About Me

Name: Always To The...
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

John [I'm For The Troops] Kerry

Michael Ramirez - 11/1/06
November 1, 2006
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

If You Want The Country To Go Backward Vote Democrat

From Rushlimbaugh.com


If you want Iraq to fail, if you want the United States to lose another war, then go ahead and elect the Democrats next Tuesday. Go ahead and vote for them. If that's what you want, because that's what you're going to get. If you want amnesty for illegal aliens, vote for Democrats, because that's what you're going to get. You know, illegal immigration remains one of the most impassioned issues out there that the inside the beltway intelligentsia totally misses.

The Republican base is already fit to be tied over the immigration issue. They didn't understand why it was that their president and some senators, Democrats and Republicans in the Senate, wanted to grant amnesty, again, when it's never worked, to as many as 12 to 15 million illegal aliens who they view as taking their jobs, making sure wages stay low in certain job sectors and so forth, they don't understand it, and nothing else matters. We have a lot of single-issue voters in the Republican Party. We would have amnesty today if it weren't for the Republicans in the House who finally, after a long time, late this summer, got some gonads and decided to distance themselves from the White House on this at the time the Senate had passed the bill, it was then time to go to conference committee with the House members. The House members refused to do it. We're not even going to negotiate with you on your bill, there's nothing in it. They did this splitting with the president, they did this for their reelection efforts, they should have done it sooner but at least they did it, but consequences. If you want amnesty for illegal aliens, vote Democrat, because Bush will get it and McCain will get it, the people that have been pushing it, will get what they want. The Democrats will easily ratify the Senate bill on immigration. So if you want that, if you're angry at Republicans for blowing it on immigration, and you want amnesty for all these people, then by all means vote Democrat. And you can kiss the fence goodbye too, if you care about that.

If you care about taxes, if you like the fact that the taxes are low and the fact that the tax cuts have created a surge in new jobs, a surge in revenues to the government which have reduced the deficit and so forth, if you are interested in that, those tax cuts expiring, vote Democrat. If you are of the mind that you don't want any new energy exploration, if you don't want any new discoveries of oil, if you don't want this country to become more energy independent, then by all means vote Democrat because that's what you're going to get. You'll get no energy exploration, you'll get no energy independence, you'll get a bunch of investigations and worthless money spent on alternative fuels that will not ever power this country to the degree that we need to powered. If you want amnesty for illegal aliens, then vote Democrat. If you want your tax cuts sunsetted; if you want no work done on eliminating the inheritance tax, by all means vote Democrats.

Some of you don't want to turn out, some of you Cut-and-Run Conservatives; some of you don't want to vote, express your anger. Just understand there are consequences. Examine those consequences, and if you can live with them, then by all means, if you want to lose in Iraq, you want the US humiliated, you want the war on terror to suffer a great big defeat, if you want to embolden our enemies, if you want to make them feel invincible, by all means, vote Democrat. If you want amnesty for illegals, vote Democrat, you'll get it. You want your tax cuts removed and raised, your taxes, vote Democrat. Those are the consequences that we all face.

Check the record. The last time the Democrats controlled the House, we had income tax increases being proposed and Charlie Rangel's promise to do it again. They expressed a desire for an energy tax increase, the old carbon tax. Bill Clinton did that in 1992 through 1994. Go back and look at it. They cut the military. They did their best to cut intelligence. They're out there doing their best now to see to it that we can't intercept phone calls involving conversations between terrorists planning attacks. If you want to return to the golden years of yesteryear when Democratic ran the show, by all means, vote for them, because there are consequences here.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

They Support The Troops

Watch Kerry on our troops




Watch It Yourself

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Follow The Qur'an

Verse 2:256 of the Qur’an says (in part), “Let there be no compulsion in religion” (it was spoken at an earlier time, when Muhammad did not have the power to force his will on other tribes as he did later).  Muslim apologists in the West have gotten a lot of mileage out of this, claiming that it proves that forced conversions and apostate killings are incompatible with Islam.

But isn’t it interesting that no mainstream Muslim group has stepped forward to condemn the ‘Holy Jihad Brigade’ for forcing two Fox journalists to recite the Shahada (Islamic profession of faith) at gunpoint two months ago?  Some groups did denounc the high-profile kidnapping during the captivity, but none spoke out against the forced conversion - even as video surfaced.

In fact, Muslims have always felt that the end justifies the means.  Islam has a horrible history of killing, raping and enslaving people of other religions until they finally relent under pressure and accept Muhammad.  It’s exactly how the religion spread as successfully as it did.  And apparently even the many Muslims who don’t personally engage in these strong-arm tactics today still prefer not to criticize those who do choose to carry on the tradition.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Everything Was Better When Saddam Was In Power

Behold the Peace of Islam: Picture of the Week
Islam: Changing Lives for the Deader

Musayib mass graves.  Proof that Iraqis were resting in peace before the war.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Be Warned

Every Conservative Who Fails to Vote Is Voting for Liberalism
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Future?

Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

October 30, 2006
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

You Can't Make This Up

Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

October 30, 2006
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Future, Unless

Michael Ramirez - 10/31/06
October 31, 2006
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

To Stop Voter Fraud

What easier way to curtail voter fraud than by requiring adequate voter identification?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Social Security Trust Fund, They're Only IOUs

My last post was about the Social Security Trust Fund myth.  Now I have more to say about this subject.  This information is from the General Accounting Office [GAO] booklet number GAO-01-199SP "Federal Trust and other Earmarked Funds" answers to FAQs.  This booklet is worth reading, it will help you cut through the B.S. about how certain people want to "save" Social Security.  Let me start with how federal trust funds are different from private trust funds. 

In the private sector the named trustee has a fiduciary [holding in trust, requires a person to act soley in the interests of the person he represents] responsibility to manage the assets.  In contrast the federal government does not have a fiduciary responsibility to the trust beneficiaries [us], and it can raise or lower future trust fund collections and payments or change the purposes for which the collections are used by changing existing laws.  Also the Federal Government has custody and control of the existing funds as well as earnings of most federal trust funds. 

Trust fund balances are really bookkeeping credits to the fund with actual cash commingled with other collections, large balances do not affect the government's ability to meet long-term commitments.

Any surpluses resulting are lent to the general fund of the Treasury and the funds are given special nonmarketable Treasury securities in return [even if the surpluses were not invested in Treasury securities, they would be used for other purposes].  These special securities are claims on the Treasury [IOUs] that can be redeemed in the future. 

After 2017 [based on latest Annual Report] cash revenues will be insufficient to pay all program costs and Social Security will have to start redeeming some of its assets to obtain the cash needed to pay benefits.   
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Myth Of The Social Security Trust Fund

The Social Security Trust fund is a myth, so is the fact that you have a "right" to Social Security.  The Supreme Court decided that in the case Fleming v. Nestor case.  The Congress can change the full retirement age, who can get Social Security, tax rate, the "cap" on yearly payment and on and on this can be done at any time. 


The trust fund will keep Social Security solvent-on paper. But it cannot delay the need for tax increases or spending cuts by a day or reduce them by a dollar. The reason: the trust fund holds special-issue government bonds (really just IOUs), and when Social Security redeems them the government will have to raise taxes or cut other spending to produce the needed cash.  As you can see below it is as soon as 2017 when revenues fall below costs.  President Bush wanted to do something about it this year and who stopped him?   All we hear from the Democrats is they want to "protect Social Security from Bush's scheme to privatize it"  don't let them try to tell you things don't get bad until about 2040 as it is now there is only about 11 years before it hits the fan.  Also ask them what they are going to do with the more than $13 trillion in unfunded obligation? 

The 2006 Social Security Trustees Report shows little change in the projected financial status of the Social Security program over last year. The Trustees Report projects that the Social Security Trust Funds will be exhausted in 2040 – one year sooner than last year’s projection. And, as they have done for more than a decade, the Trustees recommend that projected trust fund deficits be addressed in a timely way to allow for gradual changes and advance notice to workers.

In the 2006 Annual Report to Congress, the Trustees announced:

  • The projected point at which tax revenues will fall below program costs comes in 2017 -- the same as the estimate in last year’s report.

  • The projected point at which the Trust Funds will be exhausted comes in 2040 -- one year earlier than the projection in last year’s report.

  • Over the 75-year period, the Trust Funds require additional revenue equivalent to $4.6 trillion in today’s dollars to pay all scheduled benefits. This unfunded obligation is $600 billion higher than the amount estimated last year.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Minneapolis Airport Taxi Flap

NO FARE

06.10.26.NoFare-X.gif

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Muslim-Americans And The Democrat Party

The latest political trend among Muslim-Americans is encouraging one another to vote Democratic, since it is presumed that Democrats will slowly withdraw the American presence from the Middle East.  Indeed, even as early as 2003, there developed a curious symbiotic relationship between the Democratic Party and Sunni insurgents, with the implicit assumption being that the success of one assisted the other.

This is not entirely correct, however, and it may take a Democratic victory in November to jolt the Sunnis into realizing that their best hope for survival in Iraq lies in democratic assimilation rather than armed resistance.  The door is fast closing on a bright future for the country, as the Islamic terrorists are clearly winning the propaganda war and demoralizing the patience of both the Americans and the Iraqi Shias.

If the Sunnis (particularly the majority that is said to support the terrorists) think that the ouster of Coalition troops in Iraq means a return to the good old days of Baathist dictatorship - or, at the very least, something better than the present - then they're in for a very rude awakening.  What will ensue is a true civil war in a new era in which the government trades Western-imposed civil restraints for a quick and brutal victory.

The Shia dictatorship to follow may or may not be as harsh toward the Sunnis as they were toward others in their day.  But by then it will be too late.  The Sunnis will never be able to regain the one brief moment when the opportunity for a fair, healthy and unified Iraq was entirely there for the taking.  They will have squandered their own future by spitefully killing the very people who made such an opportunity possible.

And if they think otherwise, the Sunnis will soon find out that the Democrats do not intend on losing a bit of sleep over it.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Islam And The Human Head

Behold the Peace of Islam: Picture of the Week
Islam: Changing Lives for the Deader

Ever wonder what it is that Islam has against the human head?

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123456789Next »