:23 PM, Ray Fischer wrote:<br />
> Möebius Pretzel  <mobius_o_pretzel @yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>> States Look to Bankruptcy to Escape Debt, Pension Obligations<br />
>><br />
>> NY Times<br />
>> January 20, 2011<br />
>><br />
>> Policy makers are working behind the scenes to come up with a way to<br />
>> let states declare bankruptcy and get out from under crushing debts,<br />
>> including the pensions they have promised to retired public workers.<br />
><br />
> Screw Americans in order to keep taxes low for the rich.<br />
><br />
How&#8217;s that class hatred working for you?</p>
<p></mobius_o_pretzel></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/22/states-look-to-bankruptcy-to-escape-debt-pension-obligations/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obamacare Delivers New Deficit Reduction</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/18/obamacare-delivers-new-deficit-reduction/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/18/obamacare-delivers-new-deficit-reduction/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:06:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=15920</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/18/2011 9:47 AM, Bob wrote: > &#8220;Iarnrod&#8221; wrote in message > news:91ef12d0-2d68-4cdc-a612-935ba98c138b @&#038;*$?%r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com&#8230; > On Jan 15, 8:13 am, Möebius Pretzel > wrote: >> Obamacare Packs Crushing New Taxes > > It cuts the deficit and costs less than what is now being paid. > ********************************************* > Do you really believe that? > > [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/18/2011 9:47 AM, Bob wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Iarnrod&#8221; <iarnrod @yahoo.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:91ef12d0-2d68-4cdc-a612-935ba98c138b<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com&#8230;<br />
> On Jan 15, 8:13 am, Möebius Pretzel <m0bius_s_pret ...@yahoo.com><br />
> wrote:<br />
>> Obamacare Packs Crushing New Taxes<br />
><br />
> It cuts the deficit and costs less than what is now being paid.<br />
> *********************************************<br />
> Do you really believe that?<br />
><br />
><br />
If Obama care costs less, why did Obama enact all those NEW taxes in<br />
ObamaCare&#8230;.   Your lies are easily debunked.</p>
<p>If Obama care costs less, we should be cutting taxes.</p>
<p></m0bius_s_pret></iarnrod></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/18/obamacare-delivers-new-deficit-reduction/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>You still have the house but you&#8217;re too dead to enjoy it</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/16/you-still-have-the-house-but-youre-too-dead-to-enjoy-it/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/16/you-still-have-the-house-but-youre-too-dead-to-enjoy-it/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Jan 2011 18:34:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOVERNMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scotty Everyth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=15838</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/16/2011 11:29 AM, Art Sowers wrote: > > > On Sat, 15 Jan 2011, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote: > >> On 1/15/2011 10:32 AM, Yup wrote: >>> On Jan 15, 10:19 am, Beam Me Up Scotty >> Everyth&#8230;@Blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> When the people tell government what to do, we manage to get [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/16/2011 11:29 AM, Art Sowers wrote:<br />
><br />
><br />
> On Sat, 15 Jan 2011, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On 1/15/2011 10:32 AM, Yup wrote:<br />
>>> On Jan 15, 10:19 am, Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-<br />
>>> <a href="mailto:Everyth...@Blackhole.NebulaX.com">Everyth&#8230;@Blackhole.NebulaX.com</a>> wrote:<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> When the people tell government what to do, we manage to get along in<br />
>>>> life just fine, when government tells the people what to do&#8230;. things<br />
>>>> go badly.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Pelosi Reid Obama have been telling America what they &#8220;will&#8221; do &#8230;<br />
>>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> &#8230;.which is to fix decades of cumulative Republican damage.<br />
>><br />
>> Do you have a list of what Obama has &#8220;FIXED&#8221;  my count is zero.<br />
>><br />
><br />
> 1. Major progress on nuclear weapons reduction.</p>
<p>It fixed nothing&#8230;.  it makes us weak.</p>
<p>He gave away our missile defence system making us less safe.</p>
<p>> 2. Getting some kind of health insurance plan for 3/4 of the people who<br />
> don&#8217;t have it and this means they get health care now and it also means</p>
<p>They all had health care before Obama, at any emergency room.</p>
<p>> that hospital operating rooms might get paid for services to poor people</p>
<p>They were paid before Obama, that was how they kept the doors open&#8230;.</p>
<p>> that they can&#8217;t get compensation for other than taking their houses away<br />
> from them.</p>
<p>Your house is less valuable than your life so if you lose a house, so<br />
what&#8230;. you got a bargain, but to lose your life when government says<br />
we won&#8217;t let you get this cancer drug because *GOVERNMENT* says it&#8217;s too<br />
expensive, now that is a tragedy.</p>
<p>*You still have the house but you&#8217;re too dead to enjoy it*</p>
<p>If you lose a house, you go live in an apartment, I lived in a rental<br />
for several years while I saved enough to buy a house&#8230;.  it didn&#8217;t<br />
crush me.</p>
<p>> Shall I list more?</p>
<p>You haven&#8217;t listed any yet.</p>
<p>Obama has FIXED ZERO.  WE ARE DEEPER IN DEBT, we are just as hated<br />
around the world as when Bush was President.  There have been no NEW<br />
freedoms NO drop in taxes we pay.  NO &#8220;green shoots&#8221;  NO pay raises&#8230;.<br />
NO energy solutions&#8230;.  NOTHING.  The BORDER IS STILL POROUS&#8230; DRUGS<br />
ARE STILL HERE&#8230; STUDENTS ARE STILL DROPPING OUT AT 50% rates&#8230;<br />
California is still going broke and Obama is still ignoring the<br />
constitution with the Patriot act and more, still have GITMO and still<br />
use RENDITION.</p>
<p>Still in two wars.</p>
<p>Obama&#8217;s Still lying like all the others.</p>
<p>Even the things Obama can change on his own like &#8220;stop the lying&#8221;, Obama<br />
has chosen to continue it rather than fix it.</p>
</then>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/16/you-still-have-the-house-but-youre-too-dead-to-enjoy-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DC Ranked Worst Place for Small Business in 2010</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/06/dc-ranked-worst-place-for-small-business-in-2010/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/06/dc-ranked-worst-place-for-small-business-in-2010/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2011 16:41:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=15428</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At Capitol Hill Bikes in Washington, D.C., store-owner Denise D’Amour, 56, wanted her customers to be able to fuel up with healthy snacks like energy bars while perusing the shop. When D’Amour was slapped with a $2,000 fine from the city for selling food items without an official food license, she said she was disappointed, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At Capitol Hill Bikes in Washington, D.C., store-owner Denise D’Amour,<br />
56, wanted her customers to be able to fuel up with healthy snacks like<br />
energy bars while perusing the shop. When D’Amour was slapped with a<br />
$2,000 fine from the city for selling food items without an official<br />
food license, she said she was disappointed, but not surprised.</p>
<p>“It seems the city has a ‘Gotcha’ mentality, instead of trying to help<br />
small businesses,” D’Amour said. “Had I known, if they had come to me<br />
and told me, that would have been one thing. It’s been the biggest<br />
challenge for me.”</p>
<p>The frustrations D’Amour feels as a small business owner are echoed in<br />
this year’s Small Business &#038; Entrepreneurship Council’s “Small Business<br />
Survival Index 2010,” which ranked the District of Columbia as the<br />
least-friendly policy environment for entrepreneurs to launch their<br />
businesses. The index ranks locations by measuring their costs and<br />
burdens of government on small businesses, as well as policies that<br />
either enable or deter growth. The factors included in the index are:<br />
taxes, regulatory costs, government spending, property rights,<br />
health-care policies and energy costs, among others. The council also<br />
throughout the year releases a Health Care Policy Cost Index, Business<br />
Tax Index and Energy Cost Index, all of which spin off of the Survival<br />
Index.</p>
<p>Much of the activity that has occurred at the state level affecting D.C.<br />
small businesses and their owners in 2010 has not been in their favor,<br />
according to Raymond Keating, the SBE Council’s chief economist and<br />
study author.</p>
<p>“The policies were just not pro-small business,” Keating said. “State<br />
legislatures raised taxes to deal with their debt… so much happened at<br />
the state level, and unfortunately most of it was negative.”<br />
&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>Give America back to Americans</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?<br />
<a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises tax by 1% they are forced to cut<br />
every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy idea by<br />
saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we<br />
need to take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; businesses or<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
TAX amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing, we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;. the above<br />
drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by at least that<br />
10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/06/dc-ranked-worst-place-for-small-business-in-2010/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Coming Political Upheaval</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/05/coming-political-upheaval/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/05/coming-political-upheaval/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2011 04:49:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=15422</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1/5/2011 7:44 PM, ray wrote: > In article > .example.com>, > China Blue Ribbon wrote: > >> In article , ray wrote: >> >>> The first step is to repeal Commie Care which will likely get stopped by >>> the Democrat Senate. Next they will work for weeks on end defunding the >>> various [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 1/5/2011 7:44 PM, ray wrote:<br />
> In article<br />
> <chine .bleu-B742F6.21455504012011<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>reserved-multicast-range-not-delegated<br />
> .example.com>,<br />
>  China Blue Ribbon </chine><chine .bleu<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> In article <ig0erv01vu3 @news6.newsguy.com>, ray <xxxrayted @aol.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> The first step is to repeal Commie Care which will likely get stopped by<br />
>>> the Democrat Senate.  Next they will work for weeks on end defunding the<br />
>>> various parts of this monstrosity to weaken it as much as possible and<br />
>>> making it irrelevant.<br />
>><br />
>> How will that save enough money not to raise the debt ceiling?<br />
><br />
> It won&#8217;t, but it&#8217;s the right direction and they have the right idea.<br />
> Plus, states are arming themselves with new laws and regulations to stop<br />
> Commie Care from coming to their state.  Lawsuits and measures cost<br />
> those states millions.  I know the Democrats could care less as long as<br />
> they can push their agenda, but this is one time they can back off and<br />
> save these states a ton of time and money.  When the people speak, it&#8217;s<br />
> wise for the politicians to listen.<br />
><br />
Give America back to Americans</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?<br />
<a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises tax by 1% they are forced to cut<br />
every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy idea by<br />
saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we<br />
need to take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; businesses or<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
TAX amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing, we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;. the above<br />
drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by at least that<br />
10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
<p></xxxrayted></ig0erv01vu3></chine></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2011/01/05/coming-political-upheaval/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Increase taxes on alcohol, tobacco, guns to make up for the REPUBLICAN tax cuts</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/12/20/increase-taxes-on-alcohol-tobacco-guns-to-make-up-for-the-republican-tax-cuts/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/12/20/increase-taxes-on-alcohol-tobacco-guns-to-make-up-for-the-republican-tax-cuts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Dec 2010 02:47:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[text]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the poor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TMT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=14760</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 12/20/2010 8:10 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote: > On Dec 20, 3:45 pm, Beam Me Up Scotty Everyth&#8230;@Blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote: >>> On Dec 19, 8:10 pm, Too_Many_Tools wrote: >>>> Since the REPUBLICANS have gotten their 858 billion dollar tax cuts >>>> for their billionarie buddies, the Government has to get revenue from >>>> some where. >> >> [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 12/20/2010 8:10 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:<br />
> On Dec 20, 3:45 pm, Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-<br />
> <a href="mailto:Everyth...@Blackhole.NebulaX.com">Everyth&#8230;@Blackhole.NebulaX.com</a>> wrote:<br />
>>> On Dec 19, 8:10 pm, Too_Many_Tools <too_many_to ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>>>> Since the REPUBLICANS have gotten their 858 billion dollar tax cuts<br />
>>>> for their billionarie buddies, the Government has to get revenue from<br />
>>>> some where.<br />
>><br />
>> No one is making any money except the corporations that Obama is<br />
>> propping up with government funds(taxes) routed and rerouted to them in<br />
>> his money laundering scheme&#8230;.<br />
>><br />
>> Tax cuts for the rich are meaningless until rich people start making<br />
>> money.  You are arguing over money that doesn&#8217;t exist.<br />
>><br />
>>>> An easy way to increase taxes on other items&#8230;like alcohol, tobacco,<br />
>>>> guns and bullets.<br />
>><br />
>> More taxes on the poor because you already crushed the economy and now<br />
>> the poor are preparing for collapse and you want to take their money<br />
>> while buying items that will be of use in a post &#8220;FREE AMERICA&#8221; world?<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>>> Billionaries everywhere thank you for your support&#8230;suckers!<br />
>><br />
>> and the rich will buy a Lear jet or Yacht in a few years, when Obama is<br />
>> long gone&#8230;&#8230;   maybe you can get a job building them in a few years.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>>> TMT- Hide quoted text -<br />
>><br />
>> &#8211; Show quoted text -<br />
><br />
> You have a great idea&#8230;a national sales tax on EVERYTHING!!!<br />
><br />
> Republican billionaries will love it!!!<br />
></p>
<p>Sales tax only on &#8220;NEW&#8221; items, that way the rich will pay most all the<br />
tax&#8230;.</p>
<p>> And of course the PEE Party will not utter a word&#8230;compliments of the<br />
> GOP.<br />
><br />
> TMT</p>
<p></too_many_to></then>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/12/20/increase-taxes-on-alcohol-tobacco-guns-to-make-up-for-the-republican-tax-cuts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>20</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Still Waiting For Some Kinda Republican &#8220;Plan&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/11/08/still-waiting-for-some-kinda-republican-plan/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/11/08/still-waiting-for-some-kinda-republican-plan/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2010 14:24:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wealth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=14633</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 11/8/2010 7:59 AM, Lifsabsurd wrote: > Are capitalists rushing to locate in New York or other socialist/high- > state-tax-rate states today? There seems to be a cyclical process > involved. Capitalists create wealth in a location BEFORE it becomes > extremely socialist. Socialism then rises up to confiscate and spend > that wealth. Then [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 11/8/2010 7:59 AM, Lifsabsurd wrote:<br />
> Are capitalists rushing to locate in New York or other socialist/high-<br />
> state-tax-rate states today?  There seems to be a cyclical process<br />
> involved.  Capitalists create wealth in a location BEFORE it becomes<br />
> extremely socialist.  Socialism then rises up to confiscate and spend<br />
> that wealth.  Then capitalists tend to move.  Of course the cycle<br />
> repeats itself.</p>
<p>It is the new boom and bust cycle created by Socialism being injected<br />
into the system&#8230;.    This is partially from the creation of the<br />
Federal Reserve and income tax(mostly income tax)  which allows for this<br />
idea that any taxation up to 100% is a good thing.</p>
<p>SO between the Federal government taxes and the State Government taxes<br />
you tart getting close to the huge tax rate and people start looking for<br />
a better life elsewhere where the American dream still exists.</p>
<p>Get rid of all income tax and you will fix the problem, switch to a flat<br />
sales tax on all NEW ITEMS and you will allow the people to see what<br />
taxes really costs them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/11/08/still-waiting-for-some-kinda-republican-plan/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wingnuts cheered German Chancellor Merkel when she said multicultural society has &#8220;utterly failed&#8221;. That&#8217;s what they said in 1933</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/27/wingnuts-cheered-german-chancellor-merkel-when-she-said-multicultural-society-has-utterly-failed-thats-what-they-said-in-1933/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/27/wingnuts-cheered-german-chancellor-merkel-when-she-said-multicultural-society-has-utterly-failed-thats-what-they-said-in-1933/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Oct 2010 01:19:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Socialism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=14359</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/27/2010 7:21 PM, Marcus Aurelius wrote: > The New Fascism is Orwellian, authoritarian, and Machiavellian. > Multiculturalism is part of the definition of the same. When Merkel > rejects &#8220;multiculturalism&#8221;, she rejects &#8220;THE NEW FASCISM.&#8221; The &#8220;Liberal multiculturalism&#8221; has failed and that is a program of &#8220;preaching that we need to all respect differences&#8221; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 10/27/2010 7:21 PM, Marcus Aurelius wrote:<br />
> The New Fascism is Orwellian, authoritarian, and Machiavellian.<br />
> Multiculturalism is part of the definition of the same. When Merkel<br />
> rejects &#8220;multiculturalism&#8221;, she rejects &#8220;THE NEW FASCISM.&#8221;</p>
<p>The &#8220;Liberal multiculturalism&#8221; has failed and that is a program of<br />
&#8220;preaching that we need to all respect differences&#8221; while the Liberals<br />
pass laws in education and the workplace that actually homogenize all<br />
the people into a one size fits all form of mediocrity and Socialism&#8230;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/27/wingnuts-cheered-german-chancellor-merkel-when-she-said-multicultural-society-has-utterly-failed-thats-what-they-said-in-1933/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Agonizing History ???</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/27/the-agonizing-history/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/27/the-agonizing-history/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Oct 2010 18:12:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wall Street]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=14331</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/27/2010 6:50 AM, V wrote: > On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 22:36:50 +1300, Sir Gilligan Horry > wrote: > >> On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 04:59:12 -0400, V wrote: >> >>> On 26 Oct 2010 19:51:07 GMT, Michael Coburn >>> wrote: >>> >>>> The FED has little choice in its activities. >>> >>> Aside [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 10/27/2010 6:50 AM, V wrote:<br />
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 22:36:50 +1300, Sir Gilligan Horry<br />
> <gm @ga7rm5er.com> wrote:<br />
><br />
>> On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 04:59:12 -0400, V <ya @da.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> On 26 Oct 2010 19:51:07 GMT, Michael Coburn <mikcob @verizon.net><br />
>>> wrote:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> The FED has little choice in its activities.<br />
>>><br />
>>> Aside from being terminally stupid, The Fed never learned simple math.<br />
>>> Multiply a negative by a positive and the result is ALWAYS negative.<br />
>>><br />
>>> So what, pray tell, were the CIA and Wall Street thinking when they<br />
>>> decided to sell unpaid mortgages as if they were assets and why on<br />
>>> Earth did they think they could insure themselves against the loss?!?<br />
>>><br />
>>> Don&#8217;t they understand simple math?!?<br />
>><br />
>> Money is the real problem.<br />
><br />
> The Federal Reserve isn&#8217;t lending money, they&#8217;re creating debt, and<br />
> therefore all they can lend *IS* debt.</p>
<p>And the debt has to be paid and the &#8220;only&#8221; way to pay Federal debt is by<br />
taxes&#8230;..   So the Federal reserve is creating NEW taxes.</p>
<p></mikcob></ya></gm></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/27/the-agonizing-history/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Democrats created it and *Republicans are the enablers* that keep giving the Drunken idiot Democrats more liquor</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/24/democrats-created-it-and-republicans-are-the-enablers-that-keep-giving-the-drunken-idiot-democrats-more-liquor/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/24/democrats-created-it-and-republicans-are-the-enablers-that-keep-giving-the-drunken-idiot-democrats-more-liquor/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Oct 2010 16:16:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WASHINGTON]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=14140</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/23/2010 11:40 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote: > Beam Me Up Scotty wrote > in news:4CC35988.70102 @&#038;*$?%Blackhole.NebulaX.com: > >> On 10/23/2010 3:42 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote: >>> Beam Me Up Scotty > wrote >>> in news:4CC316BB.9070608 @&#038;*$?%Blackhole.NebulaX.com: >>> >>>> >>>> If the Democrats get flushed out then America has a amall chance of >>>> surviving [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 10/23/2010 11:40 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:<br />
> Beam Me Up Scotty
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote<br />
> in news:4CC35988.70102<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Blackhole.NebulaX.com:<br />
><br />
>> On 10/23/2010 3:42 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:<br />
>>> Beam Me Up Scotty </then>
<then -Destroy-Everything<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Blackhole.NebulaX.com>
> wrote<br />
>>> in news:4CC316BB.9070608<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>Blackhole.NebulaX.com:<br />
>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>>> If the Democrats get flushed out then America has a amall chance of<br />
>>>> surviving the mess we are in, if Democrats can stay in power, you can<br />
>>>> write off the real America and you&#8217;ll be living in the *NEW*<br />
> Socialist<br />
>>>> States of America&#8230;..<br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>><br />
>>>     By the &#8220;mess we are in&#8221; you mean the Republican-created<br />
>>> recession and the Republican-created quagmire wars abroad, no?<br />
>><br />
>> I normally call it a Government mess but since you want to be more<br />
>> specific&#8230;.<br />
>><br />
>> <a href="http://outsourcenews.net/j-news/content/view/185/126/" >http://outsourcenews.net/j-news/content/view/185/126/</a><br />
>> <a href="http://outsourcenews.net/j-news/content/view/179/126/" >http://outsourcenews.net/j-news/content/view/179/126/</a><br />
>><br />
>><br />
><br />
><br />
><br />
> Bush Administration Ignored Warnings of Pending Financial Meltdown<br />
><br />
> December 01, 2008<br />
> Fox News<br />
><br />
> WASHINGTON  —  The Bush administration backed off proposed<br />
> crackdowns on no-money-down, interest-only mortgages years<br />
> before the economy collapsed, buckling to pressure from some<br />
> of the same banks that have now failed. It ignored remarkably<br />
> prescient warnings that foretold the financial meltdown,<br />
> according to an Associated Press review of regulatory documents.</p>
<p>So now suddenly you think it is &#8220;Government&#8221; and NOT &#8220;Republican&#8221;?</p>
<p>The Democrats created it and *Republicans are the enablers* that keep<br />
giving the Drunken idiot Democrats more liquor?</p>
</then>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/24/democrats-created-it-and-republicans-are-the-enablers-that-keep-giving-the-drunken-idiot-democrats-more-liquor/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pay Taxes ONLY on What You BUY&#8230; and NOT on Your ENTIRE INCOME!</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/19/pay-taxes-only-on-what-you-buy-and-not-on-your-entire-income/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/19/pay-taxes-only-on-what-you-buy-and-not-on-your-entire-income/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 15:28:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=13870</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/18/2010 8:45 PM, Wayne wrote: > &#8220;(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) http://www.LayoffRemedy.com&#8221; wrote in > message news:2vkpb6lkqtpgpd788is6cm3taouktntb0o @&#038;*$?%4ax.com&#8230; >> X-No-Archive: no >> >> >> Pay Taxes ONLY on What You BUY&#8230; >> &#8230;and NOT on Your ENTIRE INCOME! >> >> >> NO more I.R.S. ??? >> >> NO more INCOME Tax ??? >> >> NO more FORMS [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 10/18/2010 8:45 PM, Wayne wrote:<br />
> &#8220;(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) <a href="http://www.LayoffRemedy.com" >http://www.LayoffRemedy.com</a>&#8221; <x @b.com> wrote in<br />
> message news:2vkpb6lkqtpgpd788is6cm3taouktntb0o<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>4ax.com&#8230;<br />
>> X-No-Archive: no<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>         Pay Taxes ONLY on What You BUY&#8230;<br />
>>                 &#8230;and NOT on Your ENTIRE INCOME!<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>      NO more I.R.S. ???<br />
>><br />
>>      NO more INCOME Tax ???<br />
>><br />
>>      NO more FORMS to fill out and submit ???<br />
>><br />
>>      NO more Tax PREPARATION ???<br />
>><br />
>>      Sounds like a DREAM, doesn&#8217;t it?<br />
>><br />
>>      Well &#8212; why not make it come TRUE?<br />
>><br />
> While VAT sounds great, there is very good reason to vehemently oppose it.</p>
<p>NOT VAT, that would be hidden taxes.   SALES TAX is an excise tax.</p>
<p>> The problem is that we will end up with BOTH income tax and VAT.  Income tax<br />
> will never go away because of all the leeches living off tax preparation.<br />
> And the government will never have the discipline to leave VAT in the<br />
> original form&#8230;..a flat tax on consumption.  The government will eventually<br />
> try to make the VAT &#8220;fair&#8221; by having a sliding scale&#8230;.you make more, you<br />
> pay a higher percentage&#8230;..if you don&#8217;t make a minimum amount, you don&#8217;t<br />
> pay VAT.  NO NO NO NO NO NO NO  NO !!!!</p>
<p>Sales tax via a constitutional amendment is the only way to end income<br />
tax and make Sales tax work.  Trying to use both will make everything fail.</p>
<p>STAY away from VAT.</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?<br />
<a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises tax by 1% they are forced to cut<br />
every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy idea by<br />
saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we<br />
need to take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; businesses or<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
TAX amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing, we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;. the above<br />
drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by at least that<br />
10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP</p>
<p></x></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/19/pay-taxes-only-on-what-you-buy-and-not-on-your-entire-income/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Conservatives Are DELIBERATELY Eliminating American Jobs, Thereby Undermining America</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/19/conservatives-are-deliberately-eliminating-american-jobs-thereby-undermining-america/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/19/conservatives-are-deliberately-eliminating-american-jobs-thereby-undermining-america/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 15:10:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=13866</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/18/2010 9:00 PM, walt tonne wrote: > Deport the up to 20 million illegal aliens and the economy would > skyrocket! *give America back to Americans* Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 10/18/2010 9:00 PM, walt tonne wrote:<br />
> Deport the up to 20 million illegal aliens and the economy would<br />
> skyrocket!</p>
<p>*give America back to Americans*</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?<br />
<a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises tax by 1% they are forced to cut<br />
every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy idea by<br />
saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we<br />
need to take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; businesses or<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
TAX amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing, we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;. the above<br />
drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by at least that<br />
10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/19/conservatives-are-deliberately-eliminating-american-jobs-thereby-undermining-america/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How To Solve The Crime Problem in Mexico</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/16/how-to-solve-the-crime-problem-in-mexico/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/16/how-to-solve-the-crime-problem-in-mexico/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Oct 2010 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=13720</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/16/2010 2:24 PM, littlebopper wrote: > There is little question but that if the U.S. military can ever be > extracted from its traps in the Middle East, our armed forces will be > compelled to invade Mexico to put down the cartels. > > Which appear to generate more threats to the U.S. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 10/16/2010 2:24 PM, littlebopper wrote:<br />
> There is little question but that if the U.S. military can ever be<br />
> extracted from its traps in the Middle East, our armed forces will be<br />
> compelled to invade Mexico to put down the cartels.<br />
><br />
> Which appear to generate more threats to the U.S. Southwest every day.</p>
<p>*give America back to Americans*</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the *war on drugs* make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?<br />
<a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly *sending red money home to Mexico* would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The *Drug dealers would have Red money* that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises tax by 1% they are forced to cut<br />
every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to *draw down troops as needed from around the world* . Put half<br />
of our military *bases along the southern Border* to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will *drive people in the underground economy* to become part of<br />
the real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
*immigration problems with illegals stealing identities* since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). *Offer illegals less welfare* and charge<br />
them tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to<br />
chase them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy idea by<br />
saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we<br />
need to take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; businesses or<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
TAX amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to *give up our roll as the police man of the world* , let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing, we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;. the above<br />
drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by at least that<br />
10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/16/how-to-solve-the-crime-problem-in-mexico/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>every dime of debt is a new tax</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/11/every-dime-of-debt-is-a-new-tax-3/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/11/every-dime-of-debt-is-a-new-tax-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Oct 2010 13:55:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wealth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=13387</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/11/2010 4:30 AM, Buerste wrote: > &#8220;Sid9&#8243; wrote in message > news:i8tvgp$p2t$1 @&#038;*$?%news.eternal-september.org&#8230; >> >> Google &#8220;taxes obama lowered&#8221; and find many more articles and how fools >> like you are both uninformed and liars. >> >> > > You benefited greatly when Obammy lowered the &#8220;IDIOT&#8221; tax. Then Google whose paying for Obamacare, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 10/11/2010 4:30 AM, Buerste wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @belsouth.net> wrote in message<br />
> news:i8tvgp$p2t$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>news.eternal-september.org&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>> Google &#8220;taxes obama lowered&#8221; and find many more articles and how fools<br />
>> like you are both uninformed and liars.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
><br />
> You benefited greatly when Obammy lowered the &#8220;IDIOT&#8221; tax.</p>
<p>Then Google whose paying for Obamacare, cigarettes, VAT, Global warming<br />
tax, NEW banking regulations and fees, Who is paying for Fannie and<br />
Freddie&#8230;..   and on and on.   Obama is adding new user fees and excise<br />
taxes and will shortly raise taxes by NOT renewing the Bush tax cuts.</p>
<p>Obama is costing the private sector so much money that we are trillions<br />
more in debt which can only be paid with taxes and for every dime of<br />
debt there is a new tax to pay off the debt.</p>
<p>Obama raised the National DEBT by $2 Trillion dollars and has therefore<br />
raised our taxes by $2 Trillion dollars. The only question is when we<br />
pay the tax, because there is no way to pay-off debt other than to raise<br />
a tax to pay that debt.</p>
<p>If Obama prints money to pay off the debt, it&#8217;s a tax, we call it<br />
inflation but it&#8217;s a tax since it is government taking your wealth.</p>
<p></sid9></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/11/every-dime-of-debt-is-a-new-tax-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>every dime of debt is a new tax</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/11/every-dime-of-debt-is-a-new-tax-2/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/11/every-dime-of-debt-is-a-new-tax-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Oct 2010 13:47:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wealth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=13383</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/11/2010 4:30 AM, Buerste wrote: > &#8220;Sid9&#8243; wrote in message > news:i8tvgp$p2t$1 @&#038;*$?%news.eternal-september.org&#8230; >> >> Google &#8220;taxes obama lowered&#8221; and find many more articles and how fools >> like you are both uninformed and liars. >> >> > > You benefited greatly when Obammy lowered the &#8220;IDIOT&#8221; tax. Then Google whose paying for Obamacare, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 10/11/2010 4:30 AM, Buerste wrote:<br />
> &#8220;Sid9&#8243; <sid9 @belsouth.net> wrote in message<br />
> news:i8tvgp$p2t$1<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>news.eternal-september.org&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>> Google &#8220;taxes obama lowered&#8221; and find many more articles and how fools<br />
>> like you are both uninformed and liars.<br />
>><br />
>><br />
><br />
> You benefited greatly when Obammy lowered the &#8220;IDIOT&#8221; tax.</p>
<p>Then Google whose paying for Obamacare, cigarettes, VAT, Global warming<br />
tax, NEW banking regulations and fees, Who is paying for Fannie and<br />
Freddie&#8230;..   and on and on.   Obama is adding new user fees and excise<br />
taxes and will shortly raise taxes by NOT renewing the Bush tax cuts.</p>
<p>Obama is costing the private sector so much money that we are trillions<br />
more in debt which can only be paid with taxes and for every dime of<br />
debt there is a new tax to pay off the debt.</p>
<p>Obama raised the National DEBT by $2 Trillion dollars and has therefore<br />
raised our taxes by $2 Trillion dollars. The only question is when we<br />
pay the tax, because there is no way to pay-off debt other to raise a<br />
tax to pay that debt.</p>
<p>If Obama prints money to pay off the debt, it&#8217;s a tax, we call it<br />
inflation but it&#8217;s a tax since it is government taking your wealth.</p>
<p></sid9></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/11/every-dime-of-debt-is-a-new-tax-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Yup&#8230;This Is The U.S. Of A.</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/08/yup-this-is-the-u-s-of-a/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/08/yup-this-is-the-u-s-of-a/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Oct 2010 02:17:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[PDT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[text]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=13289</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/8/2010 4:03 PM, robw wrote: > On Oct 5, 8:52 am, The PHANTOM wrote: >> On Oct 5, 12:04 am, T&#038;*$?%y wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Oct 4, 2:00 am, Walter Harding wrote: >> >>>> On Oct 4, 1:49 am, Kickin&#8217; A&#038;*$?%s and Takin&#8217; Names >> >>>> wrote: >>>>> On Mon, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 10/8/2010 4:03 PM, robw wrote:<br />
> On Oct 5, 8:52 am, The PHANTOM <hoofhearte ...@yahoo.com> wrote:<br />
>> On Oct 5, 12:04 am, <acronym title="Tim Crowley"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> T&*$?%y</span></acronym> <timmyturm ...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>><br />
>>> On Oct 4, 2:00 am, Walter Harding <gopartyani ...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>>> On Oct 4, 1:49 am, Kickin&#8217; <acronym title="Ass"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> A&*$?%s</span></acronym> and Takin&#8217; Names<br />
>><br />
>>>>
<populist ...@hotmail.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>> On Mon, 4 Oct 2010 01:46:19 -0700 (PDT), Walter Harding<br />
>><br />
>>>>> <gopartyani ...@gmail.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>> On Oct 3, 6:38 pm, <acronym title="Harry Hope"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> H&*$?%e</span></acronym> <riv ...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:<br />
>>>>>>> From The Associated Press, 10/3/10:http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/3/mosque-planners-wife-f&#8230;<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> Mosque planner&#8217;s wife fears for her life<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> Imam gets calls of death threats<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> NEW YORK<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> The wife of a Muslim imam planning a mosque near ground zero said<br />
>>>>>>> Sunday that she and her husband have received death threats.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> &#8220;For the record, my life is under threat,&#8221; Daisy Khan said during a<br />
>>>>>>> town-hall debate on Islam broadcast on ABC&#8217;s &#8220;This Week&#8221; news program.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> Mrs. Khan, who is married to Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, said her<br />
>>>>>>> husband&#8217;s life also is under threat but, &#8220;we do not walk around with<br />
>>>>>>> bodyguards because we love this country.&#8221;<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> __________________________________________<br />
>><br />
>>>>>>> Makes ya proud, eh?<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> What do you know &#8211; you go out of your way to vomit all over America&#8217;s<br />
>>>>>> sacred ground and you wind up pissing people off.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Go figure.<br />
>><br />
>>>>>> Mind you, you&#8217;ve every bit as concerned for these guys as they are for<br />
>>>>>> the widows and orphans of the Americans who died on Sept 11th.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> And what &#8220;sacred ground&#8221; would that be, Walter?<br />
>><br />
>>>> The building that had a two ton wheel assembly destroy it&#8217;s roof after<br />
>>>> the plane it had been attached too murdered thousands of Americans.<br />
>><br />
>>>>> You mean the &#8220;sacred ground&#8221; where push carts are selling &#8220;Muslim<br />
>>>>> food&#8221; to Muslim construction workers?<br />
>><br />
>>>> Which is a testimant to American tolerance.  A tolerance which is<br />
>>>> being spit at.<br />
>><br />
>>> It&#8217;s blocks away from ground zero.<br />
>><br />
>>> Why are you so full of hate?- Hide quoted text -<br />
>><br />
>>> &#8211; Show quoted text -<br />
>><br />
>> Two blocks. Close enough that the landing gear from one of the<br />
>> aircraft crashed through the roof of the building. It&#8217;s sacred ground<br />
>> to most Americans and to the families of 9/11 victims. The only reason<br />
>> radical muslims want their mosque built there is because it&#8217;s a<br />
>> monument to their triumph over the infidels. But,you knew that.- Hide quoted text -<br />
>><br />
>> &#8211; Show quoted text -<br />
><br />
> Then please explain the strip joint that is closer to the site.</p>
<p>The &#8220;Church of the BRASS POLE&#8221; kills people with kindness&#8230;  it&#8217;s<br />
assault with a friendly weapon.</p>
<p>They build in warehouses near airports, and they don&#8217;t support terrorism<br />
like Muslims do.  Strippers are nice people, Muslims are the psychotics.</p>
<p></riv></gopartyani></populist></gopartyani></timmyturm></hoofhearte></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/08/yup-this-is-the-u-s-of-a/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>WHY IS OBAMA STARTING A NEW WAR IN PAKISTAN</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/08/why-is-obama-starting-a-new-war-in-pakistan/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/08/why-is-obama-starting-a-new-war-in-pakistan/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:34:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[OBAMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=13281</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/8/2010 1:11 PM, Gray Ghost wrote: > &#8220;mysterion&#8221; wrote in > news:1AHro.262861$iV7.22750 @&#038;*$?%en-nntp-15.dc1.easynews.com: > >> &#8220;Gray Ghost&#8221; wrote in message >> news:Xns9E0B20FCC41EDWereofftoseethewizrd @&#038;*$?%216.196.97.142&#8230; >>> &#8220;mysterion&#8221; wrote in >>> news:r4zro.247931$pX3.151481 >>> @en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com: >>> >>>> &#8220;Gray Ghost&#8221; wrote in message >>>> news:Xns9E0AE726A5D98Wereofftoseethewizrd @&#038;*$?%216.196.97.142&#8230; >>>>> &#8220;mysterion&#8221; wrote in >>>>> news:uzrro.222373$Ua4.67226 >>>>> @en-nntp-09.dc1.easynews.com: >>>>> >>>>>> &#8220;Tom S.&#8221; wrote [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 10/8/2010 1:11 PM, Gray Ghost wrote:<br />
> &#8220;mysterion&#8221; <spamnotspam @snotmail.com> wrote in<br />
> news:1AHro.262861$iV7.22750<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>en-nntp-15.dc1.easynews.com:<br />
><br />
>> &#8220;Gray Ghost&#8221; <grey_ghost471 -newsgroups<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>yahoo.com> wrote in message<br />
>> news:Xns9E0B20FCC41EDWereofftoseethewizrd<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>216.196.97.142&#8230;<br />
>>> &#8220;mysterion&#8221; <spamnotspam @snotmail.com> wrote in<br />
>>> news:r4zro.247931$pX3.151481<br />
>>> @en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com:<br />
>>><br />
>>>> &#8220;Gray Ghost&#8221; <grey_ghost471 -newsgroups<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>yahoo.com> wrote in message<br />
>>>> news:Xns9E0AE726A5D98Wereofftoseethewizrd<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>216.196.97.142&#8230;<br />
>>>>> &#8220;mysterion&#8221; <spamnotspam @snotmail.com> wrote in<br />
>>>>> news:uzrro.222373$Ua4.67226<br />
>>>>> @en-nntp-09.dc1.easynews.com:<br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>>> &#8220;Tom S.&#8221; <tmswork @cox.com> wrote in message<br />
>>>>>> news:k_ydnUyLqODblTPRnZ2dnUVZ5radnZ2d<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>giganews.com&#8230;<br />
>>>>>>>  On 10/7/2010 8:26 AM, mysterion wrote:<br />
>>>>>>>> Okay, so you&#8217;re too ignorant to understand the reference.<br />
>>>>>>> You wrote the book on ignorance (not to mention psychotic delusion).<br />
>>>>>>>> Obama is starting a new war in Pakistan because he&#8217;s been told to.<br />
>>>>>>>> Understand?<br />
>>>>>>> &#8220;Told to&#8221; by whom?<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> Obeyme is the &#8220;most powerful man in the world&#8221;, so who is pulling<br />
>>>>>>> his chain?<br />
>>>>>>><br />
>>>>>>> A straight answer, please, not the typical childish evasion.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>>> The same guys who told Bush Jong Il what to do and Slick Willy before<br />
>>>>>> him.<br />
>>>>>><br />
>>>>><br />
>>>>> Who are?<br />
>>>><br />
>>>> Those who stand to profit from what has been wrought.<br />
>>>><br />
>>>><br />
>>><br />
>>> More specifically. Like names.<br />
>><br />
>> Look them up for yourself.<br />
>> You don&#8217;t want to know the truth and yet you insist I lay it out in front<br />
>> of you to ignore.<br />
>> Why should I bother?<br />
>> If YOU don&#8217;t care that you&#8217;re being lied to, robbed and slowly poisoned,<br />
>> why should I?<br />
>><br />
>><br />
><br />
> Dear dumbass,<br />
><br />
> Rules of debate. You make the charge, you supply the evidence. udderwise it is<br />
> kust your paranoid delusions.<br />
><br />
Are there rules to terrorism?</p>
<p></tmswork></spamnotspam></grey_ghost471></spamnotspam></grey_ghost471></spamnotspam></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/08/why-is-obama-starting-a-new-war-in-pakistan/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>We&#8217;ll cut .we&#8217;ll cut. . .something</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/08/well-cut-well-cut-something-10/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/08/well-cut-well-cut-something-10/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:01:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VAT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=13273</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/8/2010 12:42 PM, John Smith wrote: > On 10/8/2010 8:47 AM, dave wrote: > >> &#8230; >> Because the Republicans are running more-dangerously-psychotic-than >> usual candidates for office this time? >> >> The border is safer and ore secure than any time in history. Oil is >> killing us. You are a tool. > [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 10/8/2010 12:42 PM, John Smith wrote:<br />
> On 10/8/2010 8:47 AM, dave wrote:<br />
><br />
>> &#8230;<br />
>> Because the Republicans are running more-dangerously-psychotic-than<br />
>> usual candidates for office this time?<br />
>><br />
>> The border is safer and ore secure than any time in history. Oil is<br />
>> killing us. You are a tool.<br />
><br />
> More 60-80 lb backpacks of drugs are coming over than border than any<br />
> other time in history.  Illegals serve as mules for this purpose to get<br />
> their first grubstake of money here &#8230; most in law enforcement can tell<br />
> you about this &#8230; if they aren&#8217;t involved in it, themselves!  With the<br />
> kind of money we are talking about, the financial lure just tends to be<br />
> too much for many of them.</p>
<p>Growing Marijuana may be a help to the JOB market.</p>
<p>Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles<br />
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most<br />
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and<br />
competition would help us get out of this depression.</p>
<p>End the &#8220;war on drugs&#8221; make them legal(increase competition) and sold<br />
at any drug store and push for prostitution to be legal too, that will<br />
take the BIG money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the<br />
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and<br />
hurt the human trafficking business income also.  Why have illegal<br />
prostitutes when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?<br />
<a href="http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs--crime-usage-falls" >http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=12541&#038;title=portugal-legalizes-drugs&#8211;crime-usage-falls</a></p>
<p>Create Bi-color money, Red money for inside the USA and Original Green<br />
money outside the USA&#8230;.. NOTHING BUT A COLOR/INK difference, and<br />
suddenly sending red money home to Mexico would be useless as the RED<br />
money would be useless in Mexico since the Banks and etc wouldn&#8217;t accept<br />
it abroad. All electronic money leaving the USA would be debited the<br />
Sales tax when the money is sent/spent.</p>
<p>The Drug dealers would have Red money that they need to exchange for<br />
green money, makes it hard to do in large amounts and hard to spend and<br />
more expensive to deal with….. that *makes Drug smuggling less*<br />
*profitable* as would dropping the income tax and installing a NATIONAL<br />
“NEW ITEM” SALES TAX *NOT* IMPLEMENTING A VAT TAX WHICH WILL HELP THE<br />
DRUG DEALERS and illegals by making their tax free money leaving the<br />
country even more valuable. If they had to buy/exchange the RED money<br />
for GREEN money then you would charge the sales tax at that point.</p>
<p>Have the States Ratify an amendment withdrawing the 16th amendment&#8230;<br />
Maybe enact something similar to the <a href="http://fairtax.org" >http://fairtax.org</a> (Federal sales<br />
tax) *BUT NOT A VAT or VALUE ADDED TAX* with the same amendment that<br />
removes income tax and the IRS, preferably a Federal *NEW ITEM* sales tax.</p>
<p><embed width='425' height='344' allowfullscreen='true' allowscriptaccess='always' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7AgwtSzxt8&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1" /></p>
<p>This will reduce the number of tax crimes that people are in jails for<br />
and it will give the people back their privacy. It will also promote<br />
*GREEN* living where people will save more and waste less and buy second<br />
hand and wear things out rather than discard and buy new.  Then add to<br />
the amendment that if congress raises tax by 1% they are forced to cut<br />
every single expenditure of the government by 3%.</p>
<p>Begin to draw down troops as needed from around the world. Put half<br />
of our military bases along the southern Border to minimize the amount<br />
of border that the Border patrol needs to watch, the military and<br />
Federal trespassing laws will push the illegals to spaces between the<br />
military bases.</p>
<p>This tax/border policy will financially assault the drug dealers and<br />
hookers and other underground economy&#8217;s by forcing them to have to pay<br />
tax when they *spend their money* , which will further reduce the<br />
benefit of dealing in other illegal stuff.  There needs to be one type<br />
of dollar for use inside America and one type(color) of dollars for use<br />
outside the USA. That will make it harder for smugglers to get money out<br />
of the country and if they do spend it here then they will pay the sales<br />
tax and that money is used to enforce the laws to catch smugglers. We<br />
are &#8220;right now&#8221; taking money from peoples pay checks before they get<br />
them and at the same time we don&#8217;t tax drug dealers or hookers and<br />
illegals or others at all, we are penalizing the working Americans and<br />
giving a bonus to illegal activity. Sales tax will also encourage saving<br />
money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every dime you can<br />
borrow like income tax does.</p>
<p>This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the<br />
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our<br />
immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will<br />
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals less welfare and charge them<br />
tax and they won&#8217;t be so eager to come here and we won&#8217;t need to chase<br />
them&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>End Social Security/Medicare, grandfather it out of existence.</p>
<p>Pass an amendment to the constitution that makes all<br />
*laws_and_treaties* have a seven year sunset clause, and it requires<br />
that each law/treaty be voted by a separate roll call vote every seven<br />
years to continue to be maintained in our laws.</p>
<p>There should also be some constitutional amendments to stifle congress&#8217;<br />
borrowing and spending making it more difficult for that process. And a<br />
constitutional amendment to limit the Interstate Commerce Clause. The<br />
politicians use that clause to justify all sorts of socialist <acronym title="crap"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> c&*$?%p</span></acronym>. The<br />
founding fathers never meant for it to be so broadly applied. Limit it<br />
with an amendment, so government can&#8217;t justify every crazy idea by<br />
saying its legal under the interstate commerce clause.</p>
<p>Pass another amendment creating term limits on congress so the House<br />
has 6 terms and the Senate has 2 terms, for a total of 12 years in<br />
either side of congress. WE NEED TO STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING FRIVOLOUS<br />
LAWS TAXES AND BORROWING AND ENDLESSLY PRINTING MONEY.</p>
<p>To quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we<br />
need to take away congress&#8217; ability to &#8220;social engineer&#8221; businesses or<br />
private people by removing the governments use of tax code to manipulate<br />
people.</p>
<p>Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they meet the<br />
income of the government. The best way, is to<br />
*use_both_cutting_and_taxing* , the Congress should implement a rule to<br />
force an across the board spending freeze and then across the board cuts<br />
on the government spending, to do that we have to include a law in our<br />
TAX amendment to the constitution that can&#8217;t be easily circumvented, to<br />
force them to cut spending 3% for every 1% Congress raise taxes.  So any<br />
federal sales tax increase would result in automatic spending cuts using<br />
a baseline of 10% taxes.</p>
<p>And we need to give up our roll as the police man of the world, let<br />
them fight their own fights. We also need fewer crimes for people to be<br />
committing, we need fewer police and prisons to support&#8230;. the above<br />
drug and tax plan, will reduce police and prison needs by at least that<br />
10% that this plan suggested cutting each year.</p>
<p>NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to private people by 10%<br />
each year until it is 10% of today&#8217;s cost. Any way you look at it, we&#8217;re<br />
in DEEP for a long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/08/well-cut-well-cut-something-10/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>We&#8217;ll cut .we&#8217;ll cut. . .something</title>
		<link>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/08/well-cut-well-cut-something-9/</link>
		<comments>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/08/well-cut-well-cut-something-9/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2010 16:58:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IRS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NEW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terrorists]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://outsourcenews.net/ng/?p=13271</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 10/8/2010 12:43 PM, Sid9 wrote: > > &#8220;John Smith&#8221; wrote in message > news:i8nhm9$h97$2 @&#038;*$?%news.eternal-september.org&#8230; >> On 10/8/2010 8:47 AM, dave wrote: >> >>> &#8230; >>> Because the Republicans are running more-dangerously-psychotic-than >>> usual candidates for office this time? >>> >>> The border is safer and ore secure than any time in history. Oil [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On 10/8/2010 12:43 PM, Sid9 wrote:<br />
><br />
> &#8220;John Smith&#8221; <assemblywizard @gmail.com> wrote in message<br />
> news:i8nhm9$h97$2<acronym title="@"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> @&*$?%</span></acronym>news.eternal-september.org&#8230;<br />
>> On 10/8/2010 8:47 AM, dave wrote:<br />
>><br />
>>> &#8230;<br />
>>> Because the Republicans are running more-dangerously-psychotic-than<br />
>>> usual candidates for office this time?<br />
>>><br />
>>> The border is safer and ore secure than any time in history. Oil is<br />
>>> killing us. You are a tool.<br />
>><br />
>> More 60-80 lb backpacks of drugs are coming over than border than any<br />
>> other time in history.  Illegals serve as mules for this purpose to<br />
>> get their first grubstake of money here &#8230; most in law enforcement<br />
>> can tell you about this &#8230; if they aren&#8217;t involved in it,<br />
>> themselves!  With the kind of money we are talking about, the<br />
>> financial lure just tends to be too much for many of them.<br />
>><br />
>> Regards,<br />
>> JS<br />
> .<br />
> .<br />
> Take the profit out of drugs by killing our drug laws.<br />
> Tax and regulate the <acronym title="shit"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> s&*$?%t</span></acronym> the way we do with alcohol and tobacco.<br />
><br />
> Results?<br />
><br />
> Fill up the treasury and empty out the jails. End drug crime&#8230;because<br />
> there&#8217;ll be no money in it.</p>
<p>Do the same with the IRS and TAX laws by amending the constitution and<br />
getting rid of income tax and replacing it with a NEW ITEM sales tax.</p>
<p>The Prisons will have enough room to fill with Muslim terrorists who<br />
kill people.</p>
<p></assemblywizard></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://outsourcenews.net/ng/2010/10/08/well-cut-well-cut-something-9/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

