Doin' it the Chicago Way !!! Bread winner with your tax dollars - and, it's getting worse!!! Bread Winner.... = Bread Winner...Making Babies! Doctor's Commentary About a Young Mother of Eight on Welfare Who Said That She Is the Family Breadwinner-Confirmed Authorship! |
Summary of the eRumor: This is a forwarded commentary by a urologist named Sebastian J. Ciancio, M.D about a woman in her twenties who he says is having babies just to be supported by the welfare system. The mother already has seven children who have been released to the custody of their grandmother and the doctor says the Department of Child and Family Services in Illinois is paying the family $1500 per child plus groceries. |
The Truth: Dr. Sebastian J. Ciancio, of Danville, Illinois, told TruthOrFiction.Com that he is the author of this commentary about a conversation that he had with an emergency room physician. He emailed his commentary syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh and a few friends. Soon afterwards his commentary went viral on the World Wide Web. Dr. Ciancio also told us that several unauthorized versions of his email have been circulating the Internet that have included photos and might have been modified by others. Here is the Dr. Ciancio's letter:Dear Mr. Limbaugh, I was speaking to an emergency room physician this morning. He told me that a woman in her 20's came to the ER with her 8th pregnancy. She stated "my momma told me that I am the breadwinner for the family." He asked her to explain. She said that she can make babies and babies get money for the family. The scam goes like this: The grandma calls the Department of Children and Family Services and states that the unemployed daughter is not capable of caring for these children. DCFS agrees and states that the child or children will need to go to foster care. The grandma then volunteers to be the foster parent, and thus receives a check for $1500 per child per month in Illinois. Total yearly income: $144,000 tax-free, not to mention free healthcare (Medicaid) plus a monthly "Link" card entitling her to free groceries, etc, and a voucher for 250 free cell phone minutes per month. This does not even include WIC and other welfare programs. Indeed, grandma was correct in that her fertile daughter is the "breadwinner" in the family. I hope you share this story with your listeners so that they know how the ruling class spends their tax dollars. Also, many thanks for the fine service you provide in educating people about the merits of conservative thinking. Cheers, Sebastian J. Ciancio, M.D. Urologist, Danville Polyclinic, LTD. The Staff: This has been going around the net and I located the direct comment from the doctor that had this happen to him. |
Monday, January 24, 2011
WELFARE WORKS
Krauthammer Speaks
Krauthammer Dismembers Obamacare's Promised Deficit 'Reduction'
Sunday, January 23, 2011 07:39 PM
One of the frequent Democratic defenses against the GOP-led effort at repealing the massive healthcare law is that it actually would increase the deficit, not reduce it.
It is an argument that has been backed by the Congressional Budget Office and parroted by the mainstream media with surprisingly little detailed analysis: that President Barack Obama’s signature legislative effort manages to cut the deficit while providing healthcare for everyone. Who could argue with that?
But on Sunday, conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer took a good look at the numbers and found them laughable.
In a column in The Washington Post, Krauthammer asked, “Suppose someone — say, the president of United States — proposed the following: We are drowning in debt. More than $14 trillion right now. I've got a great idea for deficit reduction. It will yield a savings of $230 billion over the next 10 years: We increase spending by $540 billion while we increase taxes by $770 billion.
“He'd be laughed out of town. And yet, this is precisely what the Democrats are claiming as a virtue of Obamacare. During the debate over Republican attempts to repeal it, one of the Democrats' major talking points has been that Obamacare reduces the deficit — and therefore repeal raises it — by $230 billion. Why, the Congressional Budget Office says exactly that.”
As Krauthammer points out, this boils down to a radical increase in spending, topped by an even more radical increase in taxes. Using that logic, Democrats trumpet a net deficit reduction.
Like other examples of smoke-and-mirrors spending projections, the Obamacare bill was “gamed to produce a favorable CBO number.”
How? The entitlement it creates — government-subsidized health insurance for 32 million Americans — doesn't kick in until 2014. That means that any projection for this decade would cover only six years of expenditures but capture 10 years of revenue. “With 10 years of money inflow vs. six years of outflow, the result is a positive — i.e., deficit-reducing — number. Surprise,” Krauthammer points out.
Krauthammer also notes that Obamacare actually creates two new entitlements that will cost Americans for decades to come if the law isn’t repealed. It creates long-term care insurance that, with an aging population, “promises to be the biggest budget buster in the history of the welfare state.”
But how could such a costly program actually reduce the deficit over the next 10 years, as the CBO maintains?
The answer is that by collecting premiums now, and paying out no benefits for the first 10 years, you end up with a savings. A surplus.
Krauthammer quotes former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin and scholars Joseph Antos and James Capretta: "Only in Washington could the creation of a reckless entitlement program be used as 'offset' to grease the way for another entitlement."
“That a health-care reform law of such enormous size and consequence, revolutionizing one-sixth of the U.S. economy, could be sold on such flimflammery is astonishing, even by Washington standards. What should Republicans do?
“Make the case. Explain the phony numbers, boring as the exercise may be. Better still, hold hearings and let the CBO director, whose integrity is beyond reproach, explain the numbers himself.”
But he adds, “This does not absolve the Republicans from producing a health-care replacement. They will and should be judged by how well their alternative addresses the needs of the uninsured and the anxieties of the currently insured. But amending an insanely complicated, contradictory, incoherent and arbitrary 2,000-page bill that will generate tens of thousands of pages of regulations is a complete non-starter. Everything begins with repeal.”
© Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Monday, December 13, 2010
If there are any doubts in your mind as to why the country is going broke then read this article
Ethanol Subsidies: $10 A Gallon And $14 Million Per Job Created
Corn is unloaded to be processed at an ethanol plant in Coon Rapids, Iowa. The Senate version of the $858 billion tax bill unveiled late would extend... View Enlarged Image
Here's the bottom line for the ethanol tax credits additive to the White House-GOP tax compromise:
• $6 billion in subsidies for 2011.
• $10 per extra gallon of ethanol.
• $14 million per extra job.
• $1.2 billion to attract one extra Senate vote.
In a season of giving in Washington, the ethanol lobby may come away with even more than it hoped for and its ardent defenders sought.
The Senate version of the $858 billion tax bill unveiled late Thursday — just a week after Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., proposed extending the ethanol tax credit at a reduced 36 cents a gallon — would keep the current 45-cent credit.
The Renewable Fuels Association had praised the Baucus approach for "recognizing the importance of this investment and providing some market stability as good faith efforts to responsibly reform ethanol tax policy."
That concession came after a bipartisan group of 17 senators led by Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., penned a letter arguing that ethanol subsidies are "fiscally irresponsible and environmentally unwise."
It also followed former Vice President Al Gore's recent reversal of his long backing of corn ethanol. Declaring the subsidies bad policy, Gore admitted that his presidential ambitions had skewed his motivations and had made him feel a "certain fondness for the farmers in the state of Iowa."
Nevertheless, thanks to 11th-hour horse-trading that restored the full 45-cent credit, the tax bill may be able to count on one extra vote to clear the Senate's 60-vote hurdle on Monday: Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin.
"The only way this (ethanol deal) gets done is by tucking it into something big so people can't see it," said Franz Matzner, climate legislative director at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
He notes that "70 cents of every renewable energy dollar" appropriated by Congress go to corn ethanol, an alternative fuel with "questionable benefits."
Despite the latest victory for the industry, Matzner believes the politics are shifting against it, noting that until recently, the ethanol lobby had been seeking a five-year extension of the tax credit worth $31 billion.
Extending ethanol subsidies at a cost of $6 billion for one year would result in an extra 600 million gallons, putting the subsidy at $10 per incremental gallon, according to recent projections from Iowa State University's Center for Agricultural and Rural Development.
$6 Bil For 420 Jobs
Center director Bruce Babcock said in an e-mail that each 100 million gallons of ethanol creates 70 jobs. Thus, 600 million gallons would result in 420 jobs, or about $14 million per job.
Feinstein and Kyl highlighted this finding in their letter. They also note that ethanol may be the only product that benefits from all three forms of government support: subsidies, tariffs to protect it from competition, and mandates that require its use.
In addition to a 45-cents-a-gallon ethanol tax credit, there is a 54-cents-a-gallon import tariff on sugar-based ethanol and a mandate that oil companies use 12.6 billion gallons of ethanol in their fuel supply in 2011.
If the tax credit and tariff were eliminated, Babcock estimates the mandate would limit any reduction in out put to 600 million barrels of ethanol.
If the mandate were also suspended, that would lower ethanol production by 1.7 billion barrels, costing
about 1,200 jobs. Meanwhile, corn prices would drop from $5.21 to $3.84 per bushel, at a time when food prices have been on the rise.
Cornell University agricultural economist and Cato Institute scholar Harry de Gorter contends that while ethanol displaces some demand for oil, the resulting drop in oil prices pulls back much of that demand.
Using Babcock's figure of $10 per incremental gallon of ethanol, which de Gorter believes is understated; he puts the subsidy cost per displaced gallon of gas at $30.
Feinstein and Kyl also highlighted the 54-cent tariff on sugar-based ethanol, which is more environmentally friendly the corn-based variety. Because the tariff is greater than the 45-cent credit it is designed to offset, it "puts imported ethanol at a competitive disadvantage against imported oil," they wrote.
The Editor: The congress still doesn't get it after the last election. Earmarks (pork) has been added to the bill to maintain the Bush tax rates. If any republican votes for more pork barrel spending, 2012 is coming and vote them out also. Remember, it just isn't the democrats that have buried our country in debt but republicans also. The will stop or we will see a third party in 2012 that will have the countries best interest at their center, not the pork their elected representative can bring home.
Saturday, December 4, 2010
New Scanners - Do You Think Muslims Would Complain?
The Israelis are developing an airport security device that
Eliminates the privacy concerns that come with full-body scanners at
the airports. It's a booth you can step into that will not X-ray you,
but will detonate any explosive device you may have on you. They see
this as a win-win for everyone, with none of this crap about racial
profiling. It also would eliminate the costs of a long and expensive
trial. Justice would be swift. Case closed!
You're in the airport terminal and you hear a muffled explosion.
Shortly thereafter an announcement comes over the PA system . . .
"Attention standby passengers - we now have a seat available on
Flight number 234. Shalom!"
Hats off to the Israelis!!!!
Eliminates the privacy concerns that come with full-body scanners at
the airports. It's a booth you can step into that will not X-ray you,
but will detonate any explosive device you may have on you. They see
this as a win-win for everyone, with none of this crap about racial
profiling. It also would eliminate the costs of a long and expensive
trial. Justice would be swift. Case closed!
You're in the airport terminal and you hear a muffled explosion.
Shortly thereafter an announcement comes over the PA system . . .
"Attention standby passengers - we now have a seat available on
Flight number 234. Shalom!"
Hats off to the Israelis!!!!
=
Only Obama Would Do This
SCAREY!!!
Here They Come...this will make your day!
|
Friday, November 19, 2010
It's about time the media opened their eyes!
| If not us...who? If not now...when? Ronald Reagan This is from the Wall Street Journal which makes it even more interesting. They were once in his camp! Wall Street Journal Sizes up Obama A "deadly" article regarding Obama, at the Wall Street Journal, which today is the most widely circulated newspaper in America .. Article from the Wall Street Journal - by Eddie Sessions: "I have this theory about Barack Obama. I think he's led a kind of make-believe life in which money was provided and doors were opened because at some point early on somebody or some group took a look at this tall, good looking, half-white, half-black, young man with an exotic African/Muslim name and concluded he could be guided toward a life in politics where his facile speaking skills could even put him in the White House. In a very real way, he has been a young man in a very big hurry. Who else do you know has written two memoirs before the age of 45? "Dreams of My Father" was published in 1995 when he was only 34 years old. The "Audacity of Hope" followed in 2006. If, indeed, he did write them himself. There are some who think that his mentor and friend, Bill Ayers, a man who calls himself a "communist with a small 'c'" was the real author. His political skills consisted of rarely voting on anything that might be deemed controversial. He went from a legislator in the Illinois legislature to the Senator from that state because he had the good fortune of having Mayor Daley's formidable political machine at his disposal. He was in the U.S. Senate so briefly that his bid for the presidency was either an act of astonishing self-confidence or part of some greater game plan that had been determined before he first stepped foot in the Capital. How, many must wonder, was he selected to be a 2004 keynote speaker at the Democrat convention that nominated John Kerry when virtually no one had ever even heard of him before? He outmaneuvered Hillary Clinton in primaries. He took Iowa by storm. A charming young man, an anomaly in the state with a very small black population, he oozed "cool" in a place where agriculture was the antithesis of cool. He dazzled the locals. And he had an army of volunteers drawn to a charisma that hid any real substance. And then he had the great good fortune of having the Republicans select one of the most inept candidates for the presidency since Bob Dole. And then John McCain did something crazy. He picked Sarah Palin, an unknown female governor from the very distant state of Alaska . It was a ticket that was reminiscent of 1984's Walter Mondale and Geraldine Ferraro and they went down to defeat. The mainstream political media fell in love with him. It was a schoolgirl crush with febrile commentators like Chris Mathews swooning then and now over the man. The venom directed against McCain and, in particular, Palin, was extraordinary. Now, nearly a full 2 years into his first term, all of those gilded years leading up to the White House have left him unprepared to be President. Left to his own instincts, he has a talent for saying the wrong thing at the wrong time. It swiftly became a joke that he could not deliver even the briefest of statements without the ever-present Tele-Prompters. Far worse, however, is his capacity to want to "wish away" some terrible realities, not the least of which is the Islamist intention to destroy America and enslave the West. Any student of history knows how swiftly Islam initially spread. It knocked on the doors of Europe, having gained a foothold in Spain . The great crowds that greeted him at home or on his campaign "world tour" were no substitute for having even the slightest grasp of history and the reality of a world filled with really bad people with really bad intentions. Oddly and perhaps even inevitably, his political experience, a cakewalk, has positioned him to destroy the Democrat Party's hold on power in Congress because in the end it was never about the Party. It was always about his communist ideology, learned at an early age from family, mentors, college professors, and extreme leftist friends and colleagues. Obama is a man who could deliver a snap judgment about a Boston police officer who arrested an "obstreperous" Harvard professor-friend, but would warn Americans against "jumping to conclusions" about a mass murderer at Fort Hood who shouted "Allahu Akbar." The absurdity of that was lost on no one. He has since compounded this by calling the Christmas bomber "an isolated extremist" only to have to admit a day or two later that he was part of an al Qaeda plot. He is a man who could strive to close down our detention facility at Guantanamo even though those released were known to have returned to the battlefield against America . He could even instruct his Attorney General to afford the perpetrator of 9/11 a civil trial when no one else would ever even consider such an obscenity. And he is a man who could wait three days before having anything to say about the perpetrator of yet another terrorist attack on Americans and then have to elaborate on his remarks the following day because his first statement was so lame. The pattern repeats itself. He either blames any problem on the Bush administration or he naively seeks to wish away the truth. Knock, knock. Anyone home? Anyone there? Barack Obama exists only as the sock puppet of his handlers, of the people who have maneuvered and manufactured this pathetic individual's life. When anyone else would quickly and easily produce a birth certificate, this man has spent over a million dollars to deny access to his. Most other documents, the paper trail we all leave in our wake, have been sequestered from review. He has lived a make-believe life whose true facts remain hidden. We laugh at the ventriloquist's dummy, but what do you do when the dummy is President of the United States of America ?" |
Thursday, November 4, 2010
A Nuclear Chavez Gets Obama's OK
| After all the fuss about Iran development nuclear capabilities, Venezuela gets a pass. Obama's OK With ChavezHavingNuclear ReactorsGeopolitics: Venezuela's Hugo Chavez moves ahead with plans to go nuclear with Russian help, and the response from our president has been to give the lunatic dictator his full backing. This is trouble. Not since the days of Jimmy Carter have we seen as craven a U.S. response to a provocation as Chavez's plan for two 1,200-megawatt nuclear reactors 1,400 miles from our shores. "We have no incentive or interest in increasing friction between Venezuela and the U.S., but we do think Venezuela needs to act responsibly," President Obama told the Spanish-language press Tuesday. "Our attitude is that Venezuela has rights to peacefully develop nuclear power." Oh. So forget the Monroe Doctrine. Never mind President Kennedy's response to the nuclear ambitions of Cuba. Obama's new message to the hemisphere is that Chavez can go nuclear because he's a democracy and will therefore act responsibly. Obama's message was probably intended to deprive the dictator of his capacity to whip up nationalist sentiment in the wake of a U.S. rebuke. But, ultimately, it represents a U.S. failure to deal with the kind of threat Chavez actually poses. In itself, Chavez's plan to construct reactors is little immediate threat to the U.S., its ally Colombia or Brazil. But the treaty with Russia was signed in 2009 and is meant to take 10 years to complete. In that time, Chavez will have to develop nuclear experts and find a way to finance all these reactors. Given he already owes Russia $4.4 billion for weapons purchases, the sale of Venezuela's oil facilities in Europe to Russia won't be enough. The real problem is the relationships Chavez is forging. Chavez's visit to Russia and Iran to tout the nuclear deal was meant to show the U.S. that even after he lost a legislative election in September, he still mattered. And rogue states like Russia and Iran will still do dirty business with him — even if China won't. Chavez says he means to bring in Russian and Iranian experts for his nuclear project. That opens the door to influence from the mafiya-linked criminal underworld that includes the terrorists and arms dealers at the edges of Russia's and Iran's power structures. Chavez's closest Russian associate is Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin, a raving anti-American with rumored ties to illegal arms dealer Viktor Bout. The latter was arrested in Thailand soon after the discovery in 2008 of a computer belonging to FARC terrorists. People like this are more than willing to get the materials for dirty bombs and provide support for terrorists — something Chavez has already been implicated in himself without consequences the past few years. He's been caught attempting to deliver $300 million to FARC terrorists, and FARC itself has been caught trying to secure nuclear materials for a dirty bomb in Ukraine and Romania. Meanwhile, the Russian mafiya and Iran's Hezbollah have been making inroads in Latin America as well, and will now find even more of a welcome mat in Venezuela with this nuclear project. For the Obama administration to dismiss the Chavez nuclear deal is shortsighted, given the interconnected nature of the threat from these rogue states and what Venezuela will become as a result. Obama should be muscling Russia to drop the plan and threatening to make Georgia a NATO member if he doesn't. Instead, right now, the approach is to make nice with a predator who has it in for us in more ways than one.It may buy us peace now, but it will buy only trouble in the long run. The Staff: Obama will do nothing to protect us from anything as I believe it is his intention to destroy America as we know it.Lets hope I am wrong |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)