George Washington

Government is not reason, it is not eloquent--it is force!

Like a fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

Taxing the Internet in Colorado

I advertise my driving business in many areas. I spend alot of $ each month advertising.
Our Colorado Legislature just put into effect HB-1193 which imposes sales tax on online retailers.
No other state has these rules.
Now I can no longer advertise with Amazon because they refuse to participate in Colorado's plan.
Here is the mailing I just got from Amazon.
Ron
Thanks alot to our Tax crazed Governor Ritter and Democrat assembly

Dear Colorado-based Amazon Associate:

We are writing from the Amazon Associates Program to inform you that the Colorado government recently enacted a law to impose sales tax regulations on online retailers. The regulations are burdensome and no other state has similar rules. The new regulations do not require online retailers to collect sales tax. Instead, they are clearly intended to increase the compliance burden to a point where online retailers will be induced to "voluntarily" collect Colorado sales tax -- a course we won't take.

We and many others strongly opposed this legislation, known as HB 10-1193, but it was enacted anyway. Regrettably, as a result of the new law, we have decided to stop advertising through Associates based in Colorado. We plan to continue to sell to Colorado residents, however, and will advertise through other channels, including through Associates based in other states.

There is a right way for Colorado to pursue its revenue goals, but this new law is a wrong way. As we repeatedly communicated to Colorado legislators, including those who sponsored and supported the new law, we are not opposed to collecting sales tax within a constitutionally-permissible system applied even-handedly. The US Supreme Court has defined what would be constitutional, and if Colorado would repeal the current law or follow the constitutional approach to collection, we would welcome the opportunity to reinstate Colorado-based Associates.

You may express your views of Colorado's new law to members of the General Assembly  and to Governor Ritter, who signed the bill.

Your Associates account has been closed as of March 8, 2010, and we will no longer pay advertising fees for customers you refer to Amazon.com after that date. Please be assured that all qualifying advertising fees earned prior to March 8, 2010, will be processed and paid in accordance with our regular payment schedule. Based on your account closure date of March 8, any final payments will be paid by May 31, 2010.

We have enjoyed working with you and other Colorado-based participants in the Amazon Associates Program, and wish you all the best in your future.


Best Regards,

The Amazon Associates Team

States to Feds: Step Off

By Ashby Jones

We had no idea: states across the land are assembling their legislatures and passing these resolutions asserting their sovereignty. It’s all part of this push, it seems, to remind whomever — citizens, the federal government — that the 9th and 10th amendments to the Constitution imbue the states with certain powers.
The number of states deciding that these resolutions are worth doing are growing. South Carolina passed one this week. A Kansas resolution affirming the state’s 10th amendment rights was on Thursday sent to the state Senate for a full vote. Late last month, the Alabama legislature sent up a resolution essentially reaffirming the 10th amendment. For a full list of what states have done on this front, click here, for information from the Tenth Amendment center; click here for
By way of quick refresher, the 10th Amendment reads:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

On its face, it certainly sounds like an amendment that’s worth being mindful of (which one isn’t?). Thing is, however, that any new application or enforcement of the 10th amendment is going to require some new, perhaps forward-thinking litigation, and a Supreme Court that decides it’s high time to breathe new life into the largely moribund amendment.
Last fall, we cited Radley Balko, writing in Reason, who cited this passage from Ken at Popehat:
“The Tenth Amendment is close to a dead letter in American jurisprudence; the unrestrained growth of the federal government reflects that modern courts have refused to find that it acts as any sort of brake on federal power.”
As we wrote, it would take an enormously courageous (or ill-advised, depending on your perspective) federal judge to strike down federal legislation on Tenth amendment grounds. But this is a court that decided to pick up the Second amendment and give it another look. So who knows?

Dumass of the Year Award

Yes, Janet Napolitano, DEMOCRAT from Arizona for listing Tea Party protester, southern Christians, and returning members of the military as potential domestic terrorist and right-wing extremists. you are a dumbass.
For renaming the ongoing "War on Terror" as an "Overseas Contingency". you are a dumbass.

For dropping the word "terrorism" from the government lexicon. you are a dumbass.

For saying that the terrorist attack on 9/11/01 was really a "man-caused disaster". you are a dumbass.
 
For claiming that ILLEGAL immigration is not a crime. you are a dumbass.

For declaring that the Canadian border was more dangerous than the Mexican border. you are a dumbass.

For stating that the Muslim Terrorist attacks on 9/11 came from Canada. you are a dumbass.

For allowing the spread of Swine Flu by not testing travelers from Swine Flu ground zero in Mexico. you are a dumbass.

For comparing a fence along the US southern border to the Berlin Wall. you are a dumbass.

For claiming that Homeland Security's "system worked" when all could see it failed. you are a dumbass..

For walking back your "system worked" comment with "system failed". you are a dumbass.

Janet for you just being you. you are a dumbass.

So congratulations Janet Incompetano!!
You are the official 2009 Dumbass of the Year!
Deserving of awards and accolades to have failed so much in one short year you are the winning loser!

Government non-co-operate

It is an inalienable right of the people to withhold co-operation, we are not bound to continue in Government service. If Government should betray us in a great cause, we could not do otherwise than non-co-operate. We are therefore entitled to non-co-operate with Government in case of betrayal. -Mohandas K. Gandhi

the Louisiana Purchase.

Staffers on Capitol Hill were calling it the Louisiana Purchase.
On the eve of Saturday's showdown in the Senate over health-care reform, Democratic leaders still hadn't secured the support of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), one of the 60 votes needed to keep the legislation alive. The wavering lawmaker was offered a sweetener: at least $100 million in extra federal money for her home state.
And so it came to pass that Landrieu walked onto the Senate floor midafternoon Saturday to announce her aye vote -- and to trumpet the financial "fix" she had arranged for Louisiana. "I am not going to be defensive," she declared. "And it's not a $100 million fix. It's a $300 million fix."

Read the rest of the article here

Stop Islamic stupidity from destroying the free world...

Geert Wilders is the leader of the Netherlands political party, Partij voor de Vrijheid, or PVV.  Dutch public opinion polls show Wilders and the PVV in the lead position for any future Parliamentary election. The PVV is currently the leading Dutch party in the European Parliament.  Mr Wilders took over his leader role following the assassinations of the previous two leading figures, Pim Fortuyn and Theo Van Gogh,  in 2002 and 2004 respectively,  so there is a possibility he will suffer the same fate.

Geert Wilders was refused entry to the UK by the then Home Secretary, Jacqui   Smith, which decision was overturned on appeal by a UK court.  In contrast, he was allowed into the United States, where he made the speech copied below.  You may disagree with what he says, but the debate is first whether he should be allowed to say it in democracies that promote free speech.

'In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: who lost Europe?'
Here is the speech of Geert Wilders, Chairman, Party for Freedom, the Netherlands, at the Four Seasons, New York, introducing an Alliance of Patriots and announcing the Facing Jihad Conference in Jerusalem.


Dear friends,

Thank you very much for inviting me.



I come to America with a mission.  All is not well in the old world.  There is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic.  We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe.  This not only is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat to America and the sheer survival of the West.  The United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe.

First I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe.  Then, I will say a few things about Islam.  To close I will tell you about a meeting in Jerusalem.

The Europe you know is changing.

You have probably seen the landmarks.  But in all of these cities, sometimes a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world.  It is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration.

All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighborhoods where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen.  And if they are, they might regret it.  This goes for the police as well.  It's the world of head scarves, where women walk around in figureless tents, with baby strollers and a group of children.  Their husbands, or slaveholders if you prefer, walk three steps ahead.  With mosques on many street corners.  The shops have signs you and I cannot read.  You will be hard-pressed to find any economic activity.  These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious fanatics.  These are Muslim neighborhoods, and they are mushrooming in every city across Europe.  These are the building-blocks for territorial control of increasingly larger portions of Europe, street by street, neighborhood by neighborhood, city by city.

There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe.  With larger congregations than there are in churches.  And in every European city there are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region.  Clearly, the signal is: we rule.

Many European cities are already one-quarter Muslim: just take Amsterdam, Marseille and Malmo in Sweden.  In many cities the majority of the under-18 population is Muslim.  Paris is now surrounded by a ring of Muslim neighborhoods.  Mohammed is the most popular name among boys in many cities.

In some elementary schools in Amsterdam the farm can no longer be mentioned, because that would also mean mentioning the pig, and that would be an insult to Muslims.

Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all pupils.  In once-tolerant Amsterdam gays are beaten up almost exclusively by Muslims.  Non-Muslim women routinely hear 'whore, whore'.  Satellite dishes are not pointed to local TV stations, but to stations in the country of origin.

In France school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of Darwin.  The history of the Holocaust can no longer be taught because of Muslim sensitivity.

In England sharia courts are now officially part of the British legal system. Many neighborhoods in France are no-go areas for women without head scarves.  Last week a man almost died after being beaten up by Muslims in Brussels, because he was drinking during the Ramadan.

Jews are fleeing France in record numbers, on the run for the worst wave of anti-Semitism since World War II.  French is now commonly spoken on the streets of Tel Aviv and Netanya, Israel.  I could go on forever with stories like this.  Stories about Islamization.

A total of fifty-four million Muslims now live in Europe.  San Diego University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now.  Bernhard Lewis has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.

Now these are just numbers.  And the numbers would not be threatening if the Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate.  But there are few signs of that.  The Pew Research Center reported that half of French Muslims see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty to France.  One-third of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks.  The British Centre for Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in favor of a worldwide caliphate.  Muslims demand what they call 'respect'.  And this is how we give them respect.  We have Muslim official state holidays.

The Christian-Democratic attorney general is willing to accept sharia in the Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority.  We have cabinet members with passports from Morocco and Turkey.

Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behavior, ranging from petty crimes and random violence, for example against ambulance workers and bus drivers, to small-scale riots.  Paris has seen its uprising in the low-income suburbs, the banlieus.  I call the perpetrators 'settlers'.  Because that is what they are.  They do not come to integrate into our societies; they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam.  Therefore, they are settlers.

Much of this street violence I mentioned is directed exclusively against non-Muslims, forcing many native people to leave their neighborhoods, their cities, their countries.  Moreover, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be ignored.

The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet.  His behavior is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized.  Now, if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem.  But Mohammed was a warlord, a mass murderer, a pedophile, and had several marriages - at the same time.  Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed.  Mohammed himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza.  If it is good for Islam, it is good.  If it is bad for Islam, it is bad.

Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion.  Sure, it has a god, and a here-after, and 72 virgins.  But in its essence Islam is a political ideology.  It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every person.  Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life.  Islam means 'submission'.  Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy, because what it strives for is sharia.  If you want to compare Islam to anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all totalitarian ideologies.

Now you know why Winston Churchill called Islam 'the most retrograde force in the world', and why he compared Mein Kampf to the Quran.  The public has wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the aggressor.  I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times.  I support Israel.  First, because it is the Jewish homeland after two thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz, second because it is a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defense.

This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating Islam's territorial advance.  Israel is facing the front lines of jihad, like Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines, Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan, Lebanon, and Aceh in Indonesia.  Israel is simply in the way.  The same way West-Berlin was during the Cold War.

The war against Israel is not a war against Israel.  It is a war against the West.  It is jihad.  Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant for all of us.  If there would have been no Israel, Islamic imperialism would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for conquest.  Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream, unaware of the dangers looming.

Many in Europe argue in favor of abandoning Israel in order to address the grievances of our Muslim minorities.  But if Israel were, God forbid, to go down, it would not bring any solace to the West It would not mean our Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behavior, and accept our values.  On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous encouragement to the forces of Islam.  They would, and rightly so, see the demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed.  The end of Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the beginning.  It would mean the start of the final battle for world domination.  If they can get Israel, they can get everything.  So-called journalists volunteer to label any and all critics of Islamization as a 'right-wing extremists' or 'racists'.  In my country, the Netherlands, 60 percent of the population now sees the mass immigration of Muslims as the number one policy mistake since World War II.  And another 60 percent sees Islam as the biggest threat.  Yet there is a danger greater danger than terrorist attacks, the scenario of America as the last man standing.  The lights may go out in Europe faster than you can imagine.  An Islamic Europe means a Europe without freedom and democracy, an economic wasteland, an intellectual nightmare, and a loss of military might for America - as its allies will turn into enemies, enemies with atomic bombs.  With an Islamic Europe, it would be up to America alone to preserve the heritage of Rome, Athens and Jerusalem.

Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts.  My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives.  All throughout Europe, American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish.  My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians.  We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe's children in the same state in which it was offered to us.  We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams.  Future generations would never forgive us.  We cannot squander our liberties.  We simply do not have the right to do so.

We have to take the necessary action now to stop this Islamic stupidity from destroying the free world that we know.

---

Fix The Banking System In 4 Steps

By Dylan Ratigan

I spoke today on the Morning Meeting about the four steps the government could take to fix the U.S. banking system and stop the ongoing and expanding corruption of our country. These simple solutions come from the litany of people that I speak with who seek to change the mega-casino our government has built during the past 10 years back to one built on investors, innovators and workers creating things that benefit society.  Unfortunately, our current leaders want to take the easy road of sustaining the casino economy with what I like to call the Magic Money Machine.  Except as with all magic, there's actually a trick; in this case, it is a large bill that will be left to those of us unfortunate enough to still be around when it comes due.  Here are the four pieces of regulation that taxpayers should be demanding from their leaders:

1. Inject transparency, primarily to bring almost $600 trillion of crooked insurance scams to the forefront.  Force almost all swaps onto exchanges, not just the 20% as current proposed reform does.

Secretary Geithner, Chairman Frank and Chairman Dodd are protecting the last of the Wall Street secret money-making schemes. They don't want to force transparency on this market because it would disclose the fraud this massive bank scheme is -- a taxpayer subsidized secret insurance market which sells cheap insurance to hedge funds, power and food and energy companies, and makes for huge profits at banks and insurance companies. Insurance and idle speculation in secret is a brilliant way for banks and other financial services companies to make money (who doesn't want to collect insurance premiums every month for something you'll never have to pay for?!) And a great way to make oil, food and electricity company CEOs richer as they pay less for their insurance. One problem -- they are all surfing on the taxpayers back to the tune of $24 trillion at risk last I checked -- and the U.S. government is the one letting them do it. Still. Now bigger than ever.

2. Demand capital to back Wall Street's gambling.

In Vegas, you need to have actual money to gamble. Your own money. It's crazy, but true. Even today, in many cases more than ever, U.S. banks use America's FDIC insured safe deposits to fund their own mad bonus-seeking speculation. Once the banks blow through that -- they borrow from the biggest money printing house in the world, the U.S. Federal Reserve to do the same thing. This is truly insane. The banks and their traders keep the upside. You, the taxpayer, keep the downside. No one else in the world can pay themselves billions to take infinite risk with little or no money down, except a big bank CEO. And we thought they were good at their jobs making all that money, when all they did was rig the game using our government to do it.

3. Enact a tax-code to encourage long-term investment and discourage short-term profit. Fortunes should not be made in minutes but over years through the creation of value to society.

  

As long as the easiest way for a man or woman to make money is to spend their day clicking for dollars, why would they bother doing all the work of investing in the long-term economic development of private business in America? Tax code in general should encourage investment, jobs, and innovation in America and discourage idle speculation as the easiest way for a college kid to get rich.  There are sensible ways to use tax policy to encourage this that do not hamper liquidity.

4. Break up the Too Big To Fail banking institutions. Start with Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan. Right Now.

      

How do you expect any other business to compete with the chosen few who are guaranteed profits? The more risk they take, the more they make. Why do you think they invented a fake $600 Trillion secret derivative market in the first place? Bigger bonuses baby. All upside. No downside. Thank you Uncle Sam. Thank you Secretary Geithner.

225,000 people are driving illegally in Colorado

Audit: Unlicensed drivers big problem in Colorado

The Associated Press

Posted: 11/03/2009 11:07:24 AM MST

Updated: 11/03/2009 11:07:24 AM MST

DENVER—A state audit estimates that as many as 225,000 people are driving illegally in Colorado and that unlicensed drivers were involved in nearly one-fourth of all fatal crashes last year.
Legislators requested the audit after an unlicensed driver in the country illegally was accused of causing an accident last year that killed three people in Aurora, including a 3-year-old in an ice cream shop.
Drivers without valid licenses were involved in 24 percent of last year's fatal crashes. There were 548 people who died in traffic accidents and 130 of those died in crashes involving unlicensed drivers.
The auditors say strategies used by other states include impounding vehicles and putting special stickers on car that have been driven by people without valid licenses.
———
Information from: The Denver Post, http://www.denverpost.com

Taxing Health Insurance

Oct 6, 2009

by John Goodman

Under the Senate Finance Committee’s modified chairman’s mark, beginning in 2013, all plans (with a few exceptions) that cost more than $8,000 for individuals and $21,000 for families would be subject to a tax of 40% on the excess. Although the tax would be imposed on insurance providers and employers, the burden would be passed on to consumers. This is from the Joint Economic Committee Minority:

If companies seek to maintain absolute profit levels by increasing premiums, the high cost tax of 40% will not only add $1,600 to the cost of a $25,000 plan, but the added $1,600 to the cost of the plan will then be subject to the high cost tax, which will add another $640 to the plan’s cost. This cycle of tax increases followed by premium increases will result in a total increase of $2,667 to a $25,000 plan. Under this scenario, the result is that the stated tax rate of 40% would translate into an effective tax rate of 67%.

John Goodmans health policy blog

Medicaid Numbers Don’t Add Up

FYI | Medicaid Numbers Don’t Add Up

Oct 2, 2009

by John Goodman

This is from a Wall Street Journal editorial:

Currently, the federal government pays about 57 cents out of every dollar the states spend on Medicaid, though the “matching rate” ranges as high as 76% in some states. That would rise to 95% [under the Baucus bill] —but only for five years. After that, who knows? It all depends on which budget Congress ends up ruining. Either the states will be slammed, or Washington will extend these extra payments into perpetuity—despite the fact that CBO expects purely federal spending on Medicaid to consume 5% of GDP by 2035 under current law.

Police use acoustic warfare to disperse crowds

Oct 1, 7:10 AM (ET)

By JOE MANDAK

PITTSBURGH (AP) - Police ordered protesters to disperse at the Group of 20 summit last week with a device that can beam earsplitting alarm tones and verbal instructions that the manufacturer likens to a "spotlight of sound," but that legal groups called potentially dangerous.

The device, called a Long Range Acoustic Device, concentrates voice commands and a car alarm-like sound in a 30- or 60-degree cone that can be heard nearly two miles away. It is about two feet square and mounted on a swivel such that one person can point it where it's needed. The volume measures 140-150 decibels three feet away - louder than a jet engine - but dissipates with distance.

Robert Putnam, spokesman for the manufacturer, San Diego-based American Technology Corp., said it's "like a big spotlight of sound that you can shine on people."

"It's not a sonic cannon. It's not the death ray or anything like that," Putnam said. "It's about long-range communications being heard intelligibly."

During the Pittsburgh protests, police used the device to order demonstrators to disperse and to play a high-pitched "deterrent tone" designed to drive people away. It was the first time the device was used in a riot-control situation on U.S. soil, according to American Technology and police.

Those who heard it said authorities' voice commands were clear and sounded as if they were coming from everywhere all at once. They described the "deterrent tone" as unbearable.

Joel Kupferman, who was at Thursday's march as a legal observer for the National Lawyer's Guild, said he was overwhelmed by the tone and called it "overkill."

"When people were moving and they still continued to use it, it was an excessive use of weaponry," Kupferman said.

Witold "Vic" Walczak, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union in Pennsylvania, said the device is a military weapon capable of producing permanent hearing loss, something he called "an invitation to an excessive-force lawsuit."

The operator of the device is usually behind it and not in the path of the focused beam of sound.

Catherine Palmer, director of audiology at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, said 140 decibels can cause immediate hearing loss. But there's no way to know if anyone was exposed to sounds that loud without knowing how far away they were, she said.

Putnam and public safety officials said the complaints prove the device worked as designed.

"You have to put your hands over your ears and cover them, and it's difficult to throw stuff," said Ray DeMichiei, deputy director of the city's emergency management agency.

Police said they used the device last Thursday to issue prerecorded warnings to disperse when hundreds of demonstrators, including self-described anarchists, without a protest permit held a march that threatened to turn violent.

Aware of concerns about the volume, police were careful to use it about 12 feet off the ground mounted on a tactical vehicle, so no individual would be directly in its path or too close to it, Assistant Chief William Bochter said.

"The only way anybody gets hurt is if the deterrent is on full blast and they stand directly in front of it," Putnam said.

A regional counterterror task force bought four of the devices from American Technology using $101,000 in federal Homeland Security funds, DeMichiei said. Because the amplified message was prerecorded, police could be sure the protesters heard exactly the instructions police desired and have confidence those in the back of the crowd could hear, Bochter said.

Such devices also have military and commercial applications. Putnam said the primary purpose is to transmit specific orders loudly and clearly.

They have been used against protesters overseas, and police in New York threatened to use one during demonstrations near the Republican National Convention in 2004.

He said the city of San Diego uses them to instruct people to leave large sections of beach after festivals. It has also been used in SWAT operations.

In military applications, it allows ships to hail approaching vessels and determine their intent, the company says. Cargo ships use them to tell pirates that they had been spotted. When the pirates know they have lost the element of surprise, they will not attack, Putnam said.

Putnam said those complaining about the device have probably exposed themselves to sounds nearly as loud at rock concerts, and for longer periods of time. Walczak, the ACLU attorney, isn't buying the analogy.

"People don't flee the front row of a rock concert. Why would they be fleeing here?" Walczak asked. "Because it's loud, it's painfully loud."

Reasonable Responses to Climate Change

Reasonable Responses to Climate Change

New NCPA Study Examines Policies that Effectively Address Climate Change


Dallas (September 30, 2009) - The cap-and-trade bill that Senators Barbara Boxer and John Kerry are slated to introduce today could cost taxpayers more than $1,761 per family annually and will not reduce global warming temperatures anymore than one-tenth of a degree by 2050, according to a study released today by the National Center for Policy Analysis.
"The bill will do nothing to effectively address global warming, will cause more harm than it prevents, and will impose enormous costs on American families," said H. Sterling Burnett, Senior Fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis and author of the study.
For example, the study concludes that:

• Cap-and-trade would cost an average of $314 billion a year in lost GDP or $9.4 trillion over the period from 2012 to 2035.
• It would increase the cost of residential electricity 31 percent to 50 percent by 2030
• Job losses would total 2.5 million by 2030

"Climate change is mainly projected to add to existing problems, rather than create new ones," Burnett said. "No-regrets policies that provide benefits beyond their effects on climate as well as policies that help us to adapt to future climate change should be implemented."
The new NCPA study examines several policies that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, reduce America's dependence on foreign oil and reduce energy prices for consumers.
These "no-regrets" policies include:

• Eliminating fuel subsidies
• Reducing regulatory barriers to building new nuclear power plants.
• Encouraging breakthroughs in new technology by fostering competition

"Taken together, these policies could do a great deal to minimize the risks of global warming while at the same time promoting economic growth and global development, not to mention providing sustainable financial support for Americans and their families," Burnett said.
To read the full study, "Reasonable Responses to Climate Change," log on to http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/st324.pdf. To arrange an interview with H. Sterling Burnett, contact Leah Gipson.              

TEN FOR '10: WINNING WASHINGTON BY EMPOWERING AMERICANS

From Laura Ingraham TEN FOR '10: WINNING WASHINGTON BY EMPOWERING AMERICANS

1) Taxpayers' Bill of Rights (TABOR). Limit federal spending growth to the percentage in population growth plus the rate of inflation; provide taxpayers the option of filing a post-card sized return using a low, flat tax rate of 15% 2) End Tax-funded abortions. Stop federal payments to Planned Parenthood and prohibit any taxpayer-subsidized health insurance plan from covering abortion 3) Defend American Borders. Complete America's border-protection initiatives using remaining funds from the so-called stimulus bill 4) King Dollar. Preserve a strong dollar so that Americans' savings aren't wiped out by inflation and the U.S. dollar remains the world's reserve currency 5) Empower American Business. Immediately slash corporate tax rates to 15% and scrap the capital-gains tax altogether 6) Defend America. Strengthen America to defend our homeland and fully fund an operational, layered missile-defense system 7) Statism Exit Plan. De-fund czars; immediately cease bailout payments to failed companies; ban future bailouts 8) End Generational Theft. As few believe America's entitlement programs will be able to pay benefits to future generations, provide younger workers the choice of diverting payroll/Social Security taxes into personal retirement accounts 9) Restore America's System of Justice. Introduce penalties for frivolous lawsuits, where those who launch unsuccessful lawsuits are liable for the defendants' legal bills 10) American Energy Independence. All-of-the-Above strategy that embraces alternatives, expands and accelerates exploration and production of oil and natural gas, and jumpstarts dramatic increases in nuclear power Backers/Signatories - Tom Price (R-Ga.), chairman of the Republican Study Committee - Michael Williams, Texas Railroad Commissioner & Republican candidate for Senate - Rep. Jep Hensarling (R-Texas), member of the Republican Study Committee - Rick Crawford, Republican congressional candidate, Arkansas first district - Marco Rubio, Florida Republican senatorial candidate

Who better to bundle

Regulations intended to shed light on bundling by lobbyists are coming up short. According to an Associated Press review published last week, which compared invitations to fund-raisers hosted by lobbyists and campaign finance reports filed with the Federal Election Commission from March 19 through June, lawmakers have yet to disclose funds they raised at 195 events.
Although the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act requiring lawmakers to report cash “bundled” by lobbyists went into effect in March of this year, Oonly about two-dozen lawmakers between then and June have reported funds raised by lobbyists, the AP found, even though the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act requiring lawmakers to report cash “bundled” by lobbyists went into effect in March of this year. What can a lobbyist do to escape disclosure? Don’t touch the money, don’t take credit, raise less than $16,000 (the threshold for reporting, which does not include contributions from the lobbyist and his/her spouse) or work as an in-house lobbyist for a business, union or trade association and have your employer officially sponsor the event. HLOGA was passed in 2007 in response to the Jack Abramoff scandal, but the AP concludes that “the circumstances under which a member of Congress is legally bound to disclose a lobbyist’s fund-raising are so narrow that, had the law been in effect during Abramoff’s lobbying days, it wouldn’t have exposed much, if any, of his congressional fundraising money trail.” The Hill reported a similar story this week.
From The Capital Eye Blog

Dems lied, transparency died

Senate Finance Committee Democrats have rejected a GOP amendment that would have required a health overhaul bill to be available online for 72 hours before the committee votes.
Republicans argued that transparency is an Obama administration goal. They also noted that their constituents are demanding that they read bills before voting.
The Democrats noted that unlike other committees, the Finance Committee works off conceptual language that describes policies — instead of legislative language that ultimately becomes law, and which the GOP amendment would have required.
Democrats accepted an alternate amendment to make conceptual language available online before a vote.
Currently, the only version of Chairman Max Baucus’s proposal we have is a 223-page draft (PDF) that is written in plain English and explains the bill in conceptual terms. Republicans argued that until the bill is written in legislative language it will be impossible for the CBO to provide an accurate cost estimate.
The Bunning ammendment would have required the committee to have the legislative language of the bill, along with the CBO cost estimate, posted on the internet for 72 hours before a vote.
Democrats argued that waiting for the legislative languange to be written, and for the CBO to evaluate it, would needlessly delay the process by weeks.
“Let’s be honest about it, most people don’t read the legislative language,” Sen. John Kerry said.
The Bunning amendment was defeated by a 12 to 11 vote,
with Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln the only Democrat voting in favor.

New CAFE Standards

President Obama’s New CAFE Standards May Cause More Harm Than Good

NCPA Expert Explains New Standards Will Reduce Consumer Choice, Increase Auto Price and Increase Fatalities

Dallas (May 19, 2009) - The Obama Administration's announcement today of new mileage and pollution standards is a disgraceful attempt to court environmental votes by reducing consumer choice, according to H. Sterling Burnett, Senior Fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis. Because the government now has so much control over two of the major companies it can extort the industry into not objecting.

President Obama's tightening of national program for higher Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards is part of his plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change and ease U.S. dependence on oil. These new standards include an increase in fuel efficiency targets to 35.5 miles per gallon for new passenger vehicles and light trucks by 2016, four years earlier than required under the 2007 energy bill.

"People have the choice to purchase fuel efficient cars if they want them," Burnett said.

From the NCPA. read it here

Two women seeking the Republican nomination

WWE Chief Executive Linda McMahon Brings Strong Democratic Ties to Her Attempt to Smackdown Chris Dodd
Published by Michael Beckel on September 16, 2009 6:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
McMahonWWE.jpgLinda McMahon, the chief executive officer of World Wrestling Entertainment, announced today she's seeking the Republican Party's nomination to upset incumbent Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.). (She also announced that she would be resigning from her WWE post to focus on her campaign.)

But McMahon's history is hardly that of a hardcore Republican.

McMahon and husband Vince McMahon, who is the chairman of the WWE, have contributed nearly $90,000 to federal candidates and committees since 1989, the Center for Responsive Politics has found. And of this sum, 51 percent has gone to Democrats and 47 percent has gone to Republicans.
opensecrets

Can you say Rino!!!!!


Jane Norton formally enters Senate race

Saying she had become "more and more alarmed about the direction our nation is headed," Jane Norton, a Republican and former lieutenant governor, formally launched her 2010 campaign for the U.S. Senate today with rallies spanning the state, including one at the downtown Antlers Hilton.

Norton's theme here and at appearances in Denver and Grand Junction was the size and reach of the federal government.

"At every turn, Washington's giant hand seems to be grabbing everything in sight," she said, "seizing control of our car companies, banks, insurance companies, exploding the national debt and chipping away at individual liberty."

She promised to be "a senator who will stand up to big government power grabs."
gazette

Are you crazy? It is broke!!

The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775 - you have had 234 years to get it right; it is broke.
Social Security was established in 1935 - you have had 74 years to get it right; it is broke.
Fannie Mae was established in 1938 - you have had 71 years to get it right; it is broke.
The "War on Poverty" started in 1964 - you have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor"; it hasn't worked and our entire country is broke.
Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965 - you've had 44 years to get it right; they are broke.
Freddie Mac was established in 1970 - you have had 39 years to get it right; it is broke.
Trillions of dollars were spent in the massive political payoffs called TARP, the "Stimulus", the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009... none show any signs of working, although ACORN appears to have found a new victim: the American taxpayer.
And finally, to set a new record:
"Cash for Clunkers" was established in 2009 and went broke in 2009! It took good dependable cars (that were the best some people could afford) and replaced them with high-priced and less-affordable cars, mostly Japanese. A good percentage of the profits went out of the country. And the American taxpayers take the hit for Congress' generosity in burning three billion more of our dollars on failed experiments.
So with a perfect 100% failure! rate and a record that proves that "services" you shove down our throats are failing faster and faster, you want Americans to believe you can be trusted with a government-run health care system?

20% of our entire economy?

With all due respect,

Are you crazy?