If we ever have to fight for freedom again, We are Ready

In WWII, Japan 's highest ranking naval officer was Isoruku Yamamoto. Although he was Japanese, and his loyalties were unquestionably with The Empire, he studied for many years in America, graduating from Harvard University.  There is an oft-repeated (and sometimes disputed) quote attributed to him regarding the possibility of any nation taking a war to American soil:

"You cannot invade the mainland United States . There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

Here is why he was correct:

-------------------------------------------------------



America 's Hunters. The World's Largest Army.

The state of Wisconsin has gone an entire deer hunting season without someone getting killed. That's great, considering there were over 600,000 hunters that got permits this year.

Allow me to restate that number.

Over the last two months, the eighth largest army in the world - more men under arms than Iran ; more than France and Germany combined - deployed to the woods of a single American state to keep the deer population under control.

But that pales in comparison to the 750,000 who are in the woods of Pennsylvania this week.   Michigan 's 700,000 hunters have now returned home.  Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia , and it is literally the case that the hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world.

And that is just FOUR states.

The total population of registered hunters in America today ranges from 23 million to 43.7 million individuals. (Based on annual data provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.)

As long as the American Hunter retains his right to Bear Arms, America will forever be safe from foreign invasion of troops.

Hunting - it's not just a way to fill the freezer.  It's a matter of national security.

Don't we All Wish we Could

Shown below, is an actual letter that was sent to a bank by an 86 year old woman.
The bank manager thought it amusing enough to have it published in the New York Times.


Dear Sir:

I am writing to thank you for bouncing my check with which I endeavored to pay my plumber last month.
By my calculations, three nanoseconds must have elapsed between his presenting the check and the arrival in my account of the funds needed to honor it.

I refer, of course, to the automatic monthly deposit of my entire pension, an arrangement which, I admit, has been in place for only eight years.

You are to be commended for seizing that brief window of opportunity, and also for debiting my account $30 by way of penalty for the inconvenience caused to your bank.

My thankfulness springs from the manner in which this incident has caused me to rethink my errant financial ways. I noticed that whereas I personally answer your telephone calls and letters, --- when I try to contact you, I am confronted by the impersonal, overcharging, pre-recorded, faceless entity which your bank has become.

>From now on, I, like you, choose only to deal with a flesh-and-blood person.

My mortgage and loan repayments will therefore and hereafter no longer be automatic, but will arrive at your bank, by check, addressed personally and confidentially to an employee at your bank whom you must nominate.

Be aware that it is an OFFENSE under the Postal Act for any other person to open such an envelope.

Please find attached an Application Contact which I require your chosen employee to complete.

I am sorry it runs to eight pages, but in order that I know as much about him or her as your bank knows about me, there is no alternative.

Please note that all copies of his or her medical history must be countersigned by a Notary Public, and the mandatory details of his/her financial situation (income, debts, assets and liabilities) must be accompanied by documented proof.

In due course, at MY convenience, I will issue your employee with a PIN number which he/she must quote in dealings with me.

I regret that it cannot be shorter than 28 digits but, again, I have modeled it on the number of button presses required of me to access my account balance on your phone bank service.

As they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Let me level the playing field even further.

When you call me, press buttons as follows:

IMMEDIATELY AFTER DIALING, PRESS THE STAR (*) BUTTON FOR ENGLISH

#1. To make an appointment to see me

#2. To query a missing payment.

#3. To transfer the call to my living room in case I am there..

#4 To transfer the call to my bedroom in case I am sleeping.

#5. To transfer the call to my toilet in case I am attending to nature.

#6. To transfer the call to my mobile phone if I am not at home.

#7. To leave a message on my computer, a password to access my computer is required.
Password will be communicated to you at a later date to that Authorized Contact mentioned earlier.

#8. To return to the main menu and to listen to options 1 through 7.

#9. To make a general complaint or inquiry.
The contact will then be put on hold, pending the attention of my automated answering service.

#10. This is a second reminder to press* for English.

While this may, on occasion, involve a lengthy wait, uplifting music will play for the duration of the call.

Regrettably, but again following your example, I must also levy an establishment fee to cover the setting up of this new arrangement.

May I wish you a happy, if ever so slightly less prosperous New Year?

Your Humble Client

And remember: Don't make old People mad.
We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to set us off.

WELFARE WORKS

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.

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.

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

By JED GRAHAM, INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted 12/10/2010 06:57 PM ET

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.

 

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!!!!

=

 

Only Obama Would Do This

SCAREY!!!

Here They Come...this will make your day! 

Kareem Shora Arif Alikhan Well, boys and girls, today the fox is guarding the hen house. The wolves will be herding the sheep! Obama appointed two devout Muslims to homeland security posts. Obama and Janet Napolitano appointed Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim, as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development. DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore-in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim, who was born in Damascus, Syria, as ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC). NOTE: Has anyone ever heard a new government official being identified as a devout Catholic, a devout Jew or a devout Protestant...? Just wondering. Devout Muslims being appointed to critical Homeland Security positions? Doesn't this make you feel safer already?? That should make our home land much safer, huh!? Was it not "Devout Muslim men" that flew planes into U.S. Buildings 8 1/2 years ago? Was it not a Devout Muslim who killed 13 at Fort Hood ? Please forward this important information to any who cares about the future of our Country.