http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php?entry=entry100813-123505
In fact, I think we have a real problem, I think we've allowed too much of this attitude to permeate our society. Indeed, it seems we've collected leaders and representatives to govern our lives who spend a good amount of time reporting this socialist, loser attitude. It's quite unbecoming of an American to act like this and say these things. You see, there's nothing wrong with winning, there's nothing wrong with doing your best, and that is practically an American tradition.

Apparently, what we have is a group of new leaders who were tapping into the negative biofeedback, the low self-esteem, and this psychological depression of the electorate, and they are trying to make people feel weak, and then they come to their rescue, and tell them they will solve all their problems. Why would anyone stoop so low as to use such a manipulative strategy on their fellow citizens? Worse, what type of an American would allow themselves to be manipulated in that way.

For someone to say it doesn't matter if you win or lose, well, that's just not the truth, as it very much does matter. It matters that you accomplish things, that you are successful, that you are able to build a good life for your family, it is important that our country succeeds, and the company you work at succeeds, and it is important that you give 110% in everything you do. To just cruise through life, and have the government take care of everything for you, and while you put out little effort, that's just not American.

Please consider all this.

By: Lance Winslow
Lance Winslow is the Founder of the Online Think Tank, a diverse group of achievers, experts, innovators, entrepreneurs, thinkers, futurists, academics, dreamers, leaders, and general all around brilliant minds. Lance Winslow hopes you've enjoyed today's discussion and topic. http://www.WorldThinkTank.net - Have an important subject to discuss, contact Lance Winslow.]]> http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php?entry=entry100813-121556
It's quite simple really. The very lack of life experience synonymous with youthfulness is the key.

When we are young, many of us tend to be idealists rather than realists. Now, idealism in and of itself is by no means a bad thing. But, unless the fantasy is coated with reality, it can be very dangerous. The two major examples of this are the Communist theory of government and the concept of Marxism.

In theory, Communism is the perfect government and should result in a Utopian state. However, it has never succeeded and cannot succeed in the real world. Human nature simply won't allow it. Instead of a Utopian ideal, put into practice Communism and Marxist thought have resulted in little more than widespread poverty, an unbelievable gap between the rich and the poor, heavy oppression and utter chaos.

The other major reason why young people tend to align with liberal thought is that quite frankly, they make for an easy target. The reasons for this are two-fold.

The first reason is that our children are so very impressionable. They can easily be molded to believe things through the use of the education system, advertising and other means of communication and information. When I was in school, we where taught that Democrats are for the "little people" and Republicans are for the rich and wealthy. Sadly, I'm sure some of us just took that as gospel and never delved deeper in search of the truth.

The lack of delving deeper speaks to my second point. Many young people lack either the desire or the drive to do more than take the word of the so-called authorities that bombard them with one-sided information. Sources like "The Daily Show" and the 30 seconds of news snippets periodically shown on MTV at least influence, if not completely form their views.

But, there is hope.

New research suggests that 40% of young Americans now consider themselves conservatives. That is a staggering number considering the history of this demographic. This suggests that at least some of the youth are taking the initiative to find out more than simply what they are being fed by the mainstream media.

It also seems to be a generally accepted idea that as most of us mature, we tend to take more moderate (like myself) or conservative stances. Again, this goes back to the issue of real world experience.

Perhaps Winston Churchill put it best when he said, "Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains."

By: Jason Greiner
http://www.3riverscreative.com]]> http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php?entry=entry100727-001101
Much has been said about the burgeoning federal debt recently. Since being inaugurated, President Obama has spent more money than all previous United States Presidents combined, adjusting for inflation. That being said, President Obama has spent money that doesn't exist. Estimates by the Congressional Budget Office, the place that reviews money coming in and going out that the government proposes in legislation, has pegged our trillion dollar deficit as dangerously near the point of no return. If something isn't done to curtail, cut and stop spending soon, the United States will lose it's credit rating, and for the first time in history, default on it's debt.

So how did we get here. I'll see if I can explain simply. As we should learn about budgets and income and expense, every single dollar the Federal Government spends, has been collected through some tax placed on the individuals and businesses that fall under it's power, in this case, the United States citizens. We work to provide for ourselves and our families, enjoy vacations, save money for retirement and live our lives. The government taxes us and levies fees against us for the work and products we provide and produce. If the government spends more money than they take in, the difference is called the deficit and must be made up by borrowing money. More often than not, the government will sell bonds to another government, like China, and pay interest on those bonds so they can continue to spend when they don't bring in enough from taxes.

President Obama and Democrats in power have decided that spending money that hasn't even been earned yet, by ourselves and our unborn progeny is the way to remove us from the recession. This line of thinking comes from Keynes, an English economist during the early 20th century who wrote extensively on the spending power of the government and what it should be able to accomplish during periods of negative or no economic growth; i.e. during a recession with high unemployment, few jobs, and little goods and services being rendered or produced.

With almost 100 years of time between Keynes economic theories and the present day, we do have quite a bit of real world data to use in examining how accurate Keynesian economics really are and if they work on planet earth. The short answer is they don't. They fail miserably and prolong the recessionary periods during which they are implemented.

FD Roosevelt, who is championed as the President who brought the country out of the Great Depression during the 1930's followed these principles to the letter through his burgeoning deficit spending and "job creation" at the government level with all of his projects across the country like the WPA, NRA and a host of other alphabet soup government agencies. He did this using borrowed money and by raising taxes. His principal belief was that the government could make people work to bring the economy back around, using their own money, or lack thereof to do it.

In order to understand this theory of economics, it would be like you being out of work with no income or reduced income. You take a cash advance or special offer from your credit card company to borrow against your credit line to have some money back in your pocket. If you think that by borrowing money from your credit line, putting it in your pocket and then saying, you've got income again is preposterous and doesn't make any sense, you'd be right. You haven't improved your ability to care for yourself at all, you've only made yourself a slave to the issuer of the credit card company that loaned you the money and now wants you to pay interest on the loan. You still have no income and now have debt you have to pay for because you borrowed money you didn't have. This is insane.

Rational people understand that eventually you'll reach your credit limit and not be able to borrow anymore. You still have no income and are now in danger of defaulting on your payments of borrowed money to the bank and are in fact worse off than you were before.

This describes exactly the problem the we face now. Only, when you and I reach our credit limit, we can't just raise our limit and borrow more money to spend away that which we haven't earned. This is exactly what the Democratic Congress has done this year on more than two occasions, rather than stop spending. We only have so much time left, before our debt literally renders our country bankrupt and finished.

To conclude, Keynesian economic theory does not work. Never has; never will. In fact, those countries that didn't spend, specifically in Western Europe, during the 1930's Depression, on average saw their economic activity and countries improve a full 7 years before the United States did, and only the onset of World War II allowed us to ramp up our production and start putting people back to work and not living on borrowed money as we are doing once again, right now.

As history repeats itself, we sure aren't electing anybody to lead us who knows anything about history and basic economics.

By: Dan Orr
I'm Dan Orr, an entrepreneur with businesses in real estate and e-commerce. I work with rent generating property and recently entered the online affiliate and money-making web based products world.
http://www.topfloorview.com/affiliatemarketing.html]]> http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php?entry=entry100719-190344
That would be Harvard-based pediatrician Donald Berwick, who recently received a recess appointment as Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services by the bureaucrat who describes his pessimistic and stale vision for America as "hope and change."

Recess appointments are an executive procedure used, for better or for worse, when the Senate gives a presidential appointee a difficult time during confirmation hearings-for example, when they filibuster a nominee. Obama's appointment of Berwick bears the distinction of having been given without a confirmation hearing having even been scheduled.

It's as though Obama decided that the very requirement that his nominee appear before a Democratic-controlled Senate constituted an unreasonably difficult hurdle. This isn't a recess appointment - it's a vacation to Bermuda appointment.

As the Wall Street Journal noted, "Circumventing Senate confirmation to appoint the new Medicare chief is part of the same political willfulness that inflicted ObamaCare on the country despite the objections of most voters." CBS News observed, "The debate over Berwick's recess appointment makes clear what the White House knew all too well - Berwick may not have survived the Senate confirmation process, which would have turned into a proxy debate over health care reform."

Berwick, who will be put in charge of the health care of 100 million Americans without so much as a public query about his plans in office, has been quoted saying, "I am romantic about the N.H.S.; I love it." He has called himself "an American fan" of the system, "distant and starry-eyed."

In his London speech commemorating the N.H.S.'s 60th birthday, Berwick delivered such pro-American pronouncements to his audience as "Do not trust market forces to give you the system you need... I cannot believe that the individual health care consumer can enforce through choice the proper configurations of a system as massive and complex as health care. That is for leaders to do."

When it comes to Berwick's affection for health care systems centered around use of death panels, apparently absence makes the heart grow fonder. After returning home and mooning over the UK's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, the operational arm of the N.H.S., Berwick realized that "All I need to do to rediscover the romance is to look at health care in my own country."

That country would be the United States, which has the greatest health care system in the world, and would be a profound source of inspiration for anyone who truly loved medicine. Berwick's own place of employment is Harvard Medical School, where you would think there would have been a few medical advances in recent years to set his heart aflutter.

But no - Berwick's passion is for euthanasia counseling and quality-adjusted life years.

Berwick of course has never had to live under the jurisdiction of the N.H.S. You might call his affair with the British health care system a long-distance relationship.

Describing the supposed British backlash against American conservatives' depiction of the N.H.S. during the health care reform debate last summer, the New York Times gushed, "A Twitter campaign, We Love The N.H.S., is still going strong, with supporters sending messages about their own good experiences."

In fact, said campaign didn't even last 30 days from its first Tweet to its last, and has attracted a piddly 520 followers internationally. This is despite such helpful but unheeded administrative prompts as "What do you love about the NHS?" and "Please Retweet: 10,000 supporters visualised."

Admittedly, the riotously popular N.H.S. does have a Facebook fan page with 3,500 members. Then again, an ill-worded N.H.S. sign implying that contraception would be facilitated by... nontraditional intercourse has a Facebook fan page with 124,475 members. So perhaps fan counts are not such a flattering measure of the N.H.S.'s popularity.

Even the New York Times had to admit that Brits "complain endlessly about the National Health Service... They deplore the system's waiting lists, its regional disparities in treatment, its infection-breeding hospitals and its top-heavy bureaucracy." I guess the grass is greener on the other side of the pond!

If Donald Berwick wants to swoon over endless waiting lists, fatally protracted wait times, diminished access to specialized care, craven efforts to shield patients from learning about or acquiring costly life-saving drugs, pathetic heart attack and cancer survival rates, depersonalized patient treatment, and centralized bureaucratic decision-making about individual health care options, that's his choice. But forgive the rest of the U.S. if we aren't quite as smitten as he is.

By: Scott Spiegel
http://www.scottspiegel.com]]> http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php?entry=entry100719-184750
Trusted?

To Be or Not To Be

By depiction, Barack Obama is a person to be trusted without question, WHY?

Everyone else who has led this country has had to go through a process of building trust with the American people. From the days of George Washington down through today the position of President of the United States of America has been one of implicit trust, yes their have been individuals who have usurped that trust and gone overboard in their efforts to get as much from politics as they could, we have had some people in this position that did not belong there due to character defects that far outweighed any benefit they could have been to this country. We have had some individuals that have done more to destroy "Due Process" than most criminals that have gone to trial and been adjudged guilty. We have been saddled with individuals that have the morals of an alley cat, individuals who consider it nothing to lie in the face of the American public, and presiding courts, individuals that considered themselves untouchable by the laws that govern this land.

Be that as it may, the inherit quality that is looked for in the man who would be President has got to be ethical trustworthiness. I feel without that, no other qualification matters. For me having to trust what the President says is more important than anything in the area of leadership. This quality and this one alone predicate any action that would take place concerning the well being of the United States.

There are no other concerns in the picking of the President if you cannot count on the integrity of the individual running. The president can even be wrong in his assessment of any given situation, though we pray he is not, as he has the final choice in the recommendation of the results of any decisions made, and at times, he possesses the only voice in that process. This President has so far not only backed off the issue of trust, he has failed miserably in maintaining any semblance of knowing what he is doing.

For example: on the issue of Health Care, he had stated that he knew the present bill was flawed, but that could be taken care of with another bill, on Immigration, he had been quoted as saying, "this administration does not have the stomach to deal with the issue of immigration"( Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act.) which did not pass. Then faults Arizona for passing a law designed to protect it's boarders, and says of the law, "I think it may be unconstitutional" Yet this law does nothing different other than re-enforce the Federal Law that's on the books?

Is there something I am missing here?

It seem to me that our President (the one everyone expected so much from) is not only talking out of both sides of his mouth, but also out of the part of his anatomy that he sits on!

On perhaps the greatest ecological disaster to hit the United States, he has said" Washington has been in charge of this situation since day one" The question that that statement brings up is "Oh really, OK exactly what have you done?" He is now faced with another conundrum, The Gaza blockade. He has previously been recorded as saying the safety of Israel is "Sacrosanct" and attacks will not be tolerated. Let's see if he keeps his word, or again turn away from what he has said. Travel forward in time

Not long ago an incident that occurred the IDF [Israel Defense Force] in responding to a ship that tried to run it's blockade of the Gaza seaport got boarded, below were Arabic and Turkish individuals with nothing else on their minds than to do harm to the IDF, which was evidenced in video that were confiscated during the raid, due to no previous incidents with the actions taken by the Israeli forces the weapons carried by the IDF were the equivalent of paint-ball guns, when attacked by the individuals on-board the ship to protect themselves from being beaten by metal pipes, chains and chairs (graphically shown on the videos) they resorted to side arms, killing 9 of their attackers. For this Israel was the dumping ground of all the vehemence the rest of the world including the most revered Secretary of State her royal nobleness Hillary Clinton who stated that she denounced the actions taken by Israel in attacking the peaceful demonstration aboard that ship, WELL AIN'T THAT SPECIAL!!!

I for one think it's about time the DUMMIES, excuse me Democrats in Washington wake up to what's going on in the world and take off those "Rose Colored Glasses" they are forever wearing. This adds to the overall mystique of the pseudo-government we are now subject to, the government that exhibits the grandiose perception that we can do nothing wrong, you only have to follow our instructions and your life will be peachy keen, UNTIL THE BILL ARRIVES, so far it is in the trillions of dollars.

YOU ASK WHERE WILL IT STOP?

YOU ASK WHEN WILL IT STOP?

The answer is: AT THE POLLS

AND WHEN YOU DECIDE TO PUT A STOP TO IT!!!!

It is us, we are the ones responsible, there is no-one else to point the finger at. Harry Truman had a sign on his desk at the White House when he was President, that sign said. The Buck Stops Here, Barack Obama has decided to usurp that phrase, too bad he can't or won't live up to it, it could change the way people see him, but as for now, he, to me remains inconsistent with the overall purpose of America, that being the thing which has set us apart from every other nation on the face of the earth, our freedoms, as they are granted to American citizens, thanks to the forefathers of this nation.

By: Conrad Trudelle
I would be very interested to receive any comments about the above article, there are more to follow, and they shall be posted shortly.

I have been to more places than most people, I have done more things than most people, I have survived more things than most others have encountered. I have continually learned throughout this process and arrived at the conclusion that the differences we see keep us curious, and that keeps us alive. Never ever stop learning, and school and college is not the only place to learn, in fact it is limiting the amount and quality of knowledge we have. Communication is what makes this planet better, we have to learn to communicate better. Communication is not only content, but also delivery.]]> http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php?entry=entry100711-014800
In a nut shell, this is what the Progressive agenda is all about. Elitists are the slave masters who deliver the bare essentials to life for all. Assuming that you're not an elitist, you will have access to health care, you will never starve, you will have shelter and you will have access to entertainment for a little while. Of course none of these bare essentials are for free, because really nothing in life is ever for free. You will be taxed high on your earnings or on the things that you buy or a combination of both. Regardless in how you slice or dice it, the gross total of your earnings will eventually be galvanized to a point to where you possess less funds for your self at the end. This is the Progressive concept. It is a concept of Lord over serf. You will remain in the hierarchy of society to where you were born. Now this sounds like a really great dealio if you were born at the top of the food chain, however if you were born at the bottom, well this designed system will ensure that you will remain at the bottom more often than not. The financial hurdles will be too much, for the vast majority of people to ever over come.

Now, lets say you're a person that is not very ambitious and this system really doesn't sound all that bad to you, which is very logical. It's really not the worst case scenario to have the bare essentials of life provided to you, especially considering that poverty and human desolation is far much more worse to endure and has occurred on Earth as well. That is a very sound and good point, but please do consider human nature as well as you contemplate such a society system that socialism is.

Humans are creatures that excel in life when they are challenged. A socialist system of providing the bare essentials to you in life at a high cost in taxation has always failed throughout human history because an environment of complacency for humans has been created. In fact, on paper socialism is in fact, the most perfect society system ever devised, however in the real world it is one of the worst society systems ever designed, because socialism has never taken real human behavior into account. If humans are not constantly challenged, then humans naturally evolve to embrace complacency. In the animal kingdom complacent animals perish to predators. The young bird that does not learn to fly, is eaten by the fox. So with this phenomenon in nature being well known and understood, a logical person must also consider even though humans are highly intelligent creatures, are we not part of the animal kingdom too?

Complacency rules in socialist societies, because humans are smart enough to understand that if they get something for what appears to be nothing, then maximum effort is no longer required. Humans gravitate towards personal entertainment and other personal endeavors more instead. As an entire society begins to entertain themselves more, then naturally productivity in the over all economy reduces. Once productivity reduces too much, then a societies economy begins to spend more than it creates. Massive society debts then bring the socialist society leadership to a juncture to where a decision must be made. The decision results in either leading a society into communism where forcing productivity to increase at the barrel of a gun or other terrorizing techniques are pursued or a decision is made to ditch the socialist system entirely for a capitalist system where an individual must make their own roads and fend for themselves to survive. Of course, socialism will always eventually fail due to genuine and true human nature and behavior, which always trumps designs that are drafted on paper.

The dangers of socialism in society are very evident when you begin to weigh out the planned system versus human nature. This conflict and clash always dooms the dream of a Utopia to its guaranteed automatic failure. Now you may wonder if this is proven true over and over and over again in human history, then why is it that so many politicians and elitists pursue this system? Aren't they aware of any history, a logical person might ask? Well the answer is simply, yes, these individuals are intelligent enough to know the history of the automatic and guaranteed failure that socialism always provides, but these individuals are the fox and you are the prey. These unscrupulous individuals pursue this system only to prey upon you to better themselves. Most individuals who pursue socialism today, are some of the worlds most evil and most dangerous people on Earth or are just mentally unstable and delusional. They will pursue this system relentlessly only for self adulation and lust of power, absolute and maximum power wielded over the masses. Most individuals who pursue socialism today are individuals that are pathological narcissists. This is a dangerous human condition that causes an individual to pursue maximum power for endless attention, which heading socialism in society best assists that person to achieve. Pathological narcissists are masters of manipulation and are extremely intelligent. They can always make the absurd sound so wonderful. Pathological narcissists are typically charismatic, charming and appear to be non threatening to you as well. You have never heard of a Joseph Stalin, a chairman Mao or an Adolph Hitler in a free society, who mind you, were all pathological narcissists. Free societies do not grant enough power for a pathological narcissist to wield it for evil, but socialism grants the gateway of enough power for these individuals to thrive in an arena where the meal will eventually be you.

By: Mike J Meincke
Written: July 1st, 2010.
http://taxmemore.blogspot.com]]> http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php?entry=entry100711-011119
Most of us 65+ have led an active and involved life, both on the job and at home. Now, in retirement or getting prepared for it, we are faced with the possibility of having idle time on our hands. Something the pre-boomer generation is not used to. At first, this seems like a happy dilemma, but too much leisure time does little to stimulate the mind and can lead to a feeling of low self-esteem. Besides, who wants to do nothing when you can get great satisfaction from being of service?

"What can I do?" you ask. Anything you want! After all, you did this throughout your life, why stop now? Think about the dreams we New Seniors had when we were young. Being the best we could be in the areas where we had interest received encouragement from our elders - parents, teachers, coaches, scout masters and other leaders. And we carried this with us upon entering the workforce and, to some degree, throughout our careers. It's time to dust off those memories and apply them once again, because America needs our knowledge, experience and guidance more than ever.

The nation is in a state of fear-based, self-centered apathy. If it doesn't affect us directly, we tend not to care; so don't make waves. Gone is the spirit that helped people survive the Great Depression. The spirit that united us against common enemies in WWII. The spirit that built a post-war economy second to none. The spirit that fought social injustices and prevailed. The spirit that placed men on the moon. The spirit that outlasted the threat of the Soviet Union. The spirit that created the Internet and the technology boom. The spirit that re-united Americans after the terrorist attacks on 9/11.

Has the life gone out of this great country, or are we just taking a breath before rising up and redirecting our efforts to ignite the spark once more? Are you ready to carry the torch the spreads the light of freedom and the opportunities that will bring America back from the lonely darkness that separates us and help bring people back together again?

This action can begin to take place immediately, but the road back is long and up hill. Don't let that deter you. New Seniors can make a difference in the way government works and let those in elected positions know who they work for by being active during the period leading up to the November election. Without regard to party affiliation, those 65+ are expected to account t for nearly 30% of the votes cast this fall. So get involved.

While this is going on, look for ways to be of service in your community. Recruit other New Seniors to join you in making a difference. Tell your friends that you intend to make a difference. And, demonstrate to your family what it means to make a difference.

By: Don Potter

Don Potter, a Philadelphia native, was born in 1936 and is a 50 year veteran of the advertising agency business. Now living in Los Angeles, he has written two novels in retirement, frequently writes on marketing issues, and has a blog dedicated to pre-boomers (those born between 1930 and 1945).

Read more articles for and about pre-boomers with thoughts, comments and opinions designed to spark thinking, foster discussion, and stimulate debate by logging on to http://www.pre-boomermusings.com]]> http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php?entry=entry100628-190109
MODERN VERSION:

The horse works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The flea thinks the horse is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering flea calls a press conference and demands to know why the horse should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.

CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering flea next to a video of the horse in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned by the sharp contrast.

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor flea is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the flea, and everybody cries when they sing, 'It's Not Easy Being Green.'

Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the house where the news stations film the group singing, 'We shall overcome.' Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray for the flea's sake.

Nancy Pelosi & John Kerry exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the horse has gotten rich off the back of the flea, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the horse to make him pay his fair share.

Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-flea Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The horse is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.

Hillary gets her old law firm to represent the flea in a defamation suit against the horse, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges that Bill Clinton appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients.

The horse loses the case.

The story ends as we see the flea finishing up the last bits of the horse's food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the horse's old house, crumbles around him because he doesn't maintain it.

The horse has disappeared in the snow.

The flea is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be careful how you vote in 2010

"Kindness is a language which the deaf can hear & the blind can read."...Mark Twain

As I am now; so shall you be So prepare for Death and follow me; To follow you I'm not content Until I know which way you went. Anous.

By: W L. Berryhill
Walter Berryhill is the proud owner of the WebSites:

http://www.fastlearngolf.info]]> http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php?entry=entry100508-235951
The criminals in prison have work out areas, a chance for a free education, and we have a difficult time affording these luxuries as regular civilians.

It has evolved into a matter of respectable, American, hard working citizens, can't catch a brake. Our jobs are being shipped overseas and if you are close to retirement you find yourself being let go from your job. For a made up reason, that legally is binding in the company's small print.

I know many people who have to work two or three jobs just to make the ends meet and feed their families. If wages were higher, this would not be a problem. Then you might only have to work two jobs and be able to see the family you are working so hard for.

It does not matter the color of your skin, or what country you are from originally, nor if you are a man or a woman. We are living in a day of difficulty and prejudice against the regular, hard working, American citizen.

There are too many people breaking laws in our country and getting by with it. Suddenly, if you are just a person who is minding your own business, and standing up for your rights, jobs, beliefs, political views, you are coined as bad by media and others. It is so stupid and redundant. Grandma's and grandpa's, clergy, women and children, farmers, businessmen and women, rich, poor, and in between, being made feel that they have no rights in their own country.

We are living in the 21st century, and certain folks are acting as if they want to take us into the dark ages in this country. Where only certain folk have rights, and jobs are for a certain chosen few. It is biblical to work, and most everyone that I know want to have a decent job and raise their families in that good old American way.

When laws are set in motion to help a small stream of Americans, and jobs are created for the ones who have a certain skill, and industry is ignored as a whole, it is discrimination.

When criminals are given breaks because it is politically correct, and we all stand around with our mouths wide open, we have been discriminated against.

We have a whole new kind of discrimination in our country today. It is politically correct versus not being politically correct. This is new territory and I do not think many are coming to grips with it. I think that is why we have all of the hoop-la, and ranting going on.

I am a woman and an American citizen, and I wrote this as I see things in our country. You can agree or disagree with my ideas, it is still a free country to do so on this day.

By: Pamela Bunta
Wife, mother, grandmother, hair stylist. New author. Twitter, Facebook, You tube. Singer and musician, (bass fiddle player). My email:padewan7@yahoo.com]]> http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php?entry=entry100508-235009
In addition to losing the right to choose whether or not to purchase a healthcare plan, we will also ultimately lose the choice to decide what is in our plan. At this point, every kind of group you can imagine is lobbying in their state to get included in the plan. Each plan will have a list of required benefits that need to be included in their plan. Actually, you will not even know what group "won" the lobbying to be included in the plan until AFTER your purchase it. Another ultimate loss for Americans via ObamaCare is not getting any benefit from health living. ObamaCare will adopt something known as a rating system. Despite medical condition, age, financial conditions, thanks to rating everyone will pay the exact same rate. Young people who are usually in a lower income bracket from first starting out and are usually on the healthier side of the fence will pay far more than what their actual costs would be otherwise. More established, older workers, will receive a deep discount. Gouging young people is just not the way. Of course those with pre existing conditions and or cancer, need insurance. ObamaCare would not offer any discount though to anyone who has adopted a health conscious lifestyle. Fair? I don't believe so.

As we continue, Americans will also lose the freedom to keep their existing plan. The President claims that this is not the case, yet the bill states differently. What the bill states is that if your healthcare plan was in effect prior to ObamaCare, you can keep it. But (there is always a but) if it changes in the smallest way, the employee must drop out and pick a plan that the government has approved through the healthcare bill. Maybe more government officials should actually read the bill (many have admitted to not reading it due to it being too long and too confusing), before stating that Americans can definitely keep their present healthcare plans. Another point that must be made is that through ObamaCare, Americans will lose the right to choose their own physicians. This by far is an extremely scary and worrisome thought to many individuals. Through the healthcare bill a primary physician will be "assigned". Much like an HMO. That main doctor will then "decide for you", where to send you and what for, if a specialist is then needed.

Well, there you have it. Some of the main points of ObamaCare and why as Americans we should be concerned. Americans should not take this lying down (no pun intended). We need to let our voice be heard and let as many government officials know that this is not and will not be sufficient. The only way we will be able to accomplish this is by banning together. ObamaCare is unconstitutional and we are headed down a path to a Socialist government.
Visit http://www.physiciansagainstobamacare.org and join the fight. Together as citizens of the United States of America, we can make a difference.

By: Jake Powell]]> http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php?entry=entry100414-133214
Dear Doris asked Obama a question and was hit with a 2,600-word, 17-minute onslaught that makes any rambling reply Sarah Palin supposedly ever gave seem like the soul of brevity.

To be fair, Doris had placed a tall order: she had asked Obama to sell her on the recently passed health care overhaul legislation via a diatribe that rehashed the history of Medicare, trotted out charges against Bush, and stopped along the way for an analogy involving leaky roofs.

Oh wait-she didn't; that was what she got. She asked Obama whether raising taxes in a recession was a good idea.

A prickly Obama jumped in and implied that Doris and millions of other Americans who had been reading about the health care legislation over the past twelve months were badly misinformed, easily misled by huckster politicians, and quite possibly morons.

He launched into one of several internally and externally redundant lists cataloging the reasons for health care reform (which was not Doris's question). In a vastly condensed nutshell:

List 1, Point 1: Some people don't have health insurance.

L1, P2: Some people with health insurance might not have it in the future.

L1, P3: Sometimes insurance companies operate according to the profit motive and fail to chase down policyholders to shower them with free money they don't have coming to them.

L1, P4: Health care is expensive.

Obama lamented how all government-instituted health insurance programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP, are running out of money, which means that we need: more government intervention!

Obama embarked on another list explaining what provisions the health care overhaul bill contains (again, not Doris's question):

L2, P1: Everybody will get coverage.

L2, P2: We will drive insurance companies out of business-which will really improve the chances they will pay consumers' claims!

L2, P3: We will get rid of excess, waste, and overload in Medicare (at which point the thinking half the audience wondered how Obama would accomplish this when he couldn't even get rid of excess, waste, and overload in his response).

Obama repeated Republicans' objection that adding 30 million Americans to the insurance rolls might involve some sacrifice and would not reduce the deficit by a trillion dollars as claimed-an argument he promptly shot down as the addle-headed straw man it obviously is.

To do this, he told a story about some people living in a house with a leaky roof that dripped water into some of the rooms, and explained why the people in the rooms without leaks would be better off if the government forced them to pay for the leaks in the other rooms.

Missing from his analogy were the caveats that random strangers don't involuntarily live under the same roof, fixing one person's leaky roof does not increase the quality of life for someone without a leaky roof, and the government is not a mortgage holder empowered to make these decisions for residents. But give him points for creativity, I guess.

List time again-this one involving how the administration is going to pay for the health care overhaul:

L3, P1: We will get rid of excess, waste, and overload (see L2, P3).

L3, P2: We will increase taxes.

Finally! Obama arrived in the same ballpark as Doris's question.

Obama then noted that Doris pays Medicare taxes but Warren Buffet doesn't-ignoring the fact that Warren Buffet doesn't want or need Medicare. (Doris might not either, but let's assume for the moment that she does.)

The President proposed that we tax, for the sake of fairness, individuals making over $200,000 or couples making over $250,000 a year-you know, Warren Buffet, basically-an exorbitant amount for services they probably don't want or need.

He did not address the tax-sorry, "fine"-to be levied on citizens who do not comply with the individual mandate to purchase government-approved health insurance, which is presumably what Doris was alluding to in her question.

Obama closed with a litany of campaign-style talking points: he mentioned for the 1.3 trillionth time that he had inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit; condemned the cost of the prescription drug plan and Medicare Part D; bashed the Iraq war and the Bush tax cuts; bemoaned mounting credit card and home loan debt; cited the stimulus bill and something called FMAP; referenced PAYGO and earmarks and... ugh, I can't take it anymore.

One wonders what Doris did to deserve the karmic retribution of such a longwinded, tortuous answer, or why Obama decided to inflict it upon her. Perhaps he was using an innocent victim to try to compensate for twelve months of failing to take a leadership role in pushing his bill through Congress or adequately allay constituents' concerns about its costs.

If Obama is still going around giving a 17-minute apologia for a fundamental point of the bill he claims Americans are clamoring for but just don't realize yet, he's going to have an awfully hard time changing anyone's mind on his whirlwind national health care snake oil tour.

By: Scott Spiegel
http://www.scottspiegel.com]]> http://politics.californiapersonalinjuryattorneys.us/index.php?entry=entry100414-130958
There's more to it than conducting a physical inventory. Counting what's in warehouses, on the battlefield or in supply room is a common practice of the various government agencies. They must do in order to establish a budget for the next round of funding.

Doing a human resources inventory each year is the way staffing needs are determined in both the private and public sectors. For instance, the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) requires an additional 16,500 people at a cost of somewhere between 5 to 10 billion dollars in order to be sure that everyone has the proper insurance or pays fines under the new health care legislation.

What government ignores is the abstract side of taking inventory: the subjective evaluation of what's going on and if things are moving in the proper direction. In business and in ones personal life, there must be a value placed on the activities one has been doing and whether or not this is beneficial in increasing the overall worth of the entity. This goes beyond accomplishing short and long-term financial goals. In business it's known as goodwill. For an individual it's called character.

The United States, while trying to build friends around the world, appears weaker because we don't stand for courage, as we once did. Look at how we tip-toe around the Iranian nuclear issue as we draw a line in the sand, which is then crossed over. So we step back and draw a new line. Or what about our relationship with Israel that appears to be deteriorating? Have we become ashamed of what our forefathers gave us? Is America unwilling to encourage and support other democracies? If we are no longer proud of this country's values, our goodwill shall continue to drop as fast as our national debt is rising.

Domestically, the politicians inside the beltway have isolated themselves from the majority of people. In an effort to redistribute the nation's financial wealth, we are going broke over an ideology based on a fabricated lack of fairness that is funded through legislative equality. There is no moral justification to take away our incentives and smother our spirits by making us dependent on and even fearful of the government. Rather, to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, it is the government that must fear the people.

Free men are equal and must be treated fairly. Then, they can accomplish great feats with the gifts that come from their Creator. No government can do this. Our founders knew this. If our elected representatives would take an inventory, they might see what changes must be made. However, should they refuse to take a look at the harm they have caused and the burden placed on us as well as future generations, then it is our responsibility to take their inventory and ask ourselves, "Is their character worthy of re-election?"

By: Don Potter
Don Potter, a Philadelphia native, was born in 1936 and is a 50 year veteran of the advertising agency business. Now living in Los Angeles, he has written two novels in retirement, frequently writes on marketing issues, and has a blog dedicated to pre-boomers (those born between 1930 and 1945).

Read more articles for and about pre-boomers with thoughts, comments and opinions designed to spark thinking, foster discussion, and stimulate debate by logging on to http://www.pre-boomermusings.com]]>