545 PEOPLE
By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget.. The president does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason.. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red ..
If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.
They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.
Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.
We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.
What you do with this article now that you have read it.......... Is up to you.
This might be funny if it weren't so darned true.
Be sure to read all the way to the end:
Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table
At which he's fed.
Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.
Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for peanuts
Anyway!
Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.
Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.
Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.
Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his ass.
Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.
Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid.
Put these words
Upon his tomb,
Taxes drove me
to my doom...'
When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.
Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge T ax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Sales Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Ser vice FeeTax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge=2 0Tax
Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY? Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids..
What in the hell happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'
And I still have to 'press 1' for English!?
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Pointy Icicles impaling athletes
Apparently there are Olympic Games going on in Vancouver. Hadn’t really noticed since I actually focus on more relevant news.
Don’t get me wrong, I am a sports buff and I do follow football (‘soccer’ for in-bread Americans) and a couple of other activities, but the Olympic Games never really did it for me. The main reason is that they seem to incorporate “sports” like synchronized swimming and short track speed skating. And when they start to talk about adding Chess and other games it’s not even amusing anymore.
Why not tic-tac-to? How about winning an Olympic medal in jumping on one foot?
If there were sports like ‘ice-pole dancing’, ‘naked snow-wrestling’ or “impaling other athletes with icicles’ I would be the first to watch, but the current array of sports seldom does it for me.
Oh, and the horrific opening ceremonies…
They always need to bring in some mongoloid to (try to) run with the torch, and they always make it sooo bloody interesting to see who’s the final person that will light the fire. Yawn…
Every time I’ve been stupid enough to watch an opening ceremony in the past I’ve felt the urge to bring out the chainsaw and run through the lines of contestants. Let’s see how they try to run and throw things without legs and arms.
And the national feeling we’re supposed to have I find despicable. It’s the individuals that win or lose not a country. It should be about displaying accuracy, skills and strengths in contests with others, but it’s not. Instead we count national medals and it’s all about “us” against “them”. “We” are the ones that have won, not that particular athlete.
Well, you can still get caught up in the hype sometimes, but generally speaking it’s just boring.
So why do I write about it you may ask? Well, I’m bored and watching the spectacle right now and apparently Canada is leading over Norway in hockey with 6-0, and it is a re-run (Canada won with 8-0). How interesting…
Don’t get me wrong, I am a sports buff and I do follow football (‘soccer’ for in-bread Americans) and a couple of other activities, but the Olympic Games never really did it for me. The main reason is that they seem to incorporate “sports” like synchronized swimming and short track speed skating. And when they start to talk about adding Chess and other games it’s not even amusing anymore.
Why not tic-tac-to? How about winning an Olympic medal in jumping on one foot?
If there were sports like ‘ice-pole dancing’, ‘naked snow-wrestling’ or “impaling other athletes with icicles’ I would be the first to watch, but the current array of sports seldom does it for me.
Oh, and the horrific opening ceremonies…
They always need to bring in some mongoloid to (try to) run with the torch, and they always make it sooo bloody interesting to see who’s the final person that will light the fire. Yawn…
Every time I’ve been stupid enough to watch an opening ceremony in the past I’ve felt the urge to bring out the chainsaw and run through the lines of contestants. Let’s see how they try to run and throw things without legs and arms.
And the national feeling we’re supposed to have I find despicable. It’s the individuals that win or lose not a country. It should be about displaying accuracy, skills and strengths in contests with others, but it’s not. Instead we count national medals and it’s all about “us” against “them”. “We” are the ones that have won, not that particular athlete.
Well, you can still get caught up in the hype sometimes, but generally speaking it’s just boring.
So why do I write about it you may ask? Well, I’m bored and watching the spectacle right now and apparently Canada is leading over Norway in hockey with 6-0, and it is a re-run (Canada won with 8-0). How interesting…
The Palin syndrome
The female that most within European media think is (or rather are lying about) heading the Tea Party movement, Sarah Palin, have become a tad upset. Apparently the cartoon show of Family Guy had an episode of the animation featured Chris - the Griffin family's son - bringing home a girlfriend with Down's syndrome.
When quizzed by his parents about her family, she said that her mother used to be Alaskan governor.
This is not really accurate since the Palin who actually has the disease is one of the sons.
I’m one of those people that think that anything goes comes to jokes and humor, and this is no exception. Also I believe that reacting to this publically will only give higher ratings to the show as only consequence, so what’s the point of being upset?
Besides, will this not be a positive thing for Sarah comes to her political agenda? Of course it will. It’s not only the Gorgon of UK that can use his children’s misfortunes to win votes.
When quizzed by his parents about her family, she said that her mother used to be Alaskan governor.
This is not really accurate since the Palin who actually has the disease is one of the sons.
I’m one of those people that think that anything goes comes to jokes and humor, and this is no exception. Also I believe that reacting to this publically will only give higher ratings to the show as only consequence, so what’s the point of being upset?
Besides, will this not be a positive thing for Sarah comes to her political agenda? Of course it will. It’s not only the Gorgon of UK that can use his children’s misfortunes to win votes.
And so the story continues…
The Finance Mentalist of Sweden has solemnly declared that economic growth will go up during 2010. Maybe it will, measured in GDP, but in reality? And what will happen to Swedish GDP, as well as many other countries’, when that depression we’re in continues and worsens during the coming years?
But we can probably rest assured. When the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda and our bellowed Mentalists’ says something, who can argue?
But we can probably rest assured. When the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda and our bellowed Mentalists’ says something, who can argue?
The plan to silence dissent
For a vile and repugnant plan to work, the planers need to make sure to re-write any oppositional thought, cast it around and make it into something it’s not in order to attack it. This is a very common way of handling dissidents and free thinking individuals.
The problem with modern day society was, in the eyes of the powers that be, and before the age of internet, competition among media and journalists. As long as reporters fought over stories and we had a vide variety of papers with many different owners the elitist structure had somewhat of a problem. How could any politician lie and get away with it if journalists were lurking around every corner looking to break any juicy story?
For a brief moment in human history, the media actually did their job. Not always of course, and they could be manipulated or silenced in different ways, but even within totalitarian regimes there was, and still is, oppositional journalists whom risked their lives to tell the truth. Silently, and for no apparent reason this has changed.
Media today isn’t an auditor of government, they aren’t checking the facts or looking behind the curtain, and worse still, most of the time they seem to be in cahoots with those in power despite not being bribed or directly controlled. How did this happen?
Lefties would most likely argue that amassing of ownership in fewer hands with oligarchs directly owning or indirectly having great influence is the main problem. And I do admit, this is a problem, especially since many of those oligarchs goes to bed with other elitists daily and the fact that media moguls make a very important contribution to the enemy class.
But that’s not it, such power accumulation may hold a potential problem, but in a world with competition and freedom of speech existing, it wouldn’t matter, if there was a story it would come out and if one journalist wouldn’t write about something because of fear of getting fired, there would always be someone else that would. And if all else fails, people or enterprising entrepreneurs could always start their own paper or news station. But this is a situation that simply will not do for those in charge so in steps government and presto, all of a sudden such outs and potential for alternatives evaporate.
You see government has had a plan from the very start. Not really a conspiratorial thought-out plan, and for the most part the intent wasn’t what we actually got, but as always when government intervene the end result becomes worse or the complete opposite of what was initially intended.
One of the first things that happened was that journalists needed to get a specific education. If they didn’t go to government owned or subsidized schools with curriculums formed by state bureaucrats, it became very hard to get a job as truth-seeker. Well, you could still be famous or rich and they would put you on and let you tell a story, but otherwise, to become an actual journalist it wasn’t enough to have curious mind and wanting to investigate injustice of the world anymore, no, you also needed to first conform to a certain form of higher schooling.
The government of course claimed this was a good thing; it made journalists better educated which in turn would increase the quality. And journalist-unions agreed.
Another thing that happened early on was that government started to subsidize media or give them money so freedom of speech could be withheld with lesser thought on making a profit. Again it backfired.
I do actually believe that most politicians wanting this and still arguing for it, has good at heart. But as the case always is when you put the best of use of the state violence-monopoly, the intent doesn’t matter; the end-result will always worsen any situation.
You see, when a company suddenly gets ‘free’ money to do what they always done, they incorporate this money unto their books. Over time it becomes a part of the profit which makes them less inclined to make additional effort. In many countries (like Sweden) the government even gave more money to some within media then to others. Competition? Riiiight…
Then came a death-sentence for many unbelievers when government imposed aimed taxation. Through VAT-taxes or certain fees to be paid it became almost impossible for any potentially new paper or media-outlet to fight its way into the market. Most government even directly controls who can start and send TV and radio.
Over time the regulations, the taxes and the control functions mentioned (and some others) created a situation whereas journalists became partly dependent on the state, but even worse, became lazy. Today almost all reporting comes to us from a third of fourth (or more) steps away from the initial finding.
It goes something like this.
A reporter gets hold of a story; he can have got it from some government, from a big business or through his own investigation. The journalist in question then sells the story to routers or any other worldwide agency, and then all others buys that story, translate it and print it. No-one checks the facts, no-one argues against the initial report. If the story is big enough papers and such might send out their own people to built upon it and then they may check everything but since they’ve already said ‘A’, they cannot really say ‘B’ and certainly not ‘C’ because that would undermine their own initial reporting.
So whenever you read something or watch the news, it comes down to you from several steps back, often translated one or two times in the process. With this in mind do you really think what you see and read always is the truth?
This far you probably agree with me. Whatever the color of your politics may be, this is facts and as such cannot really be ignored.
But wait, there’s more.
You see journalists also have a tendency to sleep with those in power. More often than you think, quite literarily ‘sleep with’. Marriage between a politician and a news-anchor isn’t that uncommon, and since many papers have a political agenda ties between the powers tightens even further. And even those that don’t marry within the elitist structure are very dependent on “sources” and “whistleblowers” inside the sphere.
It is here that Internet comes into play.
The internet has blown all this away. Suddenly it doesn’t matter if you’re educated or how much money you get from government, you can still reach a worldwide audience. Anyone can be a journalist, anyone can find out the truth by cross-checking facts or talking with nearby spectators directly online instead of waiting for the next day paper edition.
Internet revolutionized our entire way of life and this is certainly true comes to information. Internet isn’t about terrorists sending emails back and forth (which they never do) and it isn’t about pedophiles picking up kids left unsupervised, it’s about the free flow of information. As such nothing in our entire history comes close to internet in importance.
You can read about a story from different angles, double-check it, read others opinions of it and make up your own mind hours, sometimes even days, before it reaches mainstream media. In effect turning the old media structure into yet another spectator needing to react.
Over time this has developed and today all people growing up with the free flow of information can quite easily see through much of the elitist agenda. I would even argue that we don’t need schools anymore. Why would we? Everything exists online, and if you have an interest in a certain topic you can read until your eyes bleed and consequently learn more than any school could ever teach you.
In the eyes of the righteous this is a problem.
How can you persuade people about the bible story when anyone can go online and read about how Sumerians’ told it first and how the church meeting in Nicea voted (!) on what story to tell and not to tell? How can you convince citizens about how scary a flu is when anyone with an hour over can check statistics and facts that makes them ignore the scare as well as the vaccine? Is it even possible to hide away a scandal today? And when anyone can read an article and then look up who the writer is and find out that that person actually stand to gain power or wealth if people listen to that story, will that not put a dent in the agenda?
So again government needs to regulate, control, tax and monitor what’s going on.
We cannot have people roaming around finding out things without first having an agency check how relevant the facts actually are.
And aren’t there pedophiles on Facebook? Didn’t some anarchist send an email on how to make a bomb? Didn’t grandma read about Hitler’s sexy wife? And how about those kids downloading porn eh? Certainly we need departments checking this.
And those pesky bloggers, how dare they write about the latest scandal mainstream media is ignoring!?
If you listen to politicians and most of the mainstream and old media; the best and brightest invention of human history is a playground for child-molesters, terrorists, political fridge groups and illegal file-shares. The shining hope of freedom and education has been twisted around into something evil the elitists can fight.
In my eyes this is a very dangerous situation and if this way of silencing any dissent is allowed to continue, and if we let this beacon of light end up in the hands of the enemy class, well then we can say goodbye to democracy.
Internet is freedoms last stand, and I hope more of you out there realize this before it is too late.
The problem with modern day society was, in the eyes of the powers that be, and before the age of internet, competition among media and journalists. As long as reporters fought over stories and we had a vide variety of papers with many different owners the elitist structure had somewhat of a problem. How could any politician lie and get away with it if journalists were lurking around every corner looking to break any juicy story?
For a brief moment in human history, the media actually did their job. Not always of course, and they could be manipulated or silenced in different ways, but even within totalitarian regimes there was, and still is, oppositional journalists whom risked their lives to tell the truth. Silently, and for no apparent reason this has changed.
Media today isn’t an auditor of government, they aren’t checking the facts or looking behind the curtain, and worse still, most of the time they seem to be in cahoots with those in power despite not being bribed or directly controlled. How did this happen?
Lefties would most likely argue that amassing of ownership in fewer hands with oligarchs directly owning or indirectly having great influence is the main problem. And I do admit, this is a problem, especially since many of those oligarchs goes to bed with other elitists daily and the fact that media moguls make a very important contribution to the enemy class.
But that’s not it, such power accumulation may hold a potential problem, but in a world with competition and freedom of speech existing, it wouldn’t matter, if there was a story it would come out and if one journalist wouldn’t write about something because of fear of getting fired, there would always be someone else that would. And if all else fails, people or enterprising entrepreneurs could always start their own paper or news station. But this is a situation that simply will not do for those in charge so in steps government and presto, all of a sudden such outs and potential for alternatives evaporate.
You see government has had a plan from the very start. Not really a conspiratorial thought-out plan, and for the most part the intent wasn’t what we actually got, but as always when government intervene the end result becomes worse or the complete opposite of what was initially intended.
One of the first things that happened was that journalists needed to get a specific education. If they didn’t go to government owned or subsidized schools with curriculums formed by state bureaucrats, it became very hard to get a job as truth-seeker. Well, you could still be famous or rich and they would put you on and let you tell a story, but otherwise, to become an actual journalist it wasn’t enough to have curious mind and wanting to investigate injustice of the world anymore, no, you also needed to first conform to a certain form of higher schooling.
The government of course claimed this was a good thing; it made journalists better educated which in turn would increase the quality. And journalist-unions agreed.
Another thing that happened early on was that government started to subsidize media or give them money so freedom of speech could be withheld with lesser thought on making a profit. Again it backfired.
I do actually believe that most politicians wanting this and still arguing for it, has good at heart. But as the case always is when you put the best of use of the state violence-monopoly, the intent doesn’t matter; the end-result will always worsen any situation.
You see, when a company suddenly gets ‘free’ money to do what they always done, they incorporate this money unto their books. Over time it becomes a part of the profit which makes them less inclined to make additional effort. In many countries (like Sweden) the government even gave more money to some within media then to others. Competition? Riiiight…
Then came a death-sentence for many unbelievers when government imposed aimed taxation. Through VAT-taxes or certain fees to be paid it became almost impossible for any potentially new paper or media-outlet to fight its way into the market. Most government even directly controls who can start and send TV and radio.
Over time the regulations, the taxes and the control functions mentioned (and some others) created a situation whereas journalists became partly dependent on the state, but even worse, became lazy. Today almost all reporting comes to us from a third of fourth (or more) steps away from the initial finding.
It goes something like this.
A reporter gets hold of a story; he can have got it from some government, from a big business or through his own investigation. The journalist in question then sells the story to routers or any other worldwide agency, and then all others buys that story, translate it and print it. No-one checks the facts, no-one argues against the initial report. If the story is big enough papers and such might send out their own people to built upon it and then they may check everything but since they’ve already said ‘A’, they cannot really say ‘B’ and certainly not ‘C’ because that would undermine their own initial reporting.
So whenever you read something or watch the news, it comes down to you from several steps back, often translated one or two times in the process. With this in mind do you really think what you see and read always is the truth?
This far you probably agree with me. Whatever the color of your politics may be, this is facts and as such cannot really be ignored.
But wait, there’s more.
You see journalists also have a tendency to sleep with those in power. More often than you think, quite literarily ‘sleep with’. Marriage between a politician and a news-anchor isn’t that uncommon, and since many papers have a political agenda ties between the powers tightens even further. And even those that don’t marry within the elitist structure are very dependent on “sources” and “whistleblowers” inside the sphere.
It is here that Internet comes into play.
The internet has blown all this away. Suddenly it doesn’t matter if you’re educated or how much money you get from government, you can still reach a worldwide audience. Anyone can be a journalist, anyone can find out the truth by cross-checking facts or talking with nearby spectators directly online instead of waiting for the next day paper edition.
Internet revolutionized our entire way of life and this is certainly true comes to information. Internet isn’t about terrorists sending emails back and forth (which they never do) and it isn’t about pedophiles picking up kids left unsupervised, it’s about the free flow of information. As such nothing in our entire history comes close to internet in importance.
You can read about a story from different angles, double-check it, read others opinions of it and make up your own mind hours, sometimes even days, before it reaches mainstream media. In effect turning the old media structure into yet another spectator needing to react.
Over time this has developed and today all people growing up with the free flow of information can quite easily see through much of the elitist agenda. I would even argue that we don’t need schools anymore. Why would we? Everything exists online, and if you have an interest in a certain topic you can read until your eyes bleed and consequently learn more than any school could ever teach you.
In the eyes of the righteous this is a problem.
How can you persuade people about the bible story when anyone can go online and read about how Sumerians’ told it first and how the church meeting in Nicea voted (!) on what story to tell and not to tell? How can you convince citizens about how scary a flu is when anyone with an hour over can check statistics and facts that makes them ignore the scare as well as the vaccine? Is it even possible to hide away a scandal today? And when anyone can read an article and then look up who the writer is and find out that that person actually stand to gain power or wealth if people listen to that story, will that not put a dent in the agenda?
So again government needs to regulate, control, tax and monitor what’s going on.
We cannot have people roaming around finding out things without first having an agency check how relevant the facts actually are.
And aren’t there pedophiles on Facebook? Didn’t some anarchist send an email on how to make a bomb? Didn’t grandma read about Hitler’s sexy wife? And how about those kids downloading porn eh? Certainly we need departments checking this.
And those pesky bloggers, how dare they write about the latest scandal mainstream media is ignoring!?
If you listen to politicians and most of the mainstream and old media; the best and brightest invention of human history is a playground for child-molesters, terrorists, political fridge groups and illegal file-shares. The shining hope of freedom and education has been twisted around into something evil the elitists can fight.
In my eyes this is a very dangerous situation and if this way of silencing any dissent is allowed to continue, and if we let this beacon of light end up in the hands of the enemy class, well then we can say goodbye to democracy.
Internet is freedoms last stand, and I hope more of you out there realize this before it is too late.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)