Socialism

From the Grapevine

At approximately 2:30 pm, September 6, 2012, I entered the Publix store on Main St. in Gainesville, FL to pick up a few items.  I gathered my items and went to the 14 and under register to check-out.  The person in front of me (a white female, approximate age 35-43, fake nails, big braided hairdo, clean clothes, carrying a purse and a plastic drinking cup) put her purchase on the check out surface ONE GRAPE. 

Yes, that is correct ONE GRAPE. The cashier asked if that was all, she replied yes.  The cashier then weighted the GRAPE and told the women the cost was $.02 (TWO CENTS), the women then pulled out her Food Stamp EBT card and swiped it through the credit card machine, requesting $24.00 in cash back.  The cashier asked if she wanted the GRAPE, the woman replied no and the GRAPE was put in the garbage can.  The register recorded the sale as .02, cash back $24.00.  The cashier gave the woman $24.00 and she folded it up, put it in her pocket, and left the store.

As the next person in line I asked the cashier as a tax payer what in the hell just happened here she said she was on the clock and could not comment. I then asked if I had actually seen this person purchase and discard a GRAPE, then get cash back on her Food Stamp EBT card. The cashier responded that it happens all day every day in their store. She also said that if the person buying the GRAPE has it ring up over .02 they get mad and make her reweigh it.

My next comment was to ask the cashier if she planned to vote in November and she said she could hardly wait for 11/6/12 to get here as one tax payer to another.  

How many more of these insane programs can we taxpayers take? Personally, I've had it with ANY politician who doesn't have the intelligence to solve social problems EXCEPT by throwing our tax $$$ at losers and leeches who have zero interest in trying to help themselves.  Arghhhh!!!!  If we don't start fixing things with our votes in November, we can kiss our country goodbye!!  

Vice Presidential Debate II

The Vice Presidential Debate I

Top U.S. Earners Pay Larger Share of Taxes

Liberals should be required to read this TWICE and digest the concept that LOWER TAX RATES result in HIGHER TAX REVENUES to the government and they result in MORE TAXES PAID BY THE RICH. Until they understand this fundamental economic principle they will always rail against conservatives and the rich as evil and selfish...

New book shows U.S. top earners pay larger share of taxes than any other industrialized nation

The Wall Street Journal's Stephen Moore has just come out with a new book titled Who's the Fairest of Them All?: The Truth about Opportunity, Taxes, and Wealth in America and he reveals some interesting information about how much the top ten percent of income earners in the United States pay in federal income taxes as opposed to any other industrialized nation in the world.

According to Moore, these earners pay almost half (45 percent) of the country's total taxes. This conclusion flies in the face of the liberal concept that top earners in the U.S. are not paying their "fair share" in taxes. Moore explains:

"The United States is actually more dependent on rich people to pay taxes than even many of the more socialized economies of Europe. According to the Tax Foundation, the United States gets 45 percent of its total taxes from the top 10 percent of tax filers, whereas the international average in industrialized nations is 32 percent. America’s rich carry a larger share of the tax burden than do the rich in Belgium (25 percent), Germany (31 percent), France (28 percent), and even Sweden (27 percent)."

Moore also delves into what the "47 percent" of America actually pays and receives from the federal government and that the perception that the middle class is shrinking is a myth. In fact, the actual trend has been an upward mobility and a better standard of living for the middle class and lower income earners in the last 25 years. 

The Heritage Foundation has been arguing these facts for years. Consider what happened each time the U.S. reduced the tax rate significantly: 

1920s: The top tax rate fell from 73 percent to 25 percent, yet the rich (in those days, those earning $50,000 and up) went from paying 44.2 percent of the tax burden in 1921 to paying more than 78 percent in 1928. 

1960s: President John F. Kennedy slashed the top tax rate from 91 percent to 70 percent. In the ensuing three years, those making more than $50,000 annually saw their tax payments rise by 57 percent, and their share of the tax burden climbed from 11.6 percent to 15.1 percent.  

1980s: The Reagan years saw the top rate fall from 70 percent in 1980 to 28 percent in 1988. What happened to the rich? The top 1 percent went from shouldering 17.6 percent of the income tax burden in 1981 to paying 27.5 percent of the total in 1988. The top 10 percent saw their share of the burden climb from 48 percent in 1981 to over 57 percent in 1988.

Additionally, more tax revenue went back to the federal government each time the taxes were lowered. So does it really make it sense to strip the upper income earners of their keep? Liberals have yet to answer how that ever improves the lives of the middle class or lower income earners in the long run.

 http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2012/oct/9/picket-new-book-shows-us-top-earners-pay-larger-sh/print/ 

The Dam Letter

SUBJECT: DEQ ... File No.97-59-0023; T11N; R10W, Sec 20; Lycoming County

Dear Mr. DeVries:

It has come to the attention of the Department of Environmental Quality that there has been recent unauthorized activity on the above referenced parcel of property. You have been certified as the legal landowner and/or contractor who did the following unauthorized activity:

Construction and maintenance of two wood debris dams across the outlet stream of Spring Pond.

A permit must be issued prior to the start of this type of activity. A review of the Department's files shows that no permits have been issued Therefore, the Department has determined that this activity is in violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Pennsylvania Compiled Laws, annotated.

The Department has been informed that one or both of the dams partially failed during a recent rain event, causing debris and flooding at downstream locations.. We find that dams of this nature are inherently hazardous and cannot be permitted. The Department therefore orders you to cease and desist all activities at this location, and to restore the stream to a free-flow condition by removing all wood and brush forming the dams from the stream channel. All restoration work shall be completed no later than January 31, 2010.

Please notify this office when the restoration has been completed so that a follow-up site inspection may be scheduled by our staff. Failure to comply with this request or any further unauthorized activity on the site may result in this case being referred for elevated enforcement action..

We anticipate and would appreciate your full cooperation in this matter. Please feel free to contact me at this office if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

David L. Price
District Representative and Water Management Division. 

Re: DEQ File
No.. 97-59-0023; T11N; R10W, Sec. 20; Lycoming County

Dear Mr. Price,

Your certified letter dated 11/17/09 has been handed to me. I am the legal landowner but not the Contractor at 2088 Dagget Lane, Trout Run, Pennsylvania ..

A couple of beavers are in the process of constructing and maintaining two wood 'debris' dams across the outlet stream of my Spring Pond.  While I did not pay for, authorize, nor supervise their dam project, I think they would be highly offended that you call their skillful use of natures building materials 'debris.'

I would like to challenge your department to attempt to emulate their dam project any time and/or any place you choose.  I believe I can safely state there is no way you could ever match their dam skills, their dam resourcefulness, their dam ingenuity, their dam persistence, their dam determination and/or their dam work ethic. 

These are the beavers/contractors you are seeking.  As to your request, I do not think the beavers are aware that they must first fill out a dam permit prior to the start of this type of dam activity.

My first dam question to you is:
(1) Are you trying to discriminate against my Spring Pond Beavers, or
(2) Do you require all beavers throughout this State to conform to said dam request?

If you are not discriminating against these particular beavers, through the Freedom of Information Act, I request completed copies of all those other applicable beaver dam permits that have been issued.  (Perhaps we will see if there really is a dam violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Pennsylvania Compiled Laws, annotated.)

I have several dam concerns.  My first dam concern is, aren't the beavers entitled to legal representation?  The Spring Pond Beavers are financially destitute and are unable to pay for said representation -- so the State will have to provide them with a dam lawyer.

The Department's dam concern that either one or both of the dams failed during a recent rain event, causing flooding, is proof that this is a natural occurrence, which the Department is required to protect. In other words, we should leave the Spring Pond Beavers alone rather than harassing them and calling them dam names.

If you want the damed stream 'restored' to a dam free-flow condition please contact the beavers -- but if you are going to arrest them, they obviously did not pay any attention to your dam letter, they being unable to read English.

In my humble opinion, the Spring Pond Beavers have a right to build their unauthorized dams as long as the sky is blue, the grass is green and water flows downstream.  They have more dam rights than I do to live and enjoy Spring Pond. If the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection lives up to its name, it should protect the natural resources (Beavers) and the environment (Beavers' Dams).

So, as far as the beavers and I are concerned, this dam case can be referred for more elevated enforcement action right now.  Why wait until 1/31/2010?  The Spring Pond Beavers may be under the dam ice by then and there will be no way for you or your dam staff to contact/harass them.

In conclusion, I would like to bring to your attention to a real environmental quality, health, problem in the area.  It is the bears!  Bears are actually defecating in our woods. I definitely believe you should be persecuting the defecating bears and leave the beavers alone.  If you are going to investigate the beaver dam, watch your dam step! The bears are not careful where they dump!

Being unable to comply with your dam request, and being unable to contact you on your dam answering machine, I am sending this response to your dam office.

THANK YOU,

RYAN DEVRIES & THE DAM BEAVERS

TRACING THE VAST UNTRACEABLE DONATIONS OF OBAMA’S DONORGATE

Written by Dagny D'Anconia

Wednesday, 10 October 2012

Even CBS News is now calling it Foreign-Donor-Gate . As Obama's coffers approach the 1 billion dollar mark, the Government Accountability Institute released a report that finally alarmed the mainstream media. Hundreds of millions donated to the Obama campaign may be illegal - but Obama's people are shrugging their shoulders, laughing all the way to the bank.  They consider the foreign donor funds to be untraceable and unknowable. However, what if we knew how to make these suspicious transactions traceable?   Imagine the power of knowing the country, the bank and the details of how the numbers were generated.  The stakes could not be higher. Back in 2008, two-thirds of Obama's fundraising haul during the final phases of his campaign were untraceable .  This election cycle it is much worse:  70% of the donations through Obama.com are from foreign sources , and only 2% have records kept on them.  The vast majority are less than $50 and, as such, no records are required by law to be kept. Not only is Obama's campaign failing to use the 3 digit security code for donations, the Obama donation website, obama.com , has also been set up to allow the internet address of the donator to be spoofed :     "An anonymous tipster mentioned that checking out the source code of the Obama donation website... would reveal some interesting logic. Specifically that IP addresses of the donors can be easily spoofed through a hidden field in the form. The tipster's guess was that the Obama campaign is recording the spoofable IP address... not the real IP address as delivered by the web server.     Put simply, there's no reason to include a hidden form field for IP address. It is there for one reason alone: IP forgery -- forging the computer addresses of donations to disguise their true sources." Furthermore, Obama.com is owned not by the Obama campaign but by Robert Roche , a resident of Shanghai China.  Roche has visited the Obama White House 11 times in the last 4 years and boasts of his special favors from and connections to the Chinese government. Donations this time around are largely under the $50 limit, evading the requirement to save the data on their origin. The sheer quantity of these low-value donations, from untraceable sources, strongly suggests an operation to accumulate campaign cash from illicit sources. Given the false IP addresses, and the use of the lower limit, how can we trace these millions? Fortunately, I have access to a patriotic gentleman who for the last decade has been running credit card companies.  He knows this field inside and out.  According to him:   "Prepaid cards in many countries are as easy to get as cash but that is not what Obama is experiencing.  What they did in my opinion with the raising of $200 million in September 2008 from debit cards was find a friendly offshore bank to issue a prebuilt file of prepaid credit cards to fake names in random amounts under the $200 reporting limit.  No actual cards ever existed just computer files that were merged into a Point of Sale software program and presented for acquisition of the money.  There are plenty of sources out there where $200 million is chicken feed like China, Soros, Russia etc.  The trick is a ‘paper trail' of where the funds originated.  If the allegation is that somehow a million people went out and purchased a million prepaid debit cards and then got on the Obama online system and poured these through to the Obama Campaign coffers - that is pure bull feathers. The key is, the bank or banks that are cooperating in this fraud can easily be traced by the transaction data.  Just a piece of data that shows how much time, seconds or milliseconds spacing you have between the entry of those transactions will tell you if these are legitimate transactions or the product of having run a prebuilt file with many thousands of cards imbedded.  Every transaction inbound and outbound is time stamped.  There is an authorization number associated with that as well. There is no doubt in my mind Obama did this in the 2008 election.  I don't think it should be hard to make a circumstantial case that Obama's support in 2008 was not from his supposed constituents in the USA and in fact it was single donors with massive donations outside the United States electronically generated into files of supposed debit cards.  They are probably sequential or as close as debit cards get.  If you can get any of the full 16 digit numbers we have people who can tell you what country, what bank and what BIN was used to transact the fraud." Thus, if any law enforcement or other security or watchdog entity can get those numbers, we can see where it came from.  China?  Russia?  The Sinaloa drug cartel in Mexico?  We can even identify the bank that performed the fraud.  Imagine the impact this would have on the election if people knew that most of his money was coming from such sources! The 16 digit transaction ID on each transaction can show us where it came from, and using the transaction time stamps, we can determine whether donations were made by real people or an automated system. In 2008, people were concerned about Obama's use of these methods to skirt donation limit laws.  However, after 4 years of watching Obama, we can now see that skirting donation laws was probably the least harmful aspect of his donation fraud.   When we look at the way America has been systematically been weakened militarily, economically, and our allies betrayed, we have to consider this credit card fraud in context. This is a strategy to overwhelm the system to ensure donation laws can not be reasonably enforced. It is a tactic prescribed by Saul Alinsky. Like the Occupy movement or massive voter fraud by ACORN, the goal is to create a tidal wave effect crippling the ability and willingness of authorities to handle criminal misbehavior. We have the crime against America and the culprit.  We know the motive: to "fundamentally transform" the United States, destroying the American system and replacing it with something else. Destruction of the American System is a goal echoed by Socialist groups across the nation for decades. We are only missing the money trail behind the donation fraud that put Obama into power to achieve that clearly stated goal.  Any foreign or domestic enemy could be behind it - or it could be a collaborative effort.  Consider the following cast of suspects: *The Sinaloa drug cartel has received favors from the Obama administration, specifically in the form of the Fast and Furious gunwalker scandal, as well as sabotage of border enforcement. *Many banks have been surviving at the mercy and whim of the Obama administration.  Stimulus money, special interest rates, leaked economic intentions, and the threat of prosecution for perceived crimes or racism all compromise the banks, both here and overseas.  There are also the foreign banks who received American Taxpayer funded bailouts during the first round of stimulus spending.  They too have the means and motive to supply "untraceable" donations. Do you think any bank would complain to the government if there were any problems with deposits to the Obama account?  Furthermore, who is going to prosecute the crooks if Obama wins the next election?  There is no incentive for a bank to blow the whistle on money coming in from fraudulent sources when the business can come under attack by the heavy hand of a vengeful Administration. *SEIU employees of restaurants etc. have access to credit card numbers.  These could be used by their union. Similarly, organizations like ACORN's subsidiary "Project Vote" have been intimately associated with the Obama machine and could be involved with supplying credit card and debit card files .            *Islamists and their affiliated terrorist organizations can donate through this unsecured system.  This could help explain the Obama administration's war on the Catholic Church and Christianity in general.  It may also explain his support for the Muslim Brotherhood and the numerous prominently placed Obama Administration officials with close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. *Wealthy Middle Eastern backers could easily donate to Obama.  Could this help explain Obama's insane war on domestic energy sources, including the vetoing of the Keystone Pipeline?  Does this also explain Obama's bowing to Middle Eastern potentates and groveling speeches of apology in the Middle East? *Adversary nations, such as Russia, Iran, North Korea, and China all have the incentive to keep Obama in charge.  Not only has Obama weakened the American economy, he has also damaged our military in countless ways including its openly gay policy, cutting funding, putting American soldiers in unwinnable situations, and withdrawing from secured territory.  These adversary nations have clear incentives and could easily arrange for donations to Obama.  Any military adversary would want Obama in charge. Adversary nations also harbor the criminal hackers who are part of a very mature and multi-billion dollar industry that reaches around the world.  Chinese hackers?  Russian mafia or FSB?   Rouge nation military such as Iran or North Korea?  All the above would gladly take part in a chance to help Obama get elected and reelected.  There is an active market in stolen credit card numbers, many without the 3 digit security code, the address, or the name of the owner.  They too could be put to use through a donation to Obama. See how this makes more sense in context of the Obama credit card fraud?  He needed them to get elected and now he needs them to get re-elected. Our patriotic expert in credit card systems adds:   "No question about it being fraud in my opinion with Roche and a bank in China involved.  The whole scheme could take place in one room and never involve a real card.  A stolen card used to make a donation would never be repaid because of the jurisdiction.  The cardholder or the American Bank would simply lose that money. If they are allowed to accept credit or debit cards, the acquiring account should be here in the United States only so we have control over the process and are able to investigate any suspected wrongdoing.  Outside the United States and especially in China investigation would be impossible.  The Chinese are buying themselves a President but then they probably already own what shares are not taken by the Moslem Brotherhood." Will we demand the data that can show where the money came from?  Or will we go on allowing our country to be purchased at the ballot box once again?  We know where that road leads. Dagny