But as for me and my house ...
Yes. Mr. Lew has a horrible 'signature' - though I use the term signature loosely. But, who is he? Look for biography material on Jacob ('Jack') Lew and you won't find much. Past the resume you will find his affiliations which give a much larger picture of who Jacob Lew really is.
Jack Lew became involved in politics prior to graduating from college and entering Georgetown University law school. After working for Representatives, Joe Moakley and 'Tip' O'Neill from Massachusetts, Lew practiced law for five years. In 1993-94, Lew was Special Assistant to then-President Bill Clinton, responsible for policy development and the drafting of the national service initiative (AmeriCorps) and healthcare reform legislation, two common topics between Clinton's and Obama's administrations.
After serving in other government positions, including Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Lew left politics to work for New York University prior to joining Citigroup. Lew was named Chief Operating Officer of Alternative Investments in 2006. The division housed hedge funds and private equity investments. Massive losses in that division helped drive Citigroup into the federal bailout debacle to the tune of $45 billion in taxpayer money. Lew was paid $2 million in 2008, and somehow earned a bonus of almost $1 million.
By the end of 2008, Lew was again in Washington, D.C., as a deputy secretary of state under Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton.
One of Lew's most troublesome affiliations is the Council on Foreign Relations, a organizational arm of the Illuminati. He was offered membership around the time he went to Citigroup. Lew is also a member of the Brookings Institute Hamilton Project and the National Academy of Social Insurance. Brookings is an Illuminati think tank and NASI receives funding from yet another Illuminati organization, the Ford Foundation. Obviously, Mr. Lew is part of the Illuminati machine.
"I describe budgets as a tapestry: When it's woven together, the picture amounts to our hopes and dreams of a nation." (Jacob Lew)
For almost 100 years, the 'tapestry' has been woven by the international bankers who are members of the Illuminati families. Their desire is to eradicate the United States of America and they are on the cusp of so doing.
It does not matter the stated religious affiliation of an Illuminati member, whether Jewish, Christian, or any other, they are foremost Luciferians. Satan worshippers! Believe me or don't ... it is still the truth.
Brand USA was established in May, 2011, under the Travel Promotion Act of 2010 to "increase inbound travel to the United States, resulting in increased U.S. exports and increased employment", according to the website. While the program was to be funded through a combination of private and public support, a $10 fee was to be assessed on travelers from countries who participate in the Visa Waiver Program to be deposited in a special fund in the U.S. Treasury.
The Act specifies that Brand USA can draw from this fund if it receives matching donations from the private sector. In 2012 Brand USA received two dollars from the Treasury for every private dollar it collected and one dollar from the Treasury for every private dollar in subsequent years. The Act allows only 20% of the donations be received be in cash - the remainder in in-kind donations.
Unfortunately, this effort has been an economic boon only to those associated with the 'public-private' company. The Daily Caller reports it obtained documents revealing "extensive waste and mismanagement at the public-private partnership".
The Washington Free Beacon reports in its article, “The Cronyism Board Tourism Board Stacked with Obama Cronies” that numerous Brand USA Board members were 'heavy' contributors to President Obama and Democratic campaigns. Documents show that many members of the Board of Directors of Brand USA are also significant cash contributors to the corporation. Of the eleven members of the board, eight have made cash contributions to the corporation. The board members were appointed by John Connor, director of the Office of White House Liaison at the U.S. Department of Commerce. Mr. Connor led Obama’s LGBT outreach efforts in the northeastern U.S. during the 2008 presidential campaign.
An October Congressional report, “Initial Investigation of Brand USA and the Department of Commerce’s Oversight,” detailed some of the partnership's unusual activities. And KTS Business Consulting performed a comprehensive audit of Brand USA the agency’s management.
According to the audit, “Although The Brand USA has a mission statement, not one staff member was able to recite it.” “Furthermore, a majority of the staff did not have any idea what the mission was. … It became very clear that The Brand USA needs a strong vision. Staff’s responses were all varied, and it identified that there is not a consensus on the direction of the organization." Further, Brand USA "[s]taff spends money without any checks and balances or funds tied to a budget.”
The Report highlights serious concerns about how the federal matching funds were spent and asserts abuses by Brand USA in its pursuit of unjustified federal funds, and alleging Brand USA has refused to fully respond to Congressional inquiries.
The October 1, 2012 deadline (when “donations” to Brand USA were reduced to a one-to-one value) created an urgency at Brand USA that led to numerous questionable donations.
Amtrak donated $10,000 in cash, in addition to train tickets, corporate information technology support, and 22 luxury baseball seats. These weren't just good seats, but located in the 'Lincoln Suite'. Forbes.com reported, “[t]he Lincoln Suites, starting at $300,000 per year, include access to the private Stars and Stripes membership club, a private entrance off the main concourse, and inside the suite, marble countertops with an induction heating range to keep catered food warm.” How does a luxury night at a baseball game further Brand USA’s mission?
Amtrak defended its contributions, stating they originated from ticket revenue; however, Amtrak's ticket revenue is not easily distinguishable from federal taxpayer funds provided to the company - currently, $1.5 billion annually. Essentially, Brand USA received additional federal funds from Amtrak.
Brand USA also attempted to collect over $10 millions dollars in federal funds for the market value of advertising it received free of charge from newspaper articles and television interviews, and the value of time spent by the company's Chairman. A 2 1/2-minute interview with Travel Channel International was valued at $4.9 million by the company; and, an interview with Eurosport was given a value of $272,172. A $4.9 million donation alone would have netted the company almost $9 million in federal funds.
Board members also inflated 'expenses' as donations. One trip to London by Board member, Randy Garfield (Disney Destinations), listed the total cost of round trip airfrare from Orlando to London as $10,037.60, although the roundtrip direct flight on British Airways from Orlando to London was $1,951.92. Tom Klein of Sabre Holdings, listed a $379 in car fare between meetings on October 5, 2011, and $95 on November 11, 2011, with hotel charges of $365. The fare from Union Station to the Capitol Hilton was $13. The distance from the Corporation for Travel Promotion to Reagan National Airport is 5.5 miles, and taxi fare is $24. And, the General Services Administration permits a maximum per diem for lodging in Washington D.C. of $183.
Fortunately, the Department of Commerce refused the above 'donations'.
Brand USA is less than two years old and has a spending record that rivals any government agency, including:
Chief Communications Officer, Anne Madison, insists that 85% of the organization’s funding is spent on marketing and programs to meet its goals. Madison claims an increase of 12% for Canadians' “intent to visit” the U.S., 14% for Japanese, and 14% in the United Kingdom since Brand USA's launch. However, actual numbers to prove such increases are not accessible. What value does 'intent' have?
Brand USA was established to increase tourism and create jobs: a proposal which would have meager economic impact, at best. It seems the only jobs it has created is for those who are involved with the partnership.
I submit - once again - responsibility and accountability are non-existent at the federal level these days.
President Barack Obama’s Chairman of the Council on Jobs and Competitiveness (jobs czar) continues his position at General Electric. Jeff Imelt, endorsed China's socialist state in a December 10th interview, saying, “state-run communism may not be your cup of tea, but their government works.”
China’s government is presently updating the country’s infrastructure; especially, coal-fired and nuclear power plants, electricity transmission lines, and railway lines. General Electric builds and exports all of these items; and, therefore, has not been impacted as greatly by the deep, four-year-long recession.
Meanwhile, back in the U.S.(S.R.), Obama’s economic management has consisted of enormous increases in spending: welfare (not including Obamacare), aid to immigrants, homosexuals, and unmarried people, and tens of billions on green energy companies (at least two have claimed bankruptcy and also received tax relief in addition to free taxpayer funds). Unlike China, U.S. citizens and companies have been doubly encumbered by environmental regulations, including the forced purchase of 'new generation' energy saving products. Guess who manufactures those products? General Electric (and other companies).
Obama's efforts cannot spur economic growth; and, can only drain the already suffering economy and overwhelm the taxpayer with decades of maintaining the cost of the debt, with no ability to pay it off. Yet, Obama wa
Very telling of the state of the U.S. economy is Imelt's statement that in the next three years: “we will sell more [energy producing gas-turbines] in Algeria than the United States.”
Is there any wonder why we are in the predicament we are in?
The Congressional Budget Office released a report in November concerning the expenses exacerbating the federal debt and recommendations to reduce future budget deficits. The report contains one eye-popping scheme.
According to the CBO, the largest potential deficit savings available to lawmakers is entitlements! Specifically - ObamaCare.
In the CBO's list of "options to reduce mandatory spending" and cut the deficit, repealing ObamaCare's massive insurance subsidies would cut federal spending by $150 billion in 2020 alone. Repealing the individual mandate would save another $40 billion, the CBO says.
Compare this with the cost savings of proposed changes to the Social Security and Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67 ($60 billion), reducing Social Security benefits ($30 billion), a Medicare Part D rebate levied against drug manufacturers ($15 billion); and, cutting Social Security disability benefits by 15% ($10 billion). That's a total of $115 billion in 2020; and, while necessary, definitely not near the $190 billion saved by repealing just two pieces of ObamaCare.
The CBO reports that Obamacare will add $1.7 trillion in federal spending over the next 10 years, with annual increases of 6%. Of course, the CBO has repeatedly revised the numbers in ever increasing amounts over the last two years. Consider the fact that the cost projection of every previous federal program has been woefully underestimated. When Medicare began in 1966, costs were 50% greater than expected in its first year; and, two years later, Congress held hearings on the cost issues.
The CBO projects its recommendations would reduce the budget deficit from nearly $1.1 trillion in fiscal year 2012 to about $200 billion in 2022, and debt would decline from 102% in 2011 to 58% of GDP in 2022 if its recommendations are implements. The CBO projections include the significant tax increases and spending decreases, already scheduled to take effect at the beginning of January, 2013; and, its recommendations do nothing to decrease the present debt.
That being said, spending on interest and "entitlement" programs (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, ObamaCare, welfare, etc.) constituted 12% of the 2004 economy (not budget), but the cost of entitlements is estimated to encompass approximately 17% of the economy by 2020.
The CBO warns that without significant changes to ObamaCare, Medicare, Social Security, Welfare, and other entitlement programs, future budget deficits will be much larger and federal expenses as a percentage of GDP will be far greater than the last four-decade average, regardless of future economic and population trends they foresee.
The CBO concluded that "per capita spending on healthcare is likely to continue to grow faster" than the economy as a whole; and, that, ObamaCare in its present form will encourage this trend because it will "substantially increase the number of people who receive federal assistance in obtaining health care."
Insurance subsidies included in ObamaCare presently extend to families with incomes up to $90,000 per year; almost 900% greater than the poverty level for a one-person household and more than 400% over the amount for a four-person household. This entitlement is one area of ObamaCare targeted for reduction by the CBO due to its huge cost (see third paragraph above).
Tax increases in addition to those included in ObamaCare will also be forced upon the ever-diminishing number of American taxpayers.
If you ask me, it's all about selfishness. Some Americans today want to be given everything that those who work long and hard enjoy. They don't care about their children or their children's children. That's their problem.
Whatever happened to, "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." (John F. Kennedy)
I am ashamed of this society - not the society of which Michelle Obama was ashamed about five years ago. American society thirty years ago (maybe 20) would have seen the evil within and expelled it. Now, they welcome it.
The population of the United States rose to over 314 million in August, 2012. To our detriment, we pay for more than two million federal workers, most of which earn much more than their public counterparts.
In the 1,420 days since he [Barack Obama] took the oath of office, the federal government has daily hired on average 101 new employees. Every day. Seven days a week. All 202 weeks. That makes 143,000 more federal workers than when Obama talked forever on that cold day in January of 2009.
Under Obama the total federal workforce has surpassed two million for the first time since the first Clinton term, now sitting about the 2.2 ,million level.
Now comes a new poll revealing that Americans know what's going on. A majority of Americans believes government workers make more money than private sector workers, according to the new Rasmussen Reports poll. Sixty-one percent of private sector workers believe that.
Surprisingly, Republicans, independents and Democrats are united in agreement that government employees have it better than private sector workers although, predictably, Dems are slightly less sure.
"The federal workforce has become an elite island of secure and high-paid workers, separated from the ocean of average American workers competing in the global economy," according to a report this year by the Cato Institute.
That report found the average civilian federal government worker collected just under $84,000 a year in taxpayer money, about $32,000 more than the average private sector worker. That's a total federal worker package of about $236 billion a year.
In his public outbursts during the alleged fiscal cliff negotiations, Obama has suggested that talks over federal spending cuts come later after his immediate favored tax increases.
Obama has frozen the inflated federal salaries into next spring, while the Republican platform in this fall's campaign called for a 10% reduction in the federal labor force through attrition. The reelected Obama seems unlikely to go along with that idea.
Congressional Republicans have also called for firing the thousands of federal employees who are behind in their income taxes but still somehow remain on the public payroll.
The latest IRS report said, for instance, that 36 of Obama's White House aides had $833,000 in unpaid back taxes.
According to Rasmussen, two out of three Americans are sure that company employees work harder than their lazy lay-about government counterparts. Only five percent think it's the other way around; they may belong to street repair crews (see photo above).
Even a plurality (48%) of government employees admit their private industry counterparts do work harder.
Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/politics-andrew-malcolm/121012-636426-americans-figure-out-public-employees-have-it-better-than-private-workers.htm#ixzz2Eihz5KHZ
Mitch McConnell, (R-Kentucky), called the President's bluff on a fiscal cliff proposal last week. But Harry Reid (D-Nevada) did not allow a vote, calling it a ‘stunt’. So, when the President blames the Republicans for the nation being propelled off the fiscal cliff, remember this. The 'stunt' planned was for the Republicans to stand their ground and get the blame. Either way, the Republicans will get blamed. I think we should do what the President wants and let the chips falls where they may.
I can find no current reporting from CNN, MSNBC or the like. The Huffington Post reporter, Michael McAuliff, is the only reporter who also claims Reid reversed his position on the vote and offered to go ahead with it, but I cannot find that information confirmed anywhere. Great reporting, Mike!
Reid together with his 50-member caucus, changed the Senate rules to block Republicans from forcing a vote on the Bill, and to block any proposed amendments after any Bill is approved. After a ruling from the presiding officer that McConnell did not need unanimous consent to force a vote on his motion, Reid appealed.
So, why would Reid say, no vote? Could it be that Democrats don't support the President's plan? Yes!
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) said Wednesday that President Obama’s plan does not actually balance the budget, saying, 'We all know that. It’s going to take common sense spending reductions. It’s going to take the right kind of revenue policy. So it takes both to get it done. But we’ve got to do it step by step.' Senator Stabenow also said, 'We’ll never get out of debt with 12 million people out of work. So we also have to make sure that we’re doing this in a smooth transition so that we’re continuing to grow as an economy as well.' Senators from Virginia and Louisiana would also vote 'no.'
Consider the following in lieu of a list: Administration officials state that the fiscal cliff plan comprised much of what has been in the President's budget proposals, all of which have been soundly rejected by Democratic lawmakers, 0-414. But, 19 House Democrats supported the bipartisan House-passed plan to stop the tax rate hikes on middle class taxpayers and small businesses.
Roll Call reports some Democrats are alarmed at “the prospect of voting to raise $1.6 trillion in revenue, provide more government stimulus and permanently minimize Congress’ role in approving debt limit hikes.”
This is what this President does. Usurps the power from the other branches of government via executive orders and Bills. Do you remember that the founders established three branches of government to keep the powers of each in check? Obviously, Barack Hussein Obama doesn't think that works well. Forget that this country has stood in good stead for over 200 years! He doesn't want to deal with Congress because they won't do what he wants!
The Congressional Budget Office reports that, under current law, federal tax revenues will rise to a record level as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the coming decade. But, annual federal spending will also increase by 55 percent and the ongoing deficits will require continued debt limit increases by Congress to the tune of $4.25 trillion.
So, no matter how much money taxpayers give, the government will continue to outspend us.
Senate Democrats have rewritten the package to pay for its stimulus provisions with a 5.6 surtax on annual income above $1 million. Now, that's 'super-wealthy'. I wonder how many people and companies will fit this criteria.
Every day, the media reports that the U.S. financial situation is in dire need of substantial tax increases or the 'fiscal cliff' - i.e., bankruptcy - is in our future. President Barack Obama doesn't want to cut any budget items and Speaker Boehner says the Republicans won't agree to tax increases without budget cuts, as well.
I have news for you: there are already substantial tax increases in 2013. So, the tax increases the President and Congress are 'fighting' over will put the U.S. among the top ten (possibly top five) most heavily taxed nation in one fell swoop. (As of 2011, the U.S. was 15th.)
Be prepared. The tax increases President Clinton proposed and Congress ratified in 1993 were retroactive. If you didn't increase your withholdings during the year to estimate what would be due, a $500 penalty was imposed.
In the midst of this insanity, Mr. Obama is putting together a climate treaty requiring, for the first time, cuts in fossil-fuel emissions from both the U.S. and China. This in addition to UN efforts. Over 190 nations via envoys are meeting at the United Nations to establish a treaty that would supersede limits on emissions for industrial nations under the Kyoto Protocol, which the U.S. never ratified.
Obama is moving forward with greenhouse-gas rules for vehicles and power plants, appliance standards (again), research into low-emitting energy sources (here we go again), and for 80% of U.S. electricity to come from clean energy sources, including nuclear and natural gas. All this may help cut greenhouse gases 17 percent in 2020 in the U.S. Natural gas is inexpensive now; however, as the U.S. begins exporting, the price will inevitably rise.
Carbon emissions come from burning fossil fuels. People create carbon emissions each time we drive, fly, turn on a light, and simply live our normal 21st century lives. It isn't just about the coal industry anymore.
Countries are ranked based upon the most fossil fuels on a per person basis by the U.S. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, part of the U.S. Department of Energy. Qatar tops the list (14.58 metric tons per person), followed by Trinidad and Tobago, United Arab Emirates, Netherlands Antilles and Bahrain. The U.S. is No. 12 on the list, with 4.9 metric tons (4,900 kilograms) of carbon emitted per person, but this is due to our higher population.
Forget the fact that it was proven the global warming data was falsified. This is just another way to get back at the United States for being successful.
Whether we'll be able to afford to drive to work, light our homes, cook food, or brush our teeth is up in the air at this point.
Fact: The UN member nations are taking control whether Americans agree to it or not.
Fact: This creates the first world government.
Fact: Despite decades in which the U.S. financially supported the rest of the world, they hate us.
Fact: The United Nations has been trying to tax the U.S. for its 'carbon footprint' for awhile.
Fact: Mr. Obama is enabling their efforts, as well as giving the UN authority over American guns, and giving the UN access to our elections.
Fact: Every Constitutional right you ever had by treaty and executive order (bypassing Congress - thereby bypassing you)
Fact: Your taxes are about to skyrocket, if the media keeps this quiet and the Congress doesn't do anything.
If you think you don't earn enough money to pay these taxes, think again. The carbon footprint tax is levied on a country, based on its emissions. Every man, woman and child will bear the cost both in taxes and cost of living.
Enjoy your new world, Progressives!
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
The founding fathers of our fledgling nation put it succinctly in this 'preamble to the Declaration of Independence'. The rights named therein which a government can guarantee are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
In the United States, this has become:
When we were married, it was a shock to both my husband and myself that our new 'home' lacked the comfort and homeyness we were accustomed to in our parents' homes. My husband joked that maybe we thought we were entitled to what they had worked 20 or more years to build together. Such is the state of America today. While my husband and I accepted the fact that we would have to work to attain a better 'standard of living', spoiled Americans don't accept this fact and demand it be given to them in the spirit of 'equality.'
Entitlement is nowhere in the founding documents of this nation.
The United States of America was not founded on equality, either. It was founded on the principle that if you are born poor, you are not condemned to remain in that social position or class for life - if you want to work hard. We laud those who have risen from poverty to success, but Progressives want everyone to be made financially equal. What is the incentive to work hard if you are forced to give it away? None! We have history (recent history) as our guide.
Since our educational system no longer teaches about the class system of European history our youth does not realize that they were fortunate to be born in a wonderful nation! The class system still exists in many regions of the world, such as India, the far east and Pacific island nations such as Indonesia,
I suppose they will have to experience Socialism in order to figure this out. (I am heartbroken for those who will bear this burden without having desired it.)
Enter the new Socialism which is called 'Progressive'. The United States is a few years behind Great Britain in its Progressivism. Great Britain had national healthcare and is now trying to undo the debacle. Its citizens came to the United States for the healthcare they couldn't access at home.
Great Britain has recently experienced an exodus. More than 16,000 Great Britons declared an annual income of more than £1 million in the 2009-10 tax year, the height of the recession and financial crisis. After Chancellor Gordon Brown introduced a top tax rate of 50% shortly before the last general election, this number fell to 6,000. This is a 38% drop in the number of people and families who give the greatest amount to the national budget. Rich Britons either left the country or reduced their taxable income to avoid paying the higher tax rates. (The 'rich' always find the loophole.)
Fact: Increasing the tax rates of those who can afford to leave the 'party' leads to a loss in revenues for the government.
Those who can live off what they have without earning more have no incentive to continue doing so.
Once Chancellor Osborne announced earlier this year that the reduction of the top tax rate by a mere 5%, those declaring annual incomes greater than 1 million pounds has risen to 10,000. Great Britain has still lost 6,000 million-pound earners.
Now, the United States:
Over the last four years, Obama stated he wanted to raise taxes on the top one percent of taxpayers. Now, this figure has been revised to the top two marginal income tax rates. This doesn't just affect millionaires. It affects the middle-income people like my husband and myself. We are not, nor have we ever been millionaires - or even close to it. We don't live extravagantly - we haven't had a vacation since my family reunion years ago. (And, my parents paid for that. Thank you!)
According to the IRS, a clear majority of small business employers will see their total tax burden increase from 38% to 43% in 2013. That extra 5% might not sound like much, but look what happened in Great Britain!
Therefore, Obama is imposing taxes on those whom he said he would not! Obama is anti-small business and against middle-income tax-payers.
President Obama and congressional Democrats claim they are raising taxes on “millionaires and billionaires” but the facts prove this is a LIE.
An Ernst and Young study projects that these tax rate hikes will eliminate 710,000 existing small business jobs. This isn't potential new jobs. There will be even more Americans on unemployment.
The day after Obama was re-elected, the medical industry as a whole announced significant cuts in jobs due to the burdens of Obamacare and other tax increases imposed during this administration due to take effect in 2013.
Medical devices include any non-pharmaceutical instrument, implant, in vitro reagent, etc., used to diagnose, prevent, or treat disease or other conditions, such as prosthetics, operating tables, pacemakers, and needles. Companies making medical devices employ approximately 409,000 Americans in 12,000 plants in the U.S. Eighty percent employ fewer than 50 people (Medical Device Manufacturers Association). In 2013 these companies, regardless of size, will pay taxes on gross sales, even if the respective company doesn’t earn a profit in a given year. Many companies incur a loss for several years as they develop new of life-improving devices.
What effect will this tax increase have on research and development? Those who need it most, lose!
The Congressional Budget Office reported that the U.S. economy would slide into a 'significant recession' as a result of the tax increases and spending cuts. (CBS News)
This $20 billion tax increase has already resulted in cuts to existing jobs and research and development budgets. Massachusetts Senator, Elizabeth Warren, Democrat: “When Congress taxes the sale of a specific product through an excise tax, as the Affordable Care Act does with medical devices, it too often disproportionately impacts the small companies with the narrowest financial margins and the broadest innovative potential. It also pushes companies of all sizes to cut back on research and development for life-saving product.”
Also taking effect in 2013 is the ObamaCare Investment Surtax that captures those who are presently exempt from self-employment tax: Subchapter-S corporations and limited partnerships. ObamaCare imposes a 3.8 percentage point tax as an “investor surtax.”
Beginning in 2014, small businesses also face the ObamaCare employer mandate tax penalty . This tax provision will force small businesses with more than 50 employees to purchase “qualifying” health insurance, or else face another tax penalty of up to $2,000 per employee.
Even with all these destructive taxes, the additional $82 billion won't touch our debt - or the interest thereon.
How many individual 'millionaires', companies and jobs are going to leave the United States as has occurred in Great Britain?
One more observation: Why would Hollywood actors (an example group) be behind Obama and this tax increase? Do they know something we don't?
Do you want to see your new tax rate? See below. (This doesn't include sales, real estate, and personal property taxes.) THIS IS FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS!
FYI: The U.S. was not debt-free under Bill Clinton. Click here for proof.
And, for the first time in our nation's history, in 2012 our debt became more than 100% of gross domestic product.
You are NOT free! You will work your entire life as a slave because the U.S. government mis-used its power, authority, and our money! This is what our forefathers fought a
An article at NaturalNews.com was sent to me by a friend yesterday. HealthRanger uses facts to support his thesis that Electronic Benefit Transfer cards (EBTs) used by welfare recipients (and, I've heard soon to be used for Medicare recipients, as well) have issues which can be utilized by the government against its citizens:
If you have read my article on the Federal Reserve, you already know that J.P. Morgan/Chase, manager of the Federal EBT system, was involved in creating our financial debacle in the first place.
Read the entire NaturalNews article and learn how this portion of the Illuminati plan (through its minions) to enslave mankind is being put into place.
As we enter into the first phase of Obamacare in 2013, even greater numbers of citizen/subjects will be placed on an EBT-type card system. If you use too much of the healthcare system, will you be cut off?
Once the herd of cattle is brought under total dependence, the Illuminati will 'cull the herd' of those who don't meet their criteria for the new world order they've planned. (see Illumicorp) That's where FEMA camps will be utilized to help those who are 'in need' - and then kill them. Biocaskets are already stockpiled. That's why I've been calling y'all cattle! Wake up!
The prophesied age of mankind being given over to its depraved mind is upon us. People actually believe what is being espoused via media. They believe it is okay for their children to be taught in school and on television that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice - and a good one. They believe if you work hard and gain any level of success, you are selfish and evil. They believe the 'government' - which is really you, the taxpayer - should be their lifelong parent. They believe any lie they are told, even when facts are before their eyes and ears - because the government says it. They believe if you cry out about any of these things, you are a horrible person. Today, bad is good; wrong is right. This deception is growing.
We will have to wait and see if the cattle remain deceived. Lining up, yet? Taking your children with you?
I am part of a 'herd', as well; but, my Shepherd is the Almighty God! He welcomes all willing to put their trust in Him. God doesn't refuse any because of infirmity or where they come from as mankind has always done. His name is not Allah, the moon god of ancient pagans. God is not like 'us' so we can't ascend to be little gods, as Oprah believes. His ways are not our ways (thankfully). His thoughts are not like ours (thankfully). Those who say the Bible is just a book have never read it, so don't listen to them. God doesn't shy from a 'challenge', so ask to know the truth. I dare you. Ask God to know the truth about Him. He is faithful and, if you truly want to know, He will give you the desire of your heart!
Don't put your trust in man - you will always be disappointed.
Darrell Issa, Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, threatened to subpoena the Department of Health and Human Services if it does not turn over documents by Thursday (yesterday) on a program he claims is being used to "buy" the election by hiding the Medicare cuts in ObamaCare.
"Your staff has run out of excuses and the long delay in providing these documents is inexcusable," Issa wrote Kathleen Sebelius, Health Secretary.
The request was made months ago for documents concerning an $8 Billion program that pays bonuses to Medicare Advantage plans to mask the first round of Medicare Advantage cuts that would have begun this week.
The effects of ObamaCare's $200 Billion (71%) in Medicare Advantage cuts over the next decade are being delayed by the bonus program which only stays in effect until 2014. Of course, if he's re-elected, you can't do anything about it!
"What they're really doing is trying on the eve of an election not to have seniors realize that the cuts to Medicare Advantage were real," Issa said.
HHS had months to comply with the Committee's request but has repeatedly delayed. Seems strangely familiar. Oh, yeah. Fast and Furious. I see a trend here! Guess we'll have to wait and see. Looks like AARP threw
Please Post a Comment or Contact Us Below