It's time to get rid of Unions, Forever !

I deceided to end the year on a bang !

And this article should provide the sparks to do it.

The back story here is New York City and the blizzard they were subject to last weekend. Before I get to the meat & potatoes of this article, I'm going to defend someone I don't like very much. Michael Bloomberg could not single handedly get into a snow plow and clear all the streets in N.Y.C.

Having said that, I do believe the Mayor has painted himself into a corner.

As any good Liberal does, Mayor Bloomberg is more than likely in bed with the Mob, also known as Unions. For those of you living under a rock, a Union steals money from kool-aid drinking employees of companies that were strong armed into having Unions (they call this stolen money "dues").

The Unions take the money and "buy" the selected politicians they want in office , I.E. Barrack Hussein Obama.

60-70 years ago Unions had their place in society, they did a lot of good providing a fair wage for the average worker, and they also elimated "sweat shops" and 13 year olds working 50 hours a week.

Now they are just a bunch of corrupt bastards, that have ruined just about every industry in this country with their high labor.

Back to the Blizzard in N.Y.C last weekend. The Snowplow drivers are Unionized, SUPRISE! One of the MOB-UNION Bosses took it upon himself to tell his workers to 'Take it slow" cleaning the streets, "completely ignore cleaning other streets" and "lift the blades slightly on some trucks" so not to clean the streets as well as they should.

The outcome of this charade was two people died because the emergency crews could not get to them.

Two Union employes blew the whistle on their boss to a local politician. Good Job !

DO WE NEED UNIONS ANYMORE, HELL NO ! ! !

Yours in liberty,

Bob Yeager

It's time to Bid Farewell to Afghanistan !

OK, let me get this strait. We send financial aid to Afghanistan, as we do to many, many countries. ((Too Many !)
The money which is meant to help the struggling Afgans, is then funneled through a corrupt Afgan Gov't system, to the Taliban ! The people we are over there fighting, spilling our young soldiers blood for ?

STOP ! WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON ! ARE WE OUT OF OUR MINDS !

Our men & women are dying every day because our tax dollars are funding a war the is helping the people we're supposed to be fighting ?

AM I MISSING SOMETHING HERE ! ? ! ?

And the best (or worst) part about this is ,President Hamid Karzai knows all about this !

One Word : INCREDIBLE

During the Bush Years, the Liberal lame stream media was crying every day, "BRING OUR TROOPS HOME". now you don't here a thing from anybody, with one exception, FOX NEWS.

The people in this country should be demanding the immediate withdrawl of our troops !

But even if they did our Gov't would keep supplying our enemy with money to kill our own soldiers.

Kinda sad, isn't it.

Yours in Liberty

Bob Yeager

50 mind blowing facts about modern America that our Founding Fathers never would have believed....

Thank You, "The Economic Collapse"

#1 In 2010, not only does the United States have a central bank, but it also runs our economy and issues all of our currency. The Federal Reserve has devalued the U.S. dollar by over 95 percent since 1913 and it has been used to create the biggest mountain of government debt in the history of the world.

#2 The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ruled that U.S. government agents can legally sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, place a secret GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of you everywhere that you go.

#3 The 50 wealthiest members of Congress saw their collective fortunes increase by 85.1 million dollars to $1.4 billion in 2009.

#4 The U.S. government has accumulated a national debt that is rapidly approaching the 14 trillion dollar mark.

#5 All over the United States, asphalt roads are being ground up and are being replaced with gravel because it is cheaper to maintain. The state of South Dakota has transformed over 100 miles of asphalt road into gravel over the past year, and 38 out of the 83 counties in the state of Michigan have now turned some of their asphalt roads into gravel roads.

#6 Americans now owe more than $849 billion on student loans, which is more than the total amount that Americans owe on their credit cards.

#7 In 2010, Americans waste an astounding amount of food. According to a study by the California Integrated Waste Management board, 63 percent of the average supermarket's waste stream is food. When you break that down, it means that each supermarket wastes approximately 3,000 pounds of food each year.

#8 The city of Cleveland plans to sort through curbside trash to ensure that people are actually recycling properly. If it is discovered that some citizens are not recycling they will be hit with very large fines.

#9 Once upon a time, U.S. industry was the envy of the world. But since 1979, manufacturing employment in the United States has fallen by 40 percent.

#10 Even though the U.S. population has exploded in size, the number of Americans with manufacturing jobs today is smaller than the number of Americans who were employed in manufacturing in 1950.

#11 Having one out of every eight Americans enrolled in the food stamp program is now considered "the new normal" and Americans continue to drop into poverty in astounding numbers.

#12 One out of every six Americans is now being served by at least one government anti-poverty program.

#13 A family of four actually has difficulty surviving on an income of $50,000 a year in America in 2010.

#14 Barack Obama is backing a proposal to create a national database that will store the DNA of all individuals who have been arrested, even if they end up not being convicted of a crime.

#15 In 2010, it takes the average unemployed American worker over 8 months to find a job.

#16 The U.S. government has made some parts of Arizona off limits to U.S. citizens because of the threat of violence from Mexican drug smugglers. The federal government has actually posted signs more than 100 miles north of the Mexican border warning travelers that certain areas are unsafe because of drug and alien smugglers.

#17 One recent survey of last year's college graduates discovered that 80 percent moved right back home with their parents after graduation.

#18 In one of the very first military commissions held under the Obama administration, a U.S. military judge ruled that confessions obtained by threatening the subject with rape are admissible in court.

#19 The average American worker now pays literally dozens of different kinds of taxes each year.

#20 In recent years the U.S. government has spent $2.6 million tax dollars to study the drinking habits of Chinese prostitutes and $400,000 tax dollars to pay researchers to cruise six bars in Buenos Aires, Argentina to find out why gay men engage in risky sexual behavior when drunk.

#21 Christians are being arrested and thrown in jail in some areas of the United States for quietly passing out Christian literature on public sidewalks.

#22 The Florida State Department of Juvenile Justice has announced that it will begin using cutting edge analysis software to predict crime by young delinquents and will place "potential offenders" in prevention and education programs.

#23 Organic milk is now considered such a national crisis that the FDA has been conducting military style raids on Amish farmers in the state of Pennsylvania.

#24 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently announced that they are considering a crackdown on farm dust.

#25 According to a new CDC report, nearly half of all Americans now use prescription drugs on a regular basis.

#26 Oakland, California Police Chief Anthony Batts says that due to severe budget cuts there are a number of crimes that his department will simply not be able to respond to any longer. The crimes that the Oakland police will no longer be responding to include grand theft, burglary, car wrecks, identity theft and vandalism.

#27 Today, Americans are losing their homes in staggering numbers. One out of every seven mortgages was delinquent or in foreclosure during the first quarter of 2010.

#28 Many of our leading scientists are now calling themselves "transhumanists" and are openly proclaiming that a future where men have fully merged with machines is inevitable.

#29 Americans who spend large amounts of cash are viewed as "potential criminals" by the U.S. government in 2010.

#30 New full body security scanners going into airports all across the United States can actually see through our clothing and produce very clear and very detailed images of our exposed bodies as we walk through them.

#31 The U.S. financial system has become a massive gambling parlor in 2010. As a result, a horrific derivatives bubble has developed that threatens to destroy our entire economy at any moment. Nobody knows exactly how big the derivatives bubble is, but low estimates place it at around 600 trillion dollars and high estimates put it at around 1.5 quadrillion dollars. Once that bubble pops there simply will not be enough money in the entire world to fix it.

#32 The U.S. government is spending an amount of money equivalent to approximately 25.4 percent of GDP this year.

#33 Today, 10,000 people make 30% of the total income in the United States.

#34 A 2006 Immigration and Customs Enforcement investigation discovered that 250 employees of the Defense Department used credit cards or PayPal to purchase images of children in sexual situations. However, the investigation also found that the Pentagon investigated only a handful of those cases.

#35 According to a recent poll of Americans between the ages of 44 and 75, 61% said that running out money was their biggest fear. The remaining 39% thought death was scarier.

#36 Approximately 57 percent of Barack Obama's 3.8 trillion dollar budget for 2011 consists of direct payments to individual Americans or is money that is spent on their behalf.

#37 A recent Department of Justice guide for investigators of criminal and extremist groups lists "constitutionalists" and "survivalists" alongside organizations like Al-Qaeda and the Aryan Brotherhood.

#38 The U.S. trade deficit has exploded to nightmarish proportions over the past two decades. Every single month tens of billions more dollars goes out of the United States than comes into it. Essentially, the United States is becoming far poorer as a nation each and every month.

#39 Factories are closing in droves across the United States because the American people would rather buy things made in China.

#40 Millions upon millions of good paying middle class jobs are being shipped off to China and they are never coming back. Meanwhile, U.S. politicians stand by idly and do nothing.

#41 Some analysts now believe that China could become the largest economy in the world by the year 2020.

#42 If the U.S. government was forced to use GAAP accounting principles (like all publicly-traded corporations must), the annual U.S. government budget deficit would be somewhere in the neighborhood of four to five trillion dollars.

#43 According to one recent survey, 28% of all U.S. households have at least one person that is currently searching for a full-time job.

#44 The U.S. dollar continues to rapidly decline in value. An item that cost $20.00 in 1970 will cost you $112.35 today. An item that cost $20.00 in 1913 will cost you $440.33 today.

#45 Major international organizations are actually proposing that the United States start considering the adoption of a truly global currency.

#46 Students at a high school in Missouri have built a car that they claim can get up to 450 miles per gallon. On another note, some of the top energy experts in the world believe that thorium could solve our energy problems and supply very cheap energy for society for hundreds of thousands of years. But in today's world technologies such as these are endlessly suppressed by the rich and powerful.

#47 One Colorado high school student is seeking an explanation from officials at his school after he was ordered by security guards to remove American flags from his truck because they might make other students at the high school "uncomfortable".

#48 Three California high school students were recently forced to remove their American flag T-shirts on Cinco de Mayo.

#49 Memorial crosses erected along Utah public roads to honor fallen state troopers have been found unconstitutional by a federal appeals court and now must be removed permanently.

#50 One group of high school students made national headlines recently when they revealed that a security guard ordered them to stop singing the national anthem during a visit to the Lincoln Memorial.

11.6.2012, 680 days away (+/-)

Election Day 2012.

Mark this day on your calander my friends,

For on this day the citizens of this country will deceide if they want to continue down the destructive Socialistic path that the President is taking us down, or are we going to elect a President that will get us out of the God forsaken mess we are in now.

It's a very easy choice when you think about it, go into the voting booth and choose the person opposite of B.H.O., and you have it made.

Otherwise, get ready for a change, one he promised, and one you will despise.

B.H.O. wants Socialism in this Country, and he will stop at nothing to achive his goal. Mark my word. He has all ready set some of the wheels in motion. (Nationalized European -Style Health care-OBAMACARE)

The time is now to start finding an alternative choice to this President.

The Republicans are going to have a wide field of contenders to choose from.(for the record, I'm not a registered Republican)

Mitt Romney, Newt Ginrich, Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Chris Christie, Jim DeMint, the list goes on and on.I know I missed some.

There is even an outside chance a Democrat might challenge him in the primaries ! Not sure if that berson will be a worthy opponent.

So when these fine men and women announce their intentions to run for President, by all means get out and support them. Elect one of them in the primaries.

Do phone banks, door to door greetings, yard signs you name it.

And when a clear winner is chosen out of the primaries, rally behind that person  Do the ground work for him or her. VOTE FOR HIM OR HER. And when the New President replaces B.H.O. in 2012, you can take credit for helping to save our country.

Four more years of B.H.O. and the Constitution, The Declaration of Independence and the Liberty Bell will be nowhere to be found. We don't want that.

Yours in Liberty,

Bob Yeager

The Yeager Family Tree was Progressive in a good way.....

I was going through some old family heirlooms that my granfather had let me when he died, and at the time I was about ready to go into shock !

I came across much to my dismay, a little book that was my great-grandfathers.

It was titled "The Appeal's Arsenal of Facts 1910" (FACTS ?).

WHERE IS GLENN BECK WHEN YOU NEED HIM   ! ! !

For any of you who are well versed in Socialism, Which I would say would be at least 50 % of any Libel-Progressives reading ths page, this is a handy little propaganda booket, small enough to fit in a suitcoat breast pocket.

The Socialists would pull this on un-suspected folks if the felt a good Constitutional arguement was coming on. (At which time I hope the other guy would pull out his Pocket Constitution....better yet, a gun.)

My great-grandfather actually bought into this shit !

WHICH IS WHY I FEAR FOR OUR COUNTRY TODAY!

Now as the Yeager dynasty progressed, (I hate that word !), my grandfather was a Postal employee, Became Postmaster, ( It's know suprise most Gov't workers are Unon backed Democrats, but I'm pretty sure he was a Republican.......Nice Leap in Politics ).

Now my Dad, Bless his soul, was a State Employee in Pa., a member of AFSCME an American destroying Union for Government employees.

Here's Proof : Back in his day, he had to register for the political party that was controlling the State of Pa. at the time. HOW'S THAT FOR UNION FREEDOM , HUH ?

He was back and forth Dem., Repub., Dem., Repub. A UNION PUPPET !

Now to me!..... I had true Freedom, worked in the private sector, Registered Republican. Absolutely no Socialistic Unions telling me what to do.

For the record, I switched to the Constitution Party this year because The Republicans are acting too much like Democrats......not a good thing.


I'd have to say in four generations,The Yeager's were quite progressive....in a good way, going from Socialism to Constitutialism !

God Bless the U.S.A !

Bob Yeager

There is hope for a true Christmas ! ! !

I recently read an article about a Christmas Tree being erected in a muslum country, a freedom that somtimes we cannot excerise in our own country !

I was really was touched by this, in every sense of the word.

The Emirates Palace Hotel, in Abu Dhabi the capital of the United Arab Emirates, Erected a 43 foot, $11 million dollar tree.
\
The tree was decorated by a local jeweler with gold ornaments and gen-studded bows And nice gold watches, I think that' great, some people didn't.

If a Muslim country can be that open minded towards it's foreign customers, why can't our citizen's have the same freedom in the United States of America.

MY praise goes to the U.A.E., you have done a beautiful job. This is one American who would travel to your country to see that beautiful tree, since there are parts of our socialist - commustist country where that's impossiable !

God Bless America......and the U.A.E. !

Thank You !

Bob Yeager

My Hero fotr this Holiday, (besides Jesus) is Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma

Why Tom Coburn?.

His 82 page manifesto showing the billions of dollars the Congress has wasted in your Tax Dollars this year !

He was man enough to put it in test, and printable at that !

to read the Senators "Wastebook" go to "Permalink

http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2010/12/dr-coburn-releases-new-oversight-report

It's a must read. you wont be sorry !

It is extremely good reading for my liberal readers,  (no offense intended)

thank you,

Bob


 P.S.  NOW Sen. Coburn, I gave you a nice plug on your good works, now PLEASE pass Funding for 9.11 First Responder Suvivors And the families they left behind.
This bill needs passed Immediately  !

Thank You

Bob Yeager, A Concerned American !

FUN FACTS ABOUT "LET'S FIX D.C."

NUMBER OF PAGEVIEWS FROM 3.22.09 - 12.21.10 @ 12:00 PM EST (U.S.A.) :

1,507 pageviews


MOST PAGEVIEWS RECORDED IN ONE DAY :

11.28.10 :  64


PAGEVIEWS BROKEN DOWN BY MONTH & YEAR :

  3.09 : 1

  4.09 : 1

  9.10 : 273

10.10 : 466

11.10 : 473

12.10 : 293 ( AS OF 12:00 PM EST ( U.S.A. )


COUNTRIES OF PAGEVIEWS ORIGIN :

36 countries


TOP 10 COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN FOR PAGEVIEWS :
(NOTE : STATS ADDED 12.27.10)

  1.) UNITED STATES : 1,290
  2.) RUSSIA : 36
  3.) DENMARK : 23
  4.) UNITED KINGDOM : 19
  5.) SLOVENIA : 19
  6.) FRANCE : 16
  7.) PAKISTAN : 16
  8.) NETHERLANDS : 14
  9.) CANADA : 13
10.) CROATIA : 12


NUMBER OF BLOGPOSTS :

132 blogposts


#1 BLOGPOST TO DATE, (12.27.10)

BORN IN THE USA? PART I I I Supremes challenged to put Constitution above Twitter, Case questioning eligibility says facts don't support Obama story.  DATED 11.29.10
TOTAL PAGEVIEWS : 45 (12.27.10)



***( note : 2 blogviews, 2 blogposts and 1 country are from year 2009 )

THANK YOU TO ALL THE LOYAL PAGEVIEWERS WHO HAVE MADE THIS BLOG A SUCCCESS ! ! ! !

Bob
__________________________________________________

HAVE YOU READ THESE OLDER POSTS ?

12.9.10 : Is Hollywood nounting a war on Christnas?movie........

12.8.10 : Hold the Brownies! Obama Set  to Sign Bill Limiring........

12.7.10 : It's Time To Be Offensive

12.5.10 : Gov. Christie to NJ Teacher Union "You Punch The...........

12.4.10 : Wave goodbye to Internet freedom

12.3.10 : Janine Turner : Actress, Writer, Patroit

12.2.10 : To Wikileak or not to Wikileak, that is the Question.............

12.2.10 : Christian Columnist : We've Won the War on Christmas

12.1.10 : Gov. Chris Christie has mastered thee politics of a .......

11.30.10 ADMENMENT IV OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE
 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

I'm back !

To the readers of my blog LET'S FIX D.C., I have been down with the flu the past few days.

I will hopefully be able to start posting more articles tomorrow, Monday 12.20.10.

Thank You for reading my blog !

Bob

Capitalism

 by Woodmere Exec Leader on Sunday, December 19, 2010 at 12:11pm

Just 'visited' the Capitalism page on fb and a few thoughts came to mind:

The Communist Manifesto is perhaps one of the most renown political writings in the world. Among many things, Engels and Marx’s political “bible” actually gave countries the tools to galvanize the murders of over 100 million people in just the first fifty years of its publication.

Time for a Capitalist Manifesto? Well, Atlas Shrugged came pretty darn close to claiming that title. And even more so did Andrew Bernstein’s “Capitalist Manifesto”. Bernstein’s work was an intensely researched account of the positives of capitalism and, in my most humble opinion, an excellent account of a well-rounded and well-grounded philosophy that lights a path of morals, ethics and progressive ideals.

I know it’s time for me to blow the dust off of both ‘manifestos’; it’s time because of the times.

Capitalism is a freedom still available on the open market, on the shelves of any store and ‘bought’ without need of a prescription doled out by any one person or by rations issued by any government. Capitalism is a philosophy, moral and fiscal, that refuses to embrace entitlement programs and other infringements (yes, infringements) on our individual freedoms? Help others in need? Yes! Promote neediness on government? No! Promote religion or lack thereof? No! Promote freedom of choice and practice of religion as long as it does not harm others? Yes!

Is Envy More Important than Prosperity?

( THANK YOU , TOWN HALL.COM )
Star Parker

Is Envy More Important than Prosperity?

 Anthony Weiner is making a name for himself.

He wants taxes raised on wealthy Americans and is one of the more vocal opponents to the deal that would retain current tax rates for everyone.

“An estate tax cut for millionaires adds exactly zero jobs. A tax cut for billionaires – virtually none,” says the congressman.

But what does Weiner know about job creation, about work, about being an entrepreneur?

Looking over his resume, you see he’s never held a private sector job.

Right out of college, he went to work on the staff of then-Congressmen Chuck Schumer, followed by six years serving on New York’s city council, and then ran for congress in 1999, capturing the seat he currently holds.

Mr. Weiner is a politically ambitious young man who has built power and career by confiscating and redistributing other people’s money.

Consider who the wealthy are that Weiner wants to punish.

Thomas Stanley and William Danko wrote a book called “The Millionaire Next Door: The Surprising Secrets of America’s Wealthy”.

They produced a portrait of who America’s millionaires are and show that by and large these are quiet, understated, self-reliant Americans who are committed to hard work, education, and family.

Their portrait shows that eighty percent of our millionaires are first generation affluent, that less than half received a cent in inheritance funds, and only 19% get any income from a trust fund or estate.

Most Americans – 80% - are not self-employed. But of those that are, two thirds are our millionaires.

Seventy five percent of these self-employed millionaires are entrepreneurs and the remaining quarter are self-employed professionals like doctors and accounts.

These are overwhelmingly self-made individuals, by a large founders and proprietors of prosaic businesses like “welding contractors, auctioneers, rice farmers, owners of mobile-home parks, pest controllers, coin and stamp dealers and paving contractors.”

Sure, we have high profile billionaires in America. But most of America’s millionaires, those whose income is in the $250,000 and above category whose taxes Anthony Weiner wants to raise, are our nation’s bread and butter entrepreneurs and small business owners.

Regarding the estate tax, or what has come to be known as the death tax, it is probably, of all the ways in which our government takes revenue, the most immoral.

As noted, 80% of millionaires are first generation and two thirds are entrepreneurs. The death tax punishes the very behavior that defines the economic heart and soul of American prosperity.

But perhaps worse, it attacks our most important social institution – the American family.

A recent Pew Research Center/Time Magazine report shows the collapse over the last half century of the traditional American family.

Today 52% of adult Americans are married compared to 72% in 1960. Forty one percent of our babies today are born to unwed mothers compared to 5% in 1960.

It was once a given in our nation that there were inviolable truths that precede government. Once most believed that one of those truths was the integrity of the American family.

The death tax tells us that that government now supersedes family. That politicians like Anthony Weiner can go inside of a family and confiscate the wealth that a breadwinner has accumulated over a lifetime of hard work and prevent parents from freely passing the fruits of their labor on to their children.

Three of four Americans say that the country today is on the wrong track.

The key question today is where we want to go and what it takes to get there.

If we want to get back to prosperity, then it should be axiomatic that protecting freedom, entrepreneurship and family is the answer. Not the politics of power and envy.

Star Parker

Star Parker is founder and president of CURE, the Center for Urban Renewal and Education, a 501c3 think tank which explores and promotes market based public policy to fight poverty, as well as author of the newly revised Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can do About It.

Government Unions vs. Taxpayers

 THANK YOU WALL STREET JOURNAL         

 By GOV. TIM PAWLENTY


The moral case for unions—protecting working families from exploitation—does not apply to public employment.

When Americans think of organized labor, they might think of images like I saw growing up in a blue-collar meatpacking town: hard hats, work boots, tough conditions and gritty jobs. While I didn't work in the slaughterhouses, I did become a union member when I worked at a grocery store to help put myself through school. I was grateful for the paycheck and proud of the work I did.

The rise of the labor movement in the early 20th century was a triumph for America's working class. In an era of deep economic anxiety, unions stood up for hard-working but vulnerable families, protecting them from physical and economic exploitation.

Much has changed. The majority of union members today no longer work in construction, manufacturing or "strong back" jobs. They work for government, which, thanks to President Obama, has become the only booming "industry" left in our economy. Since January 2008 the private sector has lost nearly eight million jobs while local, state and federal governments added 590,000.

Federal employees receive an average of $123,049 annually in pay and benefits, twice the average of the private sector. And across the country, at every level of government, the pattern is the same: Unionized public employees are making more money, receiving more generous benefits, and enjoying greater job security than the working families forced to pay for it with ever-higher taxes, deficits and debt.

How did this happen? Very quietly. The rise of government unions has been like a silent coup, an inside job engineered by self-interested politicians and fueled by campaign contributions.

Public employee unions contribute mightily to the campaigns of liberal politicians ($91 million in the midterm elections alone) who vote to increase government pay and workers. As more government employees join the unions and pay dues, the union bosses pour ever more money and energy into liberal campaigns. The result is that certain states are now approaching default. Decades of overpromising and fiscal malpractice by state and local officials have created unfunded public employee benefit liabilities of more than $3 trillion.

Over the last eight years in Minnesota, we have taken decisive action to prevent our problems from becoming a state crisis. Public employee unions fought us virtually every step of the way. Mass transit employees, for example, went on strike for 44 days in 2005—because we refused to grant them lifetime health-care benefits after working just 15 years. It was a tough fight, but in the end Minnesota taxpayers won.

We reworked benefits for new hires. We required existing employees to contribute more to their pensions. We reformed our public employee health plan and froze wages.

We proved that even in deep-blue Minnesota, taxpayers can take on big government and big labor, and win. In coming years, that fight will have to be joined throughout the country in city halls, state capitals and in Washington, D.C.

Reformers would be wise to adopt three overriding principles.

First, we need to bring public employee compensation back in line with the private sector and reduce the overall size of the federal civilian work force. Mr. Obama's proposal to freeze federal pay is a step in the right direction, but it falls well short of shrinking government and eliminating the pay premium enjoyed by federal employees.

Second, get the numbers right. Government should start using the same established accounting standards that private businesses are required to use, so we can accurately assess unfunded liabilities.

Third, we need to end defined-benefit retirement plans for government employees. Defined-benefit systems have created a financial albatross for taxpayers. The private sector dropped them years ago in favor of the clarity and predictability of defined-contribution models such as 401(k) plans. This change alone can save taxpayers trillions of dollars.

The moral case for unions—protecting working families from exploitation—does not apply to public employment. Government employees today are among the most protected, well-paid employees in the country. Ironically, public-sector unions have become the exploiters, and working families once again need someone to stand up for them.

If we're going to stop the government unions' silent coup, conservative reformers around the country must fight this challenge head on. The choice between big government and everyday Americans isn't a hard one.

Mr. Pawlenty, a Republican, is governor of Minnesota.

Chris Matthews Slams '300 Plus' Pounds Chris Christie, Too Fat to be President

THANK YOU , NEWS BUSTERS

By Scott Whitlock
December 10, 2010
16:25

Hardball host Chris Matthews appeared at a local event in Washington D.C. on Thursday to trash Republican Chris Christie as too fat to be President. The Washington Examiner reported that Matthews derided the New Jersey governor, mocking, "Chris Christie is moon over New Jersey, he should not wear white shirts, I tell you that."

He continued, "I saw him the other day and I was amazed by it, he must be 300 plus, and that’s something he’s just gotta deal with because you’re not going to say, ‘I’m going to cut the budget,’ well, how about starting with supper?"

Matthews, who appeared at the WMAL radio event, continued to cheer for the man who gave him a thrill up his leg. Lobbying for more time, he insisted, "Shouldn’t this President be given another year before you dismiss him? Give him another year in the presidency before you begin to try to destroy him."

The MSNBC anchor added, "I think we should give him another year. I’d give him two more years, but I’m not the country. I think we ought to give this guy more chance before we get into pure partisanship

On Thursday, the MRC's Tim Graham wrote about Matthews' appearance at the Georgetown Ritz Carlton and the bizarre comment that "'Hardball' is absolutely nonpartisan."

The cable host on the 2012 Republican contenders:

There’s not going to be a great Republican candidate for President in 2012 from I can see. I don’t see a great one looming right there right now. So, if you’re an American and you care about the country, do you really now want to begin rooting for the Republican candidate no matter who it is – because there’s a couple of them running who wouldn’t be great Presidents.

Continuing to riff on various MSNBC guests, Matthews lauded Newsweek's Howard Fineman as "my Spock."

— Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center.

* Chris Matthews, you are a sad individual !!! - Bob Yeager,  Let's Fix D.C. *

Hillary was right

Updated: Sat., Dec. 11, 2010, 4:44 AM


THANK YOU , NEW YORK POST

By JONAH GOLDBERG

Last Updated: 4:44 AM, December 11, 2010

Posted: 10:03 PM, December 10, 2010

When President Obama came un glued like a papier-mache doll in a steam bath during his press con ference this week, I thought perhaps it might be because he lost an old argument with Hillary Clinton.

But yesterday, when Obama hauled out Bill Clinton -- Hillary's No. 1 political ally and, secondarily, her husband -- I was sure of it.

It's largely forgotten now, but during their lengthy primary battle, the two committed liberals' greatest disagreement wasn't over policy or their shared disdain for George W. Bush. It was over their different visions of the presidency.

In a Nevada debate, Obama admitted that he wasn't a particularly organized person. But that was OK because a president's core role shouldn't be organizational but inspirational: "It involves having a vision for where the country needs to go . . . and then being able to mobilize and inspire the American people to get behind that agenda for change."

Pshaw, responded Hillary Clinton, the president is really a "chief executive officer" who must be "able to manage and run the bureaucracy."

This disagreement was symbolized by their respective role models. Obama likened himself to Martin Luther King Jr. and John F. Kennedy, inspirational leaders who led through rhetoric. Clinton sided with Lyndon Johnson, the guy who spun the shining words into actual legislation and got it passed, often on a bipartisan basis.

The debate played itself out by proxy in liberal magazines and in snippets of speeches and short outbursts on the stump, with most liberals siding with Obama over Clinton. Some even suggested she was a racist -- or at least race-baiting -- for daring to suggest that all he offered was the ability to give a good speech.

But even some of Obama's biggest fans admitted that his devotion to the magical power of words stemmed from the fact that he had little else going for him. "Barack Obama could not run his campaign for the presidency based on political accomplishment or on the heroic service of his youth," David Remnick wrote in the New Yorker after Obama won the general election. "His record was too slight. His Democratic and Republican opponents were right: he ran largely on language, on the expression of a country's potential and the self-expression of a complicated man who could reflect and lead that country."

Fast-forward to this week. Obama's undisciplined diatribe against the "purists" in his own party who oppose compromise amounted to an abject admission that Hillary was right all along.

"Measuring success" by the no-compromise standard, Obama declared, means "we will never get anything done. People will have the satisfaction of having a purist position and no victories for the American people. And we will be able to feel good about ourselves and sanctimonious about how pure our intentions are." But, he suggested, liberals will make little progress.

Obama then went on a stem-winder about how "this is a big, diverse country. Not everybody agrees with us. I know that shocks people. The New York Times editorial page does not permeate across all of America."

All true. And the Democrats are being foolishly purist, as we saw Thursday when House Democrats voted to reject the tax compromise.

But denouncing purists and accepting that significant swaths of America aren't going to be persuaded by your rhetoric is an admission that the Obama vision of the presidency either doesn't work or that Obama isn't up to the job of making it work.

Indeed, even on health-care reform, his signature accomplishment, Obama failed to mobilize and inspire the American people to his side. He got that passed with LBJ-like legislative skullduggery and sleight of hand, not "yes we can!" rhetoric. Meanwhile, yesterday's co-presidential press conference was almost a "No I can't moment."

Admitting you're wrong is part of growing up, and growing up can be painful. At least it certainly looked painful watching it on TV.

Obama's Moral Universe

THANK YOU, THE AMERICAN SPECTATOR

By Philip Klein on 12.10.10 @ 6:13AM

This week, the president found himself in a familiar spot -- starring in a morality play of his own making.

At every point in his life as he tells it, Obama has been a noble soul making his way through an ignoble world. He gave up the prospect of a high-paying job following college to work as a community organizer, rejected the top law firms to become a civil rights lawyer, and rose in the state senate as a reformer in the corrupt swamp of Illinois politics.

His campaign for the presidency was no different. He wasn’t just running against the record of George W. Bush -- every Democratic candidate was at the time -- but against the cynicism and divisiveness of the political process. In that sense, his inexperience wasn’t a problem, but evidence of his purity.

“They say I need to be seasoned; they say I need to be stewed,” he was fond of saying in his early stump speeches in Iowa and New Hampshire. “They say, ‘We need to boil all the hope out of him -- like us -- and then he’ll be ready.’”

Obama found perfect foils in Hillary Clinton and John McCain, both representatives of the old style of politics, both infected by Washington, both too consumed with tactics and process to appreciate what could be possible with just a little bit of hope.

In the early weeks of his presidency, Obama was the savior figure selling his economic stimulus package, which he said would “save or create” four million jobs. He warned that if Congress didn’t pass his preferred legislation, “this recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.”

Obama got his $862 billion stimulus package, but as the months wore on, unemployment soared into the double-digits and there was no real way to prove to an increasingly skeptical public that it had created millions of jobs. By this fall, Democrats’ prospects in the impending midterm elections were looking grim, so Obama’s new spin was that he was taking a political hit to do what was best for the American people.

“[W]hen I reflect back on the last two years, I do think that given how much stuff was coming at us, we probably spent much more time trying to get the policy right than trying to get the politics right,” he explained to the New York Times. “There is probably a perverse pride in my administration -- and I take responsibility for this; this was blowing from the top -- that we were going to do the right thing, even if short-term it was unpopular.”

That brings us to this week. Finding himself with diminished political standing following his party’s overwhelming defeat in the Congressional elections, Obama cut a deal with Republicans to extend the Bush tax rates for two years for all income levels.

Upon winning the Iowa caucuses in 2008, Obama declared that “the time has come to move beyond the bitterness and pettiness and anger that's consumed Washington.” Yet this Tuesday, he unleashed a furious assault on Republicans who he had just negotiated with, blasting them as “hostage takers” who he was “itching for a fight” with on “a wide range of issues.”

Yet he had to concede this time, he said, because “I don’t make judgments based on what the conventional wisdom is at any given time. I make my judgments based on what I think is right for the country and for the American people right now.

His displeasure didn’t end with Republicans. In fact, he reserved his harshest criticisms for his fellow liberals who attacked the compromise. Obama lashed out at those on the left who were ungrateful for the passage of national health care merely because it didn’t contain their cherished “public option,” a government-run plan to be offered within newly created government-run insurance exchanges.

“If that’s the standard by which we are measuring success or core principles, then let’s face it, we will never get anything done,” he said. “People will have the satisfaction of having a purist position and no victories for the American people. And we will be able to feel good about ourselves and sanctimonious about how pure our intentions are and how tough we are, and in the meantime, the American people are still seeing themselves not able to get health insurance because of preexisting conditions or not being able to pay their bills because their unemployment insurance ran out.”

In the midst of Obama’s rift with his core supporters, it’s illuminating to remember his primary against Hillary Clinton. With very few policy disagreements, their battle came down to Hillary portraying herself as experienced enough to know how the real world worked, and Obama inspiring his fans to imagine a better one. Yet in his press conference, Obama had morphed into the role of Hillary, scolding his base for having unrealistic expectations.

One can imagine candidate Obama charging that President Obama was too small-minded -- that with the right attitude and proper approach, Democrats could have had a public option and that they could have ended tax cuts for the rich.

A lot has changed since Obama’s candidacy, but one thing that has remained the same is that Obama himself -- whether he’s urging people to expect more or schooling them on why they should be happy with less -- is always the righteous one.

“An artist creates his own moral universe,” a character quips in Woody Allen’s Bullets Over Broadway. So, too, does our president.

Most Americans Say They’re Worse Off Under Obama, Poll Shows

Dec. 9 (Bloomberg) -- More than 50 percent of Americans say they are worse off now than they were two years ago when President Barack Obama took office, and two-thirds believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, a Bloomberg National Poll shows. A separate Bloomberg poll shows a majority of Americans are dissatisfied with the nation’s independent central bank, saying the U.S. Federal Reserve should either be brought under tighter political control or abolished outright. Bloomberg's Erik Schatzker and Deirdre Bolton report. (Source: Bloomberg)
Chart: Poll Results Attachment: Poll results and methodology More than 50 percent of Americans say they are worse off now than they were two years ago when President Barack Obama took office, and two-thirds believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, a Bloomberg National Poll shows.

The survey, conducted Dec. 4-7, finds that 51 percent of respondents think their situation has deteriorated, compared with 35 percent who say they’re doing better. The balance isn’t sure. Americans have grown more downbeat about the country’s future in just the last couple of months, the poll shows. The pessimism cuts across political parties and age groups, and is common to both sexes.

The negative sentiment may cast a pall over the holiday shopping season, according to the poll. A plurality of those surveyed -- 46 percent -- expects to spend less this year than last; only 12 percent anticipate spending more. Holiday sales rose by just under a half percent last year after falling by almost 4 percent in 2008.

“It’s definitely different this year than it’s been,” says poll respondent Larry Deyo, a 38-year-old father of two in Marlton, New Jersey. “I can’t really do too much with spending.” He says he lost his job at a kitchen and bath design center when the company closed, and he’s now working at a Home Depot Inc. store with a “significant decrease” in pay.

It was President Ronald Reagan who popularized the question, “Are you better off or worse off than you were four years ago” in his 1980 campaign against Jimmy Carter.

Obama’s numbers in the poll, given the context of an economy that is struggling to recover from the longest recession since the Great Depression and the experience of past presidents, aren’t so bad.

As Reagan approached the end of his second year in office, his numbers were more negative than Obama’s in this survey. In an ABC News/Washington Post poll taken in Oct. 1982, 61 percent of Americans said things were worse and 33 percent said they had improved. Reagan won re-election in a landslide in 1984. In the final months of George W. Bush’s presidency, as the financial crisis intensified, Americans said by a 2-to-1 margin that their financial situation had deteriorated, compared with a year earlier.

Americans in the poll also oppose Republican lawmakers’ calls to extend tax cuts for upper-income Americans beyond the end of 2010. Obama reluctantly agreed to a two-year extension of those cuts as part of a compromise package that also retained breaks for the middle class.

Sixty-six percent say the nation is headed in the wrong direction. That’s up from 62 percent who felt that way in an October poll and is the worst reading since the Bloomberg National Poll began in September 2009.

Unemployment and jobs are the most important issue facing the country now, the poll finds. Fifty percent of those surveyed identified joblessness as their top concern, twice the number who chose the federal budget deficit and government spending.

Members of Obama’s Democratic Party are about evenly split on the question of whether they are doing better than two years ago. Republicans and political independents are more downbeat. More than 60 percent of Republicans say they’re doing worse under Obama. Just over 50 percent of political independents feel that way, compared with a third who say their situation has improved.

Obama, 49, inherited an economy in deep crisis. While it has started to recover -- showing 3.2 percent growth over the past year -- unemployment has remained high. Joblessness rose to a seven-month high of 9.8 percent in November, significantly above the 7.4 percent rate that prevailed in December 2008, the month before Obama was inaugurated.

The stock market has performed much better. The Standard and Poor’s 500 Index has risen more than 50 percent since Obama was sworn in Jan. 20, 2009.

“After looking at all the politicians and all the policies, they’re not geared toward Americans. They’re geared toward the corporations,” says Ken Cmar, a 45-year-old poll respondent residing in Crystal River, Florida.

He says his business aligning wheels on vehicles has shrunk as trucking companies and municipalities with bus fleets have cut back. “It’s that trickle-down economic thing and I’m at the wrong end,” Cmar says.

By age group, only the young -- those under 35, a core constituency for Obama in his presidential bid -- consider themselves better off than they were two years ago.

The young often show a greater “sense that things are getting better for them than we see for older respondents,” says J. Ann Selzer, president of Selzer & Co., a Des Moines, Iowa-based firm that conducted the nationwide survey. “Maybe that is the sweet naivete of youth or, more likely, they are building their careers and things are, in fact, getting better for them.”

While Democrats and political independents agree that unemployment is the top issue, Republicans are about evenly split between jobs and the budget deficit, which totaled $1.29 trillion in the fiscal year ended Sept. 30.

“The deficit is outrageous,” says poll respondent Lisa Brandel, a 36-year-old free-lance writer in Bellefontaine, Ohio. “But the root of the problem is that we need more jobs. If we get better employment, more people will be paying taxes and the deficit will go down.”

On the tax cuts, the survey conducted before, during and after the negotiations between the White House and congressional Republicans this week, shows that only a third of Americans support keeping the lower rates for the highest earners.

Another third say they want only the tax cuts for the middle class to be extended, while more than a fourth say all the tax cuts should be allowed to expire Dec. 31, as scheduled.

The agreement Obama announced Dec. 6 would temporarily sustain the tax reductions for all income levels. The president said the compromise was needed to break a deadlock with Republicans who vowed to block tax cuts for middle-income Americans if those for individuals earning more than $200,000 and couples earning more than $250,000 weren’t extended, too.

The Bloomberg National survey of 1,000 U.S. adults has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

To contact the reporter on this story: Rich Miller in Washington rmiller28@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Silva in Washington at msilva34@bloomberg.net

CNN Lets Two Illegal Immigrants Vouch For the Passage of the DREAM Act

THANK YOU NewsBusters(copyright)

By Matthew Balan
December 08, 2010
22:17

CNN's Kiran Chetry helped two illegal immigrants lobby for the passage of the DREAM Act on Wednesday's American Morning, which would grant amnesty to hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrant youth. Chetry encouraged them to express their concerns for the legislation, as many Republicans in Congress don't support it, and tossed softball questions, which gave them ample time to vouch for the act.

The anchor interviewed Cesar Vargas and Gaby Pacheco 40 minutes into the 7 am Eastern hour. Chetry labeled the two "classic examples of who this DREAM Act would help, if it were to pass the Congress" (both were also held up as examples by the Obama administration as two out of the "10 Reasons We Need the Dream Act," as listed on the White House's blog on December 3). She turned to Vargas first and asked, "Are you worried that this [bill] will fail, since there has not been a lot of Republican support?"

After he gave his initial answer, the CNN anchor played up his credentials: "If you take a look at your resume, I guess you could put it, it's very, very impressive. You are going to be graduating from law school in May. You have a 3.8 GPA. You've interned with the Brooklyn DA. You've worked very hard, yet, at the same time, you really can't legally work once you graduate. So what is your plan right now, Cesar?"

Chetry then did the same with Pacheco: "Gaby, as well, you've worked hard at school, an honor student- president of your student body in college- and you likened it- it's interesting- you said, 'I went from being this- you know, all-American- played on sports teams, did really well in school- to now being a criminal.' What are you going to do?"

Later, after listing the DREAM Act's requirements for illegal immigrants, the anchor prompted Pacheco to address a specific Republican's opposition to the proposed legislation: "So Gaby, I want your take- when somebody like Senator Jeff Sessions, the Republican from Alabama, calls it a bill that would result in reckless proposals for mass amnesty and encourage more illegal immigration, what do you say to that?"

CNN didn't turn to any opponents to the bill during the segment. It's just another example of the network "playing favorites," contrary to their claim in a recent ad.

The full transcript of Kiran Chetry's interview of Cesar Vargas and Gaby Pacheco on Wednesday's American Morning:

CHETRY: Well, today, Congress could vote on the DREAM Act, giving almost a million illegal immigrants a path to citizenship by going to college, or for serving in the military for two years. But critics are calling it reckless, and call it mass amnesty in some cases.

We are joined now by two people, both illegal immigrants, who would be directly impacted by the bill. Cesar Vargas' parents brought him to Brooklyn from Mexico when he was just five years old, and Gaby Pacheco's parents came from Ecuador when she was seven. Great to have you both here this morning.

CESAR VARGAS: Thank you for having us.

GABY PACHECO: Thank you.

CHETRY: You really are classic examples of who this DREAM Act would help, if it were to pass the Congress. Cesar, let me start with you. Are you worried that this will fail, since there has not been a lot of Republican support?

VARGAS: Well, all I know is that I'll continue to fight for my dream. America's a can-do country, and I would do just that- persevere. Overall, all I want is the opportunity to serve my country and to give back to the country that has given me so much.

CHETRY: If you take a look at your resume, I guess you could put it, it's very, very impressive. You are going to be graduating from law school in May. You have a 3.8 GPA. You've interned with the Brooklyn DA. You've worked very hard, yet, at the same time, you really can't legally work once you graduate. So what is your plan right now, Cesar?

VARGAS: At this point, as I mentioned before, it's fighting for my dream and to share my stories to our congressional leaders and to say that we're not a problem. We're the solution. We are here to serve our country. For me, personally, I want to serve my country in the military, and also, to contribute to the economy and to serve and contribute to the country I love, the country I call home.

CHETRY: Gaby, as well, you've worked hard at school, an honor student- president of your student body in college- and you likened it- it's interesting- you said, 'I went from being this- you know, all-American- played on sports teams, did really well in school- to now being a criminal.' What are you going to do?

PACHECO: Well, I'm going to continue to fight and we're going to walk the halls of Congress and we're going to let the people know, like Senator Lemieux from Florida, that Mel Martinez was a champion for the DREAM Act, and he needs to do the right thing for Florida. As a matter of fact, 70 percent of the people- voters in the United States support the DREAM Act, and what we're saying is to please give us a chance, give us an opportunity to serve and give back.

CHETRY: I just want to let people know what exactly the DREAM Act would be- the requirements. You have to be under the age of 29, and you also would have to arrived in the U.S. before turning 16- like you two. You were brought over with your families. You have to be in the U.S. for five years, graduate high school, or have a GED, have a clean record and- quote, 'good moral character.' You would also then have to wait 10 years before gaining legal residency. So Gaby, I want your take- when somebody like Senator Jeff Sessions, the Republican from Alabama, calls it a bill that would result in reckless proposals for mass amnesty and encourage more illegal immigration, what do you say to that?

PACHECO: Well, that's not true. What's going to happen is only the people that are here, the people that have been living here- myself, I've been living in the United States for 18 years- I'm an American. The only thing is that I haven't had a path- I haven't had a way to legalize my status, and the DREAM Act would do just that, and- you know, after the 10 years, I would be able to become a resident. And then- you know, there's still a waiting period for me to be able to get my citizenship. So it's a very long process, but it would give us the opportunity to work, to go to college, to serve in our military, be on the front lines, and give back to our country.

CHETRY: And Cesar, this is the other ironic part for you is that- you know, you want to stay here. You said you want to contribute to the U.S. economy. You're sort of up against a wall, unless this gets passed. But you've had offers from other countries- China, Spain, perhaps Canada, that really want you and your brain power.

VARGAS: And that shows my commitment to this country. I love this country. This is my home. I don't want no medals- no awards. All I want is the opportunity to share in the American dream. You know, in my heart and soul, I am an American.

CHETRY: Well, best of luck to both of you. You're doing very well for yourselves, and we'll see what happens as this goes before the Congress. Thanks so much, Cesar Vargas and Gaby Pacheco, for telling your stories to us this morning.

VARGAS: Thank you.

PACHECO: Thank you.

Revised Fed Predictions Suggest a Bleaker Next Two Years than Anticipated

By Ross Kaminsky on 12.6.10 @ 6:07AM

On November 23, the Federal Reserve's Open Market Committee released the minutes from its November 2-3 meeting.

Before getting into the important data regarding the FOMC members' updated forecasts for future economic activity, it should be pointed out that the FOMC staff also have an economic forecast. While the specifics of the staff forecast are not in the minutes, they do mention that "the staff revised up its forecast for economic activity in 2011 and 2012." But note the caveats to this optimism: "the November forecast was conditioned on lower long-term interest rates, higher stock prices, and a lower foreign exchange value of the dollar than was the staff's previous forecast."

Perhaps just to tell the FOMC staff what the markets think of their assumptions, Tuesday gave us much lower stock prices and a much higher foreign exchange value of the dollar, with the USD settling at a 2-month high versus the Euro, with that currency-in-turmoil worth less than $1.34.

Turning to the people whose votes count, the Federal Reserve Board Governors gave new projections on GDP growth, unemployment, and inflation, with their last predictions having been made for the June FOMC meeting.

The results are dramatic in the normally boring world of the Fed: All of the participants' projections for GDP growth for 2010 (which we obviously have almost all the data for already) were between 2.3% and 2.5%, whereas in June, the predictions ranged from 2.9% to 3.8%.

Looking to the future rather than the past, the "central tendency" of GDP projections for 2011 (which removes the three lowest and three highest predictions) fell from a range of 3.5%-4.2% to a range of 3.0%-3.6%, a drop of about ½% of GDP. With GDP around $15 trillion, we're talking about $75 billion less in economic activity, or about $250 for every man, woman, and child in the United States. This is a huge change for just one year from now. Furthermore, since GDP growth is then compounded, this basically means we'll be much poorer every year for the foreseeable future than FOMC participants had expected.

Though the central tendency for 2012 was little changed, the range of guesses fell from 2.8%-5.0% to 2.6%-4.7%.

More importantly, in terms of politics, was the stunning jump in FOMC members' predictions of future unemployment: Again, we know this year's data, so the key aspect of the new 9.5%-9.7% range is that it shows the FOMC having been too optimistic in the past, with the June prediction being 9.2%-9.5%.

But the real story is in the updated forecasts for 2011 and 2012. The new central tendency for 2011 is 8.9%-9.1% versus a June prediction of 8.3% to 8.7%. Using the midpoint of the ranges, the new forecast is a full ½% higher than just 5 months earlier. The 2012 numbers are even worse, with a new range of 7.7% to 8.2%, up from 7.1% to 7.5%, an increase of 0.65% from midpoint to midpoint.

The first factor listed in the minutes as to why participants thought growth would be slower than previously expected was "a high degree of caution exhibited by consumers and businesses." And why wouldn't we be cautious with a government that has gone from wanting to control or destroy private industries from cars to health insurance to banking, to looking utterly incompetent, confused, and ineffective in everything from tax policy to negotiating free trade agreements? There's no way to know what the next shoe will be to drop and therefore little incentive to take entrepreneurial risk.

The minutes also show disagreement about the value and risks of "QE2," the Fed's aggressive Treasury Security purchasing program. Some members thought that the program would help the economy by keeping long-term interest rates low and perhaps by preventing disinflation or deflation. "Some participants, however, anticipated that additional purchases of longer-term securities would have only a limited effect on the pace of the recovery; they judged that the economy's slow growth largely reflected the effects of factors that were not likely to respond to additional monetary policy stimulus…" They also noted risks of debasing the value of the dollar and causing "an undesirably large increase in inflation."

In other words, the Federal Reserve, which is supposed to be a stabilizing buffer against the chaos of the fiscal policies of the elected branches of government, is in the view of even some of its own Governors potentially adding to rather than dampening our current economic turmoil.

The FOMC's new projections, if accurate, could spell disaster for Democrats in 2012. As James Carville famously quipped, "it's the economy, stupid." Indeed it is.

While the Fed's new forecasts might gladden the heart of someone who would love to see Barack Obama be a one-term president, we must not forget the huge cost to our nation of millions of people kept unemployed by the ultra-Keynesian policies being implemented by the current administration and Obama's willing accomplice, "Helicopter Ben" Bernanke. These policies are all the more reprehensible because Bernanke is an economic historian and the lessons of history are replete with the consistent and utter failure of Keynesian economics.

To the extent that Democrats in Congress believe, as President Obama and Nancy Pelosi have both suggested, that their 2010 electoral drubbing was due to simply not explaining their actions well enough, their echo chamber will cause them to ignore the screaming, pleading voices of an American citizenry desperate for economic stability. We should all hope that the Fed's new projections are overly pessimistic; but should they be accurate (or not pessimistic enough) we should all endeavor to ensure that those responsible for economic failure pay a political price when the votes are counted two years from now

Taking the Christ out of Festivus

by Brian Carpenter
It’s not well known that Festivus is a Christian holiday, and thus it has always been. Festivus, our Christian birthright, has been stolen from us by the forces of secularism, and we have been brainwashed into thinking that it is not a sacred Christian festival. Simply look at its symbols and rituals and the Christian roots are plain for all to see.

For instance, the chief decoration for Festivus celebrants is the Festivus pole. It is a plain aluminum pole, perfectly upright and serene. Now that Festivus poles are commercially available (Darn these lovers of filthy lucre! Will they never stop ruining our sacred celebrations with their commerce! A pox on them and their households!) the divinely inspired structure of the Festivus pole can be plainly seen by all who have a computer and internet access.

If you click the link you will notice that the Festivus pole is one pole, but it is made of three parts. The three parts constitute one pole. The Three are One. And not only that, the two parts of the base (shall we call them the First and Second parts of the Festivus pole?) are united together as one and then the Third part proceeds from the other two.

Notice also the simplicity and the self-sufficiency of our beautiful Three In One pole. It does not need (indeed, it will not tolerate) any tinsel or lights or other adornments. It stands starkly and simply. It speaks of spiritual things with its high strength-to-weight ratio. It proclaims hidden knowledge to those who have ears to hear and eyes to see. O dear reader, can you not hear it shouting of the existence of the Triune God, a truth known to no other faith but ours? This alone should be sufficient to prove the Christian origins of Festivus, but I have more evidence to present.

The next ritual we shall explain is called “The Airing of Grievances.” This takes place after a celebratory dinner. Each person present sits around the table and explains to all present all the different ways each of them has disappointed him/her in the past year. The liturgy is simple to learn. You only need to begin with the phrase, “I got a lotta problems with you people!”

Can there be any more Christian way of being in community with one another? In the esteemed words of the unwitting prophet of Festivus, former Willow Creek Pastor John Ortberg: “…entering into a life of community will require a tenacious inner commitment that you will not live with unaddressed conflict.”

To put it another way, we must take seriously the words of Jesus preserved for us in Eugene Peterson’s excellent “translation” of the New Testament, The Message: “If a fellow believer hurts you, go and tell him—work it out between the two of you. If he listens, you’ve made a friend.”

Finally, the evening ends with Feats of Strength. The observance of this sacred evening cannot be concluded, and the guests cannot leave, unless and until the host is wrestled to the floor and pinned by one of the guests selected beforehand. Can you not see the Gospel symbolism in this sacred exercise? You must be a blind man if you can’t.

“Or how can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Matthew 12:29).

The Devil, the Strong Man who formerly held us captive in the bondage of iniquity, has been bound by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and his goods (us) have been plundered. That is the essence of our salvation. The host of the Festivus celebration has the sacred privilege of playing “Devil’s Advocate” in the celebration, and the mighty chosen guest plays the part of Christ in a drama of cosmic significance. Christ bests the Strong Man, pinning him to the floor and symbolically setting the merry captives free. Here is soteriology writ large. Will you not thrill at the drama of it? Will you not bow before the sacred mystery?

With these obvious truths fresh in our minds, it is easy to see that the god of this world has blinded the reprobate, and has deceived even the Children of Light concerning the precious truths of Festivus. We Christians have been deprived of our sacred rituals and have seen them obscured and trampled upon. Can you not see how much the Christian origins of it have been obscured in that Jews, atheists, and even Jewish atheists will cheerfully observe and recommend it?

I call on all Christians everywhere to rescue Festivus from its terrible decay. Next year, on December 23, I want to see Festivus celebrations in every Christian home. I wish to see the Festivus pole restored to its rightful place in the sanctuaries of all our churches. I want to see us refusing to allow unaddressed conflict. I want wrestling matches galore! Our Lord demands nothing less from His servants! To arms! The battle is ours to win!

Is Hollywood mounting a war on Christmas? Movie studios to Santa: Drop dead.

December 7, 2010 8:38 am

For now, anyway.

It's hard to know how much is cultural, how much is financial and how much is cyclical. But whatever the reason, there isn't a single Christmas movie on studios' calendar this December.

There are, of course, a number of movies meant to appeal to family audiences: the Jack Black adaptation of "Gulliver's Travels," the latest "Chronicles of Narnia" installment, a "Tron" sequel. But movies having to do with snow, reindeer, Santa or anything else holiday are nowhere to be found.

There isn't even a darkly comic anti-Christmas movie, like a "Bad Santa" or "Christmas with the Kranks." (The lone Christmas release of any kind, Elle Fanning's "Nutcracker in 3-D," wasn't released by a studio and is a holiday turkey; about seven people have seen it since it came out two weeks ago.)

Things don't change much next year, either. There's only one major holiday release scheduled for 2011, the animated movie "Arthur Christmas" -- and that comes from the U.K.

As my colleague Dawn Chmielewski and I explore in a story in Tuesday's Times, there are plenty of explanations for the trend. Studios don't usually take sides in culture-wars debates. They do, however, pay attention to the shifting winds. And as Joe Roth, the former Disney executive who once shepherded holiday hits like "Home Alone" and "Santa Clause," says, holiday pictures just aren't where the creative or monetary Zeitgeist is circa 2010.

"The way to do a big-budget film these days is to take stories that everyone in the world knows and take them in a new direction," Roth told us. "But no one's come up with a fresh way to do a holiday movie, so we're all doing it with other kinds of stories." (Roth is doing just that with "Snow White" and "The Wizard of Oz.")

In past years there have been scads of movies playing off the holidays. In fact, as recently as 2006 we had a sack full of them, from a Danny DeVito comedy ("Deck the Halls") to a Nancy Meyers heartwarmer ("The Holiday"), to a horror movie ("Black Christmas"). That glut has turned, just four years later, into a scarcity. (Whether any of the '06 movies were any good is another matter.)

But don't be quick to blame Hollywood. Most of the movies from that fertile year of 2006 flopped. So right now, Hollywood executives' assumption is that Americans would rather come to theaters to see stories about pretty much anything other than Christmas. Are they right?



--

Hold the Brownies! Obama Set to Sign Bill Limiting School Bake Sales

Posted on December 3, 2010 at 7:30pm by Scott Baker  WASHINGTON (AP) — Don’t touch my brownies!


A child nutrition bill on its way to President Barack Obama — and championed by the first lady — gives the government power to limit school bake sales and other fundraisers that health advocates say sometimes replace wholesome meals in the lunchroom.

Republicans, notably Sarah Palin, and public school organizations decry the bill as an unnecessary intrusion on a common practice often used to raise money.

“This could be a real train wreck for school districts,” Lucy Gettman of the National School Boards Association said Friday, a day after the House cleared the bill. “The federal government should not be in the business of regulating this kind of activity at the local level.”

The legislation, part of first lady Michelle Obama’s campaign to stem childhood obesity, provides more meals at school for needy kids, including dinner, and directs the Agriculture Department to write guidelines to make those meals healthier. The legislation would apply to all foods sold in schools during regular class hours, including in the cafeteria line, vending machines and at fundraisers.

It wouldn’t apply to after-hours events or concession stands at sports events.

Public health groups pushed for the language on fundraisers, which encourages the secretary of Agriculture to allow them only if they are infrequent. The language is broad enough that a president’s administration could even ban bake sales, but Secretary Tom Vilsack signaled in a letter to House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-Calif., this week that he does not intend to do that. The USDA has a year to write rules that decide how frequent is infrequent.

Margo Wootan of the Center for Science in the Public Interest says the bill is aimed at curbing daily or weekly bake sales or pizza fundraisers that become a regular part of kids’ lunchtime routines. She says selling junk food can easily be substituted with nonfood fundraisers.

“These fundraisers are happening all the time,” Wootan said. “It’s a pizza sale one day, doughnuts the next… It’s endless. This is really about supporting parental choice. Most parents don’t want their kids to use their lunch money to buy junk food. They expect they’ll use their lunch money to buy a balanced school meal.”

Not all see it that way.

Palin mocked the efforts last month by bringing a plate of cookies to a school speech in Pennsylvania. Rep. John Kline of Minnesota, the senior Republican on the House Education and Labor Committee, said the federal government “has really gone too far” when it is deciding when to hold bake sales.

Some parents say they are perplexed by what the new rules might allow.

In Seminole, Fla., the Seminole High Warhawks Marching Band‘s booster club held a bake sale to help send the band’s 173 members to this year‘s Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade in New York. One of the bake sale’s specialties: New York-style cheesecake, an homage to the destination they’d pursued for 10 years.

“Limiting bake sales is so narrow-minded,” said Laura Shortway, whose 17-year-old daughter, Mallory, is a drummer in the band. “Having bake sales keeps these fundraisers community based, which is very appealing to the person making the purchase.”

Several school districts and state education departments already have policies suggesting or enforcing limits on bake sales, both for nutritional reasons and to keep the events from competing for dollars against school cafeterias. In Connecticut, for instance, about 70 percent of the state‘s school districts have signed on to the state education department’s voluntary guidelines encouraging healthy foods in place of high-sugar, high-fat options.

Under those rules, bake sales cannot be held on school grounds unless the items meet nutrition standards that specifically limit portion sizes, fat content, sodium and sugars. That two-ounce, low-fat granola bar? Probably OK, depending what’s in it. But grandma’s homemade oversized brownie with cream cheese frosting and chocolate chips inside? Probably not.

One loophole in Connecticut: The nutritional standards apply if the food is being sold at a bake sale, but not if it’s being given away free, such as by a parent for a child’s birthday.

“If a mom wants to send in cupcakes to celebrate St. Patrick’s Day, that would not be subject to the state guidelines,” said Thomas Murphy, a spokesman for the state’s education department.

In New York City, a rule enacted in 2009 allows bake sales only once a month, and they must comply with nutritional standards and be part of a parent group fundraiser.

Wootan says she hopes the rules will prompt schools to try different options for fundraising.

“Schools are so used to doing the same fundraisers every year that they need a strong nudge to do something new,” she says. “The most important rebuttal to all of these arguments is that schools can make money other ways — you don’t have to harm kids health.”

Associated Press writer Stephanie Reitz contributed to this report from Hartford, Conn.

It’s Time To Be Offensive

Bill Muehlenberg’s commentary on issues of the day…


The history of the Christian church is replete with examples of the believing community being sucked into the worldview and values of the surrounding culture. It happens all the time unfortunately, and will undoubtedly continue. The church is meant to be countercultural, but it so seldom really is.

Indeed, in God’s upside-down kingdom, you can almost take it as a rule of thumb that whatever the world is just crazy about, the church should be dead set against. Within reason, and with obvious exceptions, that may not be a bad way to look at things. Indeed, if the world is in love with what you are doing, then you might need to ask if what you are doing is really of God.

Consider just one area in which the church has slavishly conformed to the world around it, instead of radically challenging it. Today in the West it has become axiomatic that the only ‘virtues’ worth agitating for are acceptance and tolerance.

In an age which believes in nothing, it is assumed that we are supposed to get excited about nothing. Just live and let live. Whatever you are into, or are doing, or believing, that is just hunky dory. Who am I to judge you? The only thing anyone should do is embrace everything, accept everything, judge nothing, and criticise nothing.

And this silly and even harmful mindset has now crept into the churches big time as well. We have simply soaked up the false values of the surrounding culture, and put a Christian spin on it all. Indeed, we seek to recruit Jesus in justifying our embrace of such worldly lunacy.

Thus we now have so many believers who are terrified of saying anything or doing anything for fear of offending somebody. They seem to think it is the loving thing, the polite thing, even the Christlike thing, not to rock the boat and not to cause even a hint of controversy.

Well these believers really need to start reading their Bibles again – or for the first time. Simply reading the four Gospels will show what foolish and unscriptural sentiments these are. Time and time again we read about Jesus offending people, getting people angry, causing division, and provoking major public commotion. Wherever he went, he seemed to get into trouble.

We see that he was constantly causing uproars, alienating people, and coming in for criticism. There are plenty of passages one can appeal to here. In Luke 4:28-29 we find these words: “All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this. They got up, drove him out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him off the cliff.”

Well, at least he provoked a reaction. In many churches today it’s all a preacher can do to simply keep the congregation awake. Jesus had no such problems. People either loved him or hated him. There was no little middle ground.

And we are told this on numerous occasions. John 7:40-43 puts it this way: “On hearing his words, some of the people said, ‘Surely this man is the Prophet.’ Others said, ‘He is the Christ.’ Still others asked, ‘How can the Christ come from Galilee? Does not the Scripture say that the Christ will come from David’s family and from Bethlehem, the town where David lived?’ Thus the people were divided because of Jesus.”

Now Jesus could easily have softened his message. After all, isn’t the name of the game church growth? Isn’t the real deal to get numbers? Why unnecessarily turn people off? Just tone things down a bit and the crowds will come rushing in.

But that is not how Jesus operated. Consider John 6:60-67: “On hearing it, many of his disciples said, ‘This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?’Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, ‘Does this offend you?’… From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.”

Jesus obviously was not reading carefully books like How to Win Friends and Influence People. He knew people took offence at his words, and he fully accepted that people would reject him and his teaching. Indeed, he put it this way: “Do you suppose that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, No; but rather division” (Luke 12:51).

Of course we could go on to the book of Acts and see how this same pattern plays itself out over and over again. Just one example, however. In Acts 17:6 we are told this about the early believers: they “caused trouble everywhere” (GNB). A troublesome bunch, those early Christians. If that was so very true of Jesus and the early church, should it not be true of us as well?

Now it really should go without saying that when I speak about this, I am not suggesting that we go out of our way causing trouble, seeking to deliberately be offensive, and taking no regard for the legitimate sensitivities of others. We are to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves, as Jesus commanded us.

I am simply saying that it is the nature of the beast – that is, the normal Christian life – that offense will be taken quite often when we simply live a life of truth, integrity and conformity to the will and claims of Christ. That will always prove to be offensive to people. It was true of Jesus, and it will be true of us.

So by all means, let us be tactful, diplomatic, and seek to build bridges where possible. Let us strive be as gracious and loving and kinds as we can be. But just remember, the most gracious, loving and kind person on earth was rejected by men, an outcast of the world, and eventually crucified for taking an unflinching stand for the truth of God.

Can we be, and do, any less?

The Constitution, Article I, Sections 1-9

I think most of you would agree, this country is in real need of a history lesson, or at least a refresher course. I have taken it upon myself to do this for you.

Did you know the TSA can not make or enforce laws, nor can the FBI, Or the Dept. of Justice. Only Congress can make laws, The president can issue executive order, which if you watch over the next few months, he is going to abuse this power in draconian measures.

He can do that and pay  the price for it.

Remember, congress writes the laws !.... here's proof :

ARTICLE I


THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

Section 1--The Congress

Lawmaking powers given; two houses.

All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Section 2--The House of Representatives

Two-year terms; election of members.

The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature.

Qualifications.

No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the age of twenty-five years, and been seven years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state in which he shall be chosen.

Distribution of Representatives and direct taxes.

Representatives [and direct taxes]amd shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers, [which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three- fifths of all other persons]amd. The actual enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent term of ten years, in such manner as they shall by law direct. The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each state shall have at least one Representative; [and until such enumeration shall be made, the state of New Hampshire shall be entitled to choose three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three]amd.

Filling vacancies.

When vacancies happen in the representation from any state, the executive authority thereof shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies.

Officers; power of impeachment.

The House of Representatives shall choose their speaker and other officers, and shall have the sole power of impeachment.

Section 3--The Senate

Two members from each state; six-year terms.

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, [chosen by the legislature thereof,]amd for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.

One-third elected every two years; filling vacancies.

Immediately after they shall be assembled in consequence of the first election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three classes. The seats of the Senators of the first class shall be vacated at the expiration of the second year, of the second class at the expiration of the fourth year, and of the third class at the expiration of the sixth year, so that one-third may be chosen every second year; [and if vacancies happen by resignation, or otherwise, during the recess of the legislature of any state, the executive thereof may make temporary appointments until the next meeting of the legislature, which shall then fill such vacancies]amd.

Qualifications.

No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the age of thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state for which he shall be chosen.
President of the Senate.

The Vice President of the United States shall be president of the Senate, but shall have no vote unless they be equally divided.
Other officers.

The Senate shall choose their other officers, and also a president pro tempore in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the office of President of the United States.

Trial of impeachments.

The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside; and no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the members present.

Punishment of those found guilty.

Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States; but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment, according to law.

Section 4--Congressional Elections and Sessions

Regulation of elections.

The times, places, and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, [except as to the places of choosing Senators]amd.

Annual sessions.

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, [and such meeting shall be on the first Monday in December,]amd unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Section 5--Internal Operations of Congress

Admission of members; number required to do business.

Each house shall be the judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its own members, and a majority of each shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner and under such penalties as each house may provide.

Rules; punishment and removal of members.

Each house may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member.

Public records to be kept.

Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such parts as may in their judgment require secrecy; and the yeas and nays of the members of either house on any question shall, at the desire of one-fifth of those present, be entered on the journal.

Adjournment.

Neither house, during the session of Congress, shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other place than that in which the two houses shall be sitting.

Section 6--Congressional Privileges and Restrictions

Payment; freedom from arrest.

The Senators and Representatives shall receive a compensation for their services, to be ascertained by law and paid out of the treasury of the United States. They shall in all cases, except treason, felony, and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either house, they shall not be questioned in any other place.

Holding other offices not allowed.

No Senator or Representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under the authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been increased, during such time; and no person holding any office under the United States shall be a member of either house during his continuance in office.

Section 7--The Lawmaking Process

Tax bills.

All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other bills.

How bills become laws; the President's veto; overriding a veto.

Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate shall, before it become a law, be presented to the President of the United States. If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his objections, to that house in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the objections at large on their journal and proceed to reconsider it. If after such reconsideration two-thirds of that house shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other house, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two-thirds of that house, it shall become a law. But in all such cases the votes of both houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the journal of each house respectively. If any bill shall not be returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their adjournment prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a law.

Congressional orders and resolutions.

Every order, resolution, or vote to which the concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and, before the same shall take effect, shall be approved by him, or, being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two- thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the rules and limitations prescribed in the case of a bill.

Section 8--Powers of Congress

(1-17. Enumerated powers.)

The Congress shall have power:

To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish an uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively the appointment of the officers and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation, in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;-And

Implied powers.

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

Section 9--Limitations on Congress

(1-6. Restrictions on lawmaking.)

[The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.]amd

The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.

No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed.

No capitation [or other direct tax]amd shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state.

No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another; nor shall vessels bound to or from one state be obliged to enter, clear, or pay duties in another.

How public money is spent.

No money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.

Titles of nobility not allowed.

No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States; and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.