The United States needs to strive to become energy independent. It is a matter of National Security because oil/gasoline is the lifeblood of our economy. At the present time the United States has to deal with several countries that do not like us. OPEC holds this country hostage by refusing to boost production even though the demand is picking up to keep the prices high.
The rising costs of oil and gasoline is caused by many factors, some of them are: supply and demand, a play on the value of the dollar, speculators, government regulation, EPA, refineries or lack thereof.
Why doesn’t the United States have an energy policy that would be in the best interests for this country? Perhaps it is because of the environmental lobbyists who do not want the oil companies drilling for oil. Perhaps it is because of the infighting between the Democrats and Republicans, but as I stated I believe this is a matter of national security. Neither party has done a good job of creating an energy policy that is beneficial to this country.
However, the solutions proposed by the Democrats do nothing to bring down the costs. Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama want to seize the profits of the oil companies or impose a windfall profits tax on them. Several years ago when gasoline prices were lower Paul Simon the Democrat Senator from Illinois wanted to have four to five dollar a gallon for gasoline to pay for social programs. Also when gasoline prices were lower there were several Democrats proposing a surcharge on the price of gasoline because their states were not getting enough tax revenue. The revenue created from gasoline taxes should be used for the roads.
The United States should not impose a windfall profit tax or seize the profits of the oil companies. But the United States does not need to subsidize the oil companies with taxpayer’s money either.
What needs to be done for the United States to become more energy independent is to drill for more oil, find alternative sources of energy, and to ease some of the burdensome regulations imposed on the industry.
The United States should encourage the development of alternative fuels as long as it does not come from crops in the food group, which could lead to food inflation, because not only do humans eat corn and corn products it is also used for feed for the animals. This is driving up the costs because of supply and demand. Some scientists have said it is not energy efficient to produce ethanol from corn, and claim hemp is a better alternative for the production of alternative fuel. It is a weed, not in the food group, and its fuel burns cleaner and better.
The most recent energy bill should be revised or repealed. The oil companies and ethanol companies do not need to be subsidized with taxpayer money. Let them find away to be profitable and keep the profits. The bill also bans the incandescent light bulb in favor of the mercury filled compact fluorescent bulbs, which eventually will have environmental concerns because it is a hazardous poison that could end up in the water supply (see Mercury poisoning). Thomas Edison has to be rolling in has grave.
Oil companies need to be able to drill for the oil where the oil is. Environmentalists fear the pollution factor, but we must have faith in the oil companies to drill responsibly and to protect the environment. China and Mexico are drilling in the Gulf of Mexico at the present time. Do you think that protecting the environment is a big concern for them? As I stated this country needs to become more energy independent it is vital to our economy and our country.
The United States needs to encourage the use of nuclear power as another source of energy. People are concerned with its safety, but the technology is there to be able to use nuclear power in a safe way. Then there is the problem of where to put the facilities. Some people are in favor of it as long as it is not in my back yard. My suggestion would be to put them at the military bases that have been closed down.
Another problem with the high cost of fuel is the lack of refineries in this country. There hasn't been a refinery built in this country for decades. Also the refineries throughout different parts of the country refine different grades of fuels because of EPA regulations. This leads to rising costs due to supply and demand, the refiners are unable to produce enough fuel because of the EPA regulations and the lack of refineries throughout the country to produce the supply for the demand.
Again, the United States needs and energy policy that reduces our dependence on foreign oil as a matter of national security, because we are sending billions of dollars to countries that do not like us. Sure the oil goes out in the open market to the world, but I would prefer to have the oil wells on our shores so the United States can be in control of the energy supply. Otherwise, OPEC can have an impact on our economy and our security.
Greg Zotta
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Representative? Diane Watson
Representative Diane Watson, Democrat of California, stated Rush Limbaugh said he wants this President to fail. She continued that if the President fails, then America fails. She also stated what a wonderful person Fidel Castro is and how great a healthcare system Cuba has. Here she is praising a communist.
Rush Limbaugh stated he wants Obama’s “policies to fail”, and so do I. Obama goes around the world apologizing for what a rotten country America is. Obama is a Marxist and if he gets his way will destroy America. Look at the people (the czars) that are advising him and what they are proposing. The Diversity Czar wants to stifle free speech. They want to have the power to shut down the Internet and cell phones, (look what happened in Iran). They want to control our lives with what they are proposing in the Cap and Trade legislation, as well as the healthcare legislation. In the proposed legislation people will lose their freedoms and privacy, because they will have access to your medical records, tax returns, and bank records. They will control the people through the force and intimidation of the IRS. What he is trying to create is an oligarchy, which is a government in which supreme power rests with a few.
The United States of America is the greatest country in the world. Free people from around the world look up to us for leadership and help. In times of crisis, tsunamis, earthquakes, genocide, etc. people look to America for help and we respond.
Bill Maher stated there are a lot of stupid people in America. I have to agree with him and Rep. Watson is a prime example, but the people who voted for her have to fit in that category also.
As for as her praise of the communist leader Fidel Castro and his great healthcare system you have to ask the question: “How many people have you seen get into small boats, rafts, inner tubes, or anything that floats to go to Cuba for their healthcare?” The answer is None!! It is the other way around. If you truly want to know about Cuba, ask the people of Cuba, without Fidel or his soldiers around.
I believe there are some “Smart” people out there and they realize that Diane Watson does not represent what America truly stands for.Hopefully,after the next election she will no longer be a Representative.
Greg Zotta
Immigration
The United States needs to secure its borders. There have been appropriations to build a fence, and now there is talk about a virtual fence. A fence may help, but it is more important to increase the number of border security guards. Otherwise the people crossing illegally into this country could climb over or dig under the fence.
The people that are here illegally should make arrangements to return to their country and go through the process of gaining access to this country legally. If the illegal immigrants are caught committing a crime they should be prosecuted for the crime and then deported.
The employers that are hiring these illegal immigrants need to be held accountable through fines and possible jail time. Also, the politicians that are setting up sanctuary cities need to be held accountable.
My grandparents came to this country from Italy. They went through the process and became legal citizens. They assimilated into this culture and learned to speak English.
For those people who are for amnesty and open borders I ask the following question:“What do you say to the people who went through the process and gained access to this country legally?” Their answer may be, “Why bother?” Just come on in, take advantage of the healthcare system, schools, housing, and welfare. Don’t bother trying to assimilate into this culture. Have the corporations add onto their costs by printing brochures and ads in Spanish, and having voicemail in Spanish. By the way these costs are passed on to the consumers through higher prices.
The process of gaining access to this country should be streamlined so that qualified individuals can benefit from living in this great country. But they need to assimilate into our culture and speak the language, which is English.
Also, I believe the United States needs to support its border guards. (Unlike what the United States did to agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean who I believe were wrongly imprisoned.) I have called on President Bush to pardon these agents, but as of this time he has not pardoned them. I encourage everyone to check into the story of these two border agents. Afterwards if you believe as I do that they were unjustly imprisoned, I urge you to call the President and request that they be pardoned.
Greg Zotta
The people that are here illegally should make arrangements to return to their country and go through the process of gaining access to this country legally. If the illegal immigrants are caught committing a crime they should be prosecuted for the crime and then deported.
The employers that are hiring these illegal immigrants need to be held accountable through fines and possible jail time. Also, the politicians that are setting up sanctuary cities need to be held accountable.
My grandparents came to this country from Italy. They went through the process and became legal citizens. They assimilated into this culture and learned to speak English.
For those people who are for amnesty and open borders I ask the following question:“What do you say to the people who went through the process and gained access to this country legally?” Their answer may be, “Why bother?” Just come on in, take advantage of the healthcare system, schools, housing, and welfare. Don’t bother trying to assimilate into this culture. Have the corporations add onto their costs by printing brochures and ads in Spanish, and having voicemail in Spanish. By the way these costs are passed on to the consumers through higher prices.
The process of gaining access to this country should be streamlined so that qualified individuals can benefit from living in this great country. But they need to assimilate into our culture and speak the language, which is English.
Also, I believe the United States needs to support its border guards. (Unlike what the United States did to agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean who I believe were wrongly imprisoned.) I have called on President Bush to pardon these agents, but as of this time he has not pardoned them. I encourage everyone to check into the story of these two border agents. Afterwards if you believe as I do that they were unjustly imprisoned, I urge you to call the President and request that they be pardoned.
Greg Zotta
Friday, August 28, 2009
Democrats and Taxes
It seems like the Democrats are the ones who are always looking to raise taxes. Could it be because some of them do not pay their taxes?
Joe Biden wants to take (steal) money from individuals supposedly making $250,000 calling it Patriotic to do so.
New York Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel, Chairman of the tax writing Ways and Means Committee, did not pay taxes on rental income and ended up writing checks to cover taxes due on his 2004, 2005, and 2006 returns. He did not pay penalties and interest in those payments but says he will if the IRS imposes them. The IRS should not only impose the penalties and interest but they should audit his returns.
Charles Rangel claims the Republican Party has declared guerilla warfare on the Democrats and has made efforts to smear him and members of his party. Is it a smear when it is the truth? He further stated that he made a series of mistakes that are unconscionable, but there was no intention to avoid or evade the law. Al Capone might have said the same thing.
The Republicans have called for the House Democratic leaders to remove him from the chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee but they have refused to do so. Apparently Rangel is unfamiliar with the tax code when it comes to paying his taxes, so why should he be in charge of that committee?
Greg Zotta
Joe Biden wants to take (steal) money from individuals supposedly making $250,000 calling it Patriotic to do so.
New York Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel, Chairman of the tax writing Ways and Means Committee, did not pay taxes on rental income and ended up writing checks to cover taxes due on his 2004, 2005, and 2006 returns. He did not pay penalties and interest in those payments but says he will if the IRS imposes them. The IRS should not only impose the penalties and interest but they should audit his returns.
Charles Rangel claims the Republican Party has declared guerilla warfare on the Democrats and has made efforts to smear him and members of his party. Is it a smear when it is the truth? He further stated that he made a series of mistakes that are unconscionable, but there was no intention to avoid or evade the law. Al Capone might have said the same thing.
The Republicans have called for the House Democratic leaders to remove him from the chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee but they have refused to do so. Apparently Rangel is unfamiliar with the tax code when it comes to paying his taxes, so why should he be in charge of that committee?
Greg Zotta
Questions for Presidential Candidates
A presidential election is occurring and with it comes all the promises from the candidates, how their agenda would be more beneficial to the country than the other candidates’ agenda. It’s down to three Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain. The remaining candidates are in the legislature and are the ones who make the laws, so where are the bills, where is the legislation on what they are promising?
Barack Obama claims he is the candidate for change. He says that he’ll do things differently to get elected. He would not be beholding to the lobbyists and special interests groups, and that he should be treated as an outsider in Washington. My question to him is: how did you get to Washington?
I would also like to ask all of the candidates, who are U.S. Senators, if they are giving back any portions of their salaries since they are not doing the job they were elected to do? Instead, they are flying all across the country campaigning.
Barack Obama states he wants to end the war and pull the troops out. He wants to have universal health care, he wants to end global warming, and he wants to end global poverty at US taxpayers expense. He wants to raise the taxes on the rich and increase the taxes on capital gains. Increasing taxes on capital gains would affect a lot of people, because they own homes and investments in 401k plans, mutual funds, and stocks.
He is trying to bribe the electorate with a thousand dollars that he wants to steal from the oil companies through a windfall profits tax.
As they say, the devil is in the details and one should read the fine print on what Obama’s agenda would cost. So be careful for the candidate you choose to vote for, because all you may end up with is change.
Greg Zotta
Barack Obama claims he is the candidate for change. He says that he’ll do things differently to get elected. He would not be beholding to the lobbyists and special interests groups, and that he should be treated as an outsider in Washington. My question to him is: how did you get to Washington?
I would also like to ask all of the candidates, who are U.S. Senators, if they are giving back any portions of their salaries since they are not doing the job they were elected to do? Instead, they are flying all across the country campaigning.
Barack Obama states he wants to end the war and pull the troops out. He wants to have universal health care, he wants to end global warming, and he wants to end global poverty at US taxpayers expense. He wants to raise the taxes on the rich and increase the taxes on capital gains. Increasing taxes on capital gains would affect a lot of people, because they own homes and investments in 401k plans, mutual funds, and stocks.
He is trying to bribe the electorate with a thousand dollars that he wants to steal from the oil companies through a windfall profits tax.
As they say, the devil is in the details and one should read the fine print on what Obama’s agenda would cost. So be careful for the candidate you choose to vote for, because all you may end up with is change.
Greg Zotta
Thursday, August 27, 2009
AIG and OUTRAGE
The Obama Administration and several bureaucrats are fanning outrage over the AIG bonuses that were paid out. The 165 million in bonuses being paid out to the AIG employees’ amounts to less than one tenth of one percent of the billions of dollars that was in the bill. This Administration and Congress are spending trillions of dollars.
AIG attempted to get a loan from the banks but because of the size of the loan the banks were unable to do it. Therefore AIG received a loan from the government on not very favorable terms, 8½% above Libor on a two-year note, and the government will be issued warrants called equity participation notes. The CEO says the loan will be paid back plus interest.
If these people fulfilled their obligations in order to receive the bonuses then they should be paid them.
Senator Dodd initially said he had nothing to do with the language put in the bill to allow these employees to receive the bonuses. He then changed his story claiming that he put in the amendment exempting these employees so they could receive the bonuses at the urging of the Treasury Department, and the Obama Administration. Therefore, Senator Dodd is a liar.
Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Tim Geithner are culpable in this financial crisis with the way they handled Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG etc.
Several politicians are claiming outrage over the employees at AIG receiving bonuses. The bonuses to be paid were stipulated in the law that was passed by Congress without being read by them.
Chuck Schumer said he wants to pass a law to take/steal the bonus money from the AIG employees. What he is proposing is tantamount to outright theft; so therefore when making a crime into a law then “THERE IS NO LAW. “ Remember if they can do it to them they can do it to you.
Another bureaucrat stated AIG stands for arrogance, incompetence, greed, but as the saying goes “if the shoe fits.”
These self-righteous politicians are jumping on the populace bandwagon of class envy pitting the haves from the have-nots; yet they passed a law in the dark of night giving themselves automatic pay raises. Are they going to repeal that law? I think not.
Chris Dodd and Barack Obama received campaign contributions from AIG, Barney Frank received contributions from the banks, Dodd, Hillary Clinton, Charles Schumer and Charles Rangel received contributions from Bernie Maddoff. Are these politicians/bureaucrats going to give that money back? I think not.
Obama stated there is outrage out there over the bonuses being paid out at AIG, but people do not be misguided, the outrage should be directed at the President and members of Congress. People need to be concerned with his radical agenda, and loss of freedom in his push towards Socialism. If I wanted to live in Venezuela I would have moved there.
Greg Zotta
AIG attempted to get a loan from the banks but because of the size of the loan the banks were unable to do it. Therefore AIG received a loan from the government on not very favorable terms, 8½% above Libor on a two-year note, and the government will be issued warrants called equity participation notes. The CEO says the loan will be paid back plus interest.
If these people fulfilled their obligations in order to receive the bonuses then they should be paid them.
Senator Dodd initially said he had nothing to do with the language put in the bill to allow these employees to receive the bonuses. He then changed his story claiming that he put in the amendment exempting these employees so they could receive the bonuses at the urging of the Treasury Department, and the Obama Administration. Therefore, Senator Dodd is a liar.
Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Tim Geithner are culpable in this financial crisis with the way they handled Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG etc.
Several politicians are claiming outrage over the employees at AIG receiving bonuses. The bonuses to be paid were stipulated in the law that was passed by Congress without being read by them.
Chuck Schumer said he wants to pass a law to take/steal the bonus money from the AIG employees. What he is proposing is tantamount to outright theft; so therefore when making a crime into a law then “THERE IS NO LAW. “ Remember if they can do it to them they can do it to you.
Another bureaucrat stated AIG stands for arrogance, incompetence, greed, but as the saying goes “if the shoe fits.”
These self-righteous politicians are jumping on the populace bandwagon of class envy pitting the haves from the have-nots; yet they passed a law in the dark of night giving themselves automatic pay raises. Are they going to repeal that law? I think not.
Chris Dodd and Barack Obama received campaign contributions from AIG, Barney Frank received contributions from the banks, Dodd, Hillary Clinton, Charles Schumer and Charles Rangel received contributions from Bernie Maddoff. Are these politicians/bureaucrats going to give that money back? I think not.
Obama stated there is outrage out there over the bonuses being paid out at AIG, but people do not be misguided, the outrage should be directed at the President and members of Congress. People need to be concerned with his radical agenda, and loss of freedom in his push towards Socialism. If I wanted to live in Venezuela I would have moved there.
Greg Zotta
Affirmative Action
No one should get preferential treatment when it comes to a job, schooling, etc. because of race, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation, because that would be discrimination. Instead it should be based on merit, if you can do the job, or if you have the grades.
Another problem with Affirmative Action is that it puts doubt in people’s minds. Did the person get the position because they are qualified for it or because of affirmative action?
Affirmative Action was supposedly set up to right the wrongs of the past. As they say two wrongs do not make a right. But if that is the case the present eventually becomes the past, and those wrongs that are occurring now would have to be made right in the future. Affirmative Action is a discriminatory practice and needs to be ended.
Greg Zotta
Another problem with Affirmative Action is that it puts doubt in people’s minds. Did the person get the position because they are qualified for it or because of affirmative action?
Affirmative Action was supposedly set up to right the wrongs of the past. As they say two wrongs do not make a right. But if that is the case the present eventually becomes the past, and those wrongs that are occurring now would have to be made right in the future. Affirmative Action is a discriminatory practice and needs to be ended.
Greg Zotta
Plaxico Burress
Plaxico Burress pled guilty to a New York State gun law and accepted a plea agreement with a 2-year prison sentence. The violations he was charged with were two counts of criminal possession of a weapon, and one count of reckless endangerment. Burress faced the possibility of serving at least a minimum of 3 ½ years if he was convicted on the charges. The prosecutor, District Attorney Robert Morgenthau would accept a plea deal, wherein Burress would receive at least two years.
Let’s look at what happened: Plaxico went to a nightclub carrying a gun, concealed on his person and accidentally shot himself in the leg. Apparently, he felt threatened and was carrying the weapon for protection. The gun was not registered in New York, or New Jersey where Burress lived. He had a license to carry a weapon in the state of Florida, but it expired in May 2008. Therefore, he violated gun laws in the state.
I believe people have a God given right to protect themselves and that the gun laws are unconstitutional, because my interpretation of the second amendment is that people have a right to arm themselves for protection. The second amendment of the constitution states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
He will now be a convicted felon and will not be able to arm himself in the future because of the law that states a convicted felon cannot carry a concealed weapon. There are claims that there is overcrowding in the prisons. So my questions are: “Why did the prosecutor find it necessary to want to give him a 2-year prison sentence for the charges he was accused of?” “What is the NRA’s position on the incident?’’
Apparently, Plaxico needed more training on gun safety, but should he go to jail for two years for this incident, coming from a retired police officer, I don’t think so. He is to be sentenced September 22, 2009; hopefully the Judge will come to a more reasonable punishment.
Greg Zotta
Let’s look at what happened: Plaxico went to a nightclub carrying a gun, concealed on his person and accidentally shot himself in the leg. Apparently, he felt threatened and was carrying the weapon for protection. The gun was not registered in New York, or New Jersey where Burress lived. He had a license to carry a weapon in the state of Florida, but it expired in May 2008. Therefore, he violated gun laws in the state.
I believe people have a God given right to protect themselves and that the gun laws are unconstitutional, because my interpretation of the second amendment is that people have a right to arm themselves for protection. The second amendment of the constitution states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
He will now be a convicted felon and will not be able to arm himself in the future because of the law that states a convicted felon cannot carry a concealed weapon. There are claims that there is overcrowding in the prisons. So my questions are: “Why did the prosecutor find it necessary to want to give him a 2-year prison sentence for the charges he was accused of?” “What is the NRA’s position on the incident?’’
Apparently, Plaxico needed more training on gun safety, but should he go to jail for two years for this incident, coming from a retired police officer, I don’t think so. He is to be sentenced September 22, 2009; hopefully the Judge will come to a more reasonable punishment.
Greg Zotta
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
HealthCare
The United States has the greatest healthcare system in the world, but because of government intervention and regulation costs are, and have been skyrocketing. Government is not the solution to the problem with healthcare. Medicare and Medicaid are government programs that are going broke. This country does not need socialized/nationalized medicine.
There are people that say 47-50 million people are without healthcare/insurance coverage, and some are politicians who want to provide health insurance for them. Some of the reasons why these people do not have health insurance is because they are young and physically fit and do not think they need it, some are illegal immigrants, some can afford it but choose to be self-insured, and some just do not want to pay for it using the emergency rooms as their clinic.
We do not have a healthcare problem in this country; we have a health insurance problem. Nobody is denied healthcare in this country and if they go to the emergency room they will be treated, regardless of the ability to pay. This in itself is not right because the doctors, nurses, hospital etc. provide a service to that individual and they should be paid. Some hospitals are going out of business because of this. Also people who have health insurance are paying more because a percentage goes for people who do not pay.
Unfortunately there are many people and politicians who think healthcare is a right. That is a big problem, for there is a need and a want for healthcare/insurance but it should not be a right.
The solution to the healthcare/insurance crisis is in the free market. One way is for people to buy catastrophic healthcare insurance to cover the costs of a major illness or injury, and to pay for doctors visits, therapy, drugs, etc. out of pocket. The individuals should purchase the insurance themselves and their employer should not provide it to them. People should be paid for the work they do, and buy what they want when they want. When people have their health insurance paid by their employer, they get locked into plans they may not want and have to stay employed with that company in order to keep the insurance. There is a lack of competition in the health insurance industry when employers provide health insurance to their employees. The reason employers began providing health coverage was because the government imposed a wage freeze the under Stabilization Act of 1942; therefore business circumvented the wage freeze law by offering paid benefits in lieu of wages. Also some companies that have promised to pay the health insurance for retirees have reneged on that promise.
Another solution to the healthcare/insurance crisis is to set up some form of medical savings accounts, wherein people purchase insurance to pay for medical expenses and if they do not use the coverage they would get back some of their money. This would empower the people to be in control of their lives and make decisions about their healthcare.
Medical insurance should be available to purchase across state lines, which would increase competition in the industry thus lowering cost. Insurance companies need to be held accountable for the services that were contracted in the policy when individuals have paid their premiums for health care coverage, and the insurance company should not be able to cancel coverage on that individual because of illness or injury.
What the Government is proposing in the overhaul of healthcare amounts to socialism. It is about control and the loss of freedoms. The loss of freedom will occur because you will be told what you can do, what you can eat etc. because it will be tied to healthcare.
To pay for it Obama wants to put the squeeze on doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceuticals. Taxes on beer, wine, liquor, and tobacco would go up. Soda and other sugary drinks and cereals would also be taxed because they lead to obesity. The idea behind the proposed increases is to tax lifestyle choices that contribute to rising medical costs. Controlling our lives!!
The United States has the greatest healthcare system in the world. Sure it needs to be fine-tuned but we do not need socialized medicine or universal single-payer healthcare (Obamacare). I urge everyone to contact their representatives in government and have them oppose this government takeover of the healthcare system.
Greg Zotta
There are people that say 47-50 million people are without healthcare/insurance coverage, and some are politicians who want to provide health insurance for them. Some of the reasons why these people do not have health insurance is because they are young and physically fit and do not think they need it, some are illegal immigrants, some can afford it but choose to be self-insured, and some just do not want to pay for it using the emergency rooms as their clinic.
We do not have a healthcare problem in this country; we have a health insurance problem. Nobody is denied healthcare in this country and if they go to the emergency room they will be treated, regardless of the ability to pay. This in itself is not right because the doctors, nurses, hospital etc. provide a service to that individual and they should be paid. Some hospitals are going out of business because of this. Also people who have health insurance are paying more because a percentage goes for people who do not pay.
Unfortunately there are many people and politicians who think healthcare is a right. That is a big problem, for there is a need and a want for healthcare/insurance but it should not be a right.
The solution to the healthcare/insurance crisis is in the free market. One way is for people to buy catastrophic healthcare insurance to cover the costs of a major illness or injury, and to pay for doctors visits, therapy, drugs, etc. out of pocket. The individuals should purchase the insurance themselves and their employer should not provide it to them. People should be paid for the work they do, and buy what they want when they want. When people have their health insurance paid by their employer, they get locked into plans they may not want and have to stay employed with that company in order to keep the insurance. There is a lack of competition in the health insurance industry when employers provide health insurance to their employees. The reason employers began providing health coverage was because the government imposed a wage freeze the under Stabilization Act of 1942; therefore business circumvented the wage freeze law by offering paid benefits in lieu of wages. Also some companies that have promised to pay the health insurance for retirees have reneged on that promise.
Another solution to the healthcare/insurance crisis is to set up some form of medical savings accounts, wherein people purchase insurance to pay for medical expenses and if they do not use the coverage they would get back some of their money. This would empower the people to be in control of their lives and make decisions about their healthcare.
Medical insurance should be available to purchase across state lines, which would increase competition in the industry thus lowering cost. Insurance companies need to be held accountable for the services that were contracted in the policy when individuals have paid their premiums for health care coverage, and the insurance company should not be able to cancel coverage on that individual because of illness or injury.
What the Government is proposing in the overhaul of healthcare amounts to socialism. It is about control and the loss of freedoms. The loss of freedom will occur because you will be told what you can do, what you can eat etc. because it will be tied to healthcare.
To pay for it Obama wants to put the squeeze on doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceuticals. Taxes on beer, wine, liquor, and tobacco would go up. Soda and other sugary drinks and cereals would also be taxed because they lead to obesity. The idea behind the proposed increases is to tax lifestyle choices that contribute to rising medical costs. Controlling our lives!!
The United States has the greatest healthcare system in the world. Sure it needs to be fine-tuned but we do not need socialized medicine or universal single-payer healthcare (Obamacare). I urge everyone to contact their representatives in government and have them oppose this government takeover of the healthcare system.
Greg Zotta
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Gun Control
Below are some questions and what should be the answers to gun control and the right you have to defend yourself.
Do you believe you have the right to protect yourself and your family? Yes! You have a God given right to protect yourself and your family. Most gun control laws violate the second amendment to the constitution which states the following: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Do you believe criminals care about laws? No. Criminals, by definition, do not care about laws. Criminals will carry and use weapons against their victims.
Do you believe Law-abiding citizens will become criminals by shooting up the town if states enact right to carry laws? No. Law abiding citizens, by definition, abide by laws even unjust gun control laws wherein they are restricted from protecting themselves against criminals. If right to carry laws are passed law-abiding citizens will be able to defend themselves and their families without the fear of violating some unjust gun control law.
Are there current laws on the books to deal with people who misuse firearms, i.e.: flourishing, assault with a deadly weapon etc? Yes. If people use weapons illegally there are laws on the books to address the violation.
Individuals have choices in their lives. If they do not want to own or carry guns then they do not have to. However those individuals should not impose their will on other people by telling them that they cannot carry weapons to defend themselves.
Greg Zotta
Do you believe you have the right to protect yourself and your family? Yes! You have a God given right to protect yourself and your family. Most gun control laws violate the second amendment to the constitution which states the following: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Do you believe criminals care about laws? No. Criminals, by definition, do not care about laws. Criminals will carry and use weapons against their victims.
Do you believe Law-abiding citizens will become criminals by shooting up the town if states enact right to carry laws? No. Law abiding citizens, by definition, abide by laws even unjust gun control laws wherein they are restricted from protecting themselves against criminals. If right to carry laws are passed law-abiding citizens will be able to defend themselves and their families without the fear of violating some unjust gun control law.
Are there current laws on the books to deal with people who misuse firearms, i.e.: flourishing, assault with a deadly weapon etc? Yes. If people use weapons illegally there are laws on the books to address the violation.
Individuals have choices in their lives. If they do not want to own or carry guns then they do not have to. However those individuals should not impose their will on other people by telling them that they cannot carry weapons to defend themselves.
Greg Zotta
Monday, August 17, 2009
Obama and Veterans
On August 17th, 2009 at the Veterans of Foreign Wars conference in Phoenix, Arizona President Obama stated, he would spend billions of dollars erecting more treatment centers for wounded warriors. Yet, in March 2009, he floated the idea to have military personnel that were wounded in battle to have their private medical insurance pay for their medical bills.
The Obama Administration hoped to save upwards of $500 million a year by billing the veterans’ private insurance. After strong protests from veterans and members of Congress Obama dropped the plan. My questions to President Obama are, “What were you thinking?” “ Where did you get such an idea? ’’ It’s bad enough the soldier was wounded in battle, but you wanted to have his private insurance pay the bill. Also, have you ever thought of having members of Congress purchase their own medical insurance to save taxpayers money?
People who served in the military should have the best medical care provided to them as a benefit for serving and protecting this great country. Instead of spending billions building more hospitals, why not let the soldiers get the treatment they need at the hospital of their choice and have the government pay the bill?
Greg Zotta
The Obama Administration hoped to save upwards of $500 million a year by billing the veterans’ private insurance. After strong protests from veterans and members of Congress Obama dropped the plan. My questions to President Obama are, “What were you thinking?” “ Where did you get such an idea? ’’ It’s bad enough the soldier was wounded in battle, but you wanted to have his private insurance pay the bill. Also, have you ever thought of having members of Congress purchase their own medical insurance to save taxpayers money?
People who served in the military should have the best medical care provided to them as a benefit for serving and protecting this great country. Instead of spending billions building more hospitals, why not let the soldiers get the treatment they need at the hospital of their choice and have the government pay the bill?
Greg Zotta
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Obama and Transparency
President Obama states he wants to have the most transparent government ever. He wrote a memo that reads: My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government. I believe you should lead by example. That is why I do not understand why Obama does not release his birth certificate, or his college papers.
The media wants to demonize the people who are requesting the information calling them “Birthers.” The media does not understand why these people are in such an uproar about where Obama was born. Perhaps they are unaware that according to the Constitution you have to be a natural born citizen to be the President of the United States.
President Obama has released a document called a Certificate of Live Birth, wherein it states he was born in Hawaii, but it is not the birth certificate. That would be sufficient if the original birth certificate were lost or destroyed. But that is not the case. The original does exist but Obama refuses to disclose it. That is what I find puzzling. Here is a man who in order to gain the public trust, claims he is for transparency, yet he refuses to release the birth certificate or his college papers. Maybe he doesn’t understand the meaning to the word transparency, which according to Webster’s dictionary means clearness, to make bright or clear; to make evident; to free from accusation. When there is a contradiction between what he says and what he does you begin to question, “What is he trying to hide? What will those documents reveal? The point is not necessarily where he was born, but why he refuses to release the documents.
The media should be trying to ascertain the truth and request that President Obama release the documents instead of criticizing the people who are looking for the answers. The media should at least ask him why he is refusing to disclose the birth certificate and college papers. The freedom of the press is recognized in the first amendment of the Constitution because they are supposed to be the watchdogs over the government.
President Obama, you state you want to have the most transparent government ever, then I say release the documents.
Greg Zotta
The media wants to demonize the people who are requesting the information calling them “Birthers.” The media does not understand why these people are in such an uproar about where Obama was born. Perhaps they are unaware that according to the Constitution you have to be a natural born citizen to be the President of the United States.
President Obama has released a document called a Certificate of Live Birth, wherein it states he was born in Hawaii, but it is not the birth certificate. That would be sufficient if the original birth certificate were lost or destroyed. But that is not the case. The original does exist but Obama refuses to disclose it. That is what I find puzzling. Here is a man who in order to gain the public trust, claims he is for transparency, yet he refuses to release the birth certificate or his college papers. Maybe he doesn’t understand the meaning to the word transparency, which according to Webster’s dictionary means clearness, to make bright or clear; to make evident; to free from accusation. When there is a contradiction between what he says and what he does you begin to question, “What is he trying to hide? What will those documents reveal? The point is not necessarily where he was born, but why he refuses to release the documents.
The media should be trying to ascertain the truth and request that President Obama release the documents instead of criticizing the people who are looking for the answers. The media should at least ask him why he is refusing to disclose the birth certificate and college papers. The freedom of the press is recognized in the first amendment of the Constitution because they are supposed to be the watchdogs over the government.
President Obama, you state you want to have the most transparent government ever, then I say release the documents.
Greg Zotta
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Fair Tax vs. Flat Tax
The main problem I have with the Fair Tax (National Sales Tax) is I am afraid we will end up with both an Income Tax and the Fair Tax. The income tax was first introduced during the Civil War as a temporary measure to fund the war and was imposed on the top one percent of the population. This flat rate income tax was repealed in 1872. However Congress passed the Income Tax Act of 1894 and it was to be imposed on the wealthiest members of the population. Over time the tax laws have changed wherein more individuals have been required to pay the income tax with the maximum rate at one time up to 94%; and the tax code has grown to over 67000 pages.
The Fair Tax is based on the consumption of new goods and services. What is to prevent the retailer from increasing the cost of the product, or the government through regulation causing the costs to rise, which would increase the amount of tax, possibly making the product unaffordable?
How would it be policed around the Border States? What about Internet purchases or overseas purchases? With inflation looming on the horizon because of the government and this administration basically printing money, the cost of goods and services will rise.
I am for simplifying the tax code but I think the Fair Tax is the wrong way to go. With a tax on consumption the individual has no control over it except not to buy it, but if the person needs the item they would have to purchase it at whatever the cost plus the added tax. Wherein a flat tax is based on a percentage of the individual’s income and they have some control over how much they make. I believe everyone who lives in this Great Country benefits from what it has to offer and they should contribute to the support and defense of it.
Greg Zotta
Imperial
The Fair Tax is based on the consumption of new goods and services. What is to prevent the retailer from increasing the cost of the product, or the government through regulation causing the costs to rise, which would increase the amount of tax, possibly making the product unaffordable?
How would it be policed around the Border States? What about Internet purchases or overseas purchases? With inflation looming on the horizon because of the government and this administration basically printing money, the cost of goods and services will rise.
I am for simplifying the tax code but I think the Fair Tax is the wrong way to go. With a tax on consumption the individual has no control over it except not to buy it, but if the person needs the item they would have to purchase it at whatever the cost plus the added tax. Wherein a flat tax is based on a percentage of the individual’s income and they have some control over how much they make. I believe everyone who lives in this Great Country benefits from what it has to offer and they should contribute to the support and defense of it.
Greg Zotta
Imperial
Evil People and Guns
You’ve seen the signs. It’s a picture of a gun encircled with a line slashed through it. They are everywhere. These signs are in schools, churches, hospitals, government buildings, and businesses. They’re supposed to represent a universal message stating that No Guns Are Allowed on the premises.Yet in the criminal mind it represents a place where there will be little or no resistance, in other words a Shooting Gallery.
Criminals do not care about laws, and these signs did not protect the students and faculty of Virginia Tech. That is why Cho was able to do what he did. He chained the doors shut and went on his killing spree shooting innocent people.
It was said that these victims were in the wrong place at the wrong time. That is an idiotic statement. People use it to excuse or explain the situation that occurred. They were in their classrooms at class time. They were where they were supposed to be.
There are EVIL people in the world who mean us harm. People need to be able to defend themselves from these evildoers. You have a God given right to be able to protect yourself and your family. I say you have a duty to do so. This means you should be able to arm yourself anywhere. These rights are protected under the second amendment of the constitution.
The Rosie O’Donnell’s of the world preach that we need to get rid of the guns to prevent this kind of violence. She doesn’t believe ordinary people should be able to defend themselves. Yet she walks around with armed bodyguards.
Other people are saying we need to have more police presence to protect ourselves. If there were more policemen on campus the students would have been safe. As a former police officer, I say this is a false premise. Policemen usually respond after the crime and do follow-up work to find the perpetrator. If you saw the video when the shootings were occurring there were a number of heavily armed police officers on campus. However, they did not prevent Cho from murdering those innocent people because you could hear the gunshots coming from inside the school at that time. There are no guns allowed on campus, however if the guns were allowed this carnage may have been limited, because when the shooting started they would have had a chance to protect themselves and possibly take out the shooter.
Other people are making excuses for this MURDERER. They are saying he was crazy, a loaner stalker and was probably influenced by talk radio and video games. They say Cho was a ticking time bomb that showed numerous signs of violence but nobody noticed. I say Cho was an EVIL PERSON. There are more EVIL PEOPLE in the world and we should and need to take notice of them. One such person is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran.
Greg Zotta
Criminals do not care about laws, and these signs did not protect the students and faculty of Virginia Tech. That is why Cho was able to do what he did. He chained the doors shut and went on his killing spree shooting innocent people.
It was said that these victims were in the wrong place at the wrong time. That is an idiotic statement. People use it to excuse or explain the situation that occurred. They were in their classrooms at class time. They were where they were supposed to be.
There are EVIL people in the world who mean us harm. People need to be able to defend themselves from these evildoers. You have a God given right to be able to protect yourself and your family. I say you have a duty to do so. This means you should be able to arm yourself anywhere. These rights are protected under the second amendment of the constitution.
The Rosie O’Donnell’s of the world preach that we need to get rid of the guns to prevent this kind of violence. She doesn’t believe ordinary people should be able to defend themselves. Yet she walks around with armed bodyguards.
Other people are saying we need to have more police presence to protect ourselves. If there were more policemen on campus the students would have been safe. As a former police officer, I say this is a false premise. Policemen usually respond after the crime and do follow-up work to find the perpetrator. If you saw the video when the shootings were occurring there were a number of heavily armed police officers on campus. However, they did not prevent Cho from murdering those innocent people because you could hear the gunshots coming from inside the school at that time. There are no guns allowed on campus, however if the guns were allowed this carnage may have been limited, because when the shooting started they would have had a chance to protect themselves and possibly take out the shooter.
Other people are making excuses for this MURDERER. They are saying he was crazy, a loaner stalker and was probably influenced by talk radio and video games. They say Cho was a ticking time bomb that showed numerous signs of violence but nobody noticed. I say Cho was an EVIL PERSON. There are more EVIL PEOPLE in the world and we should and need to take notice of them. One such person is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran.
Greg Zotta
Eminent Domain/ Legalized Theft
Eminent is synonymous with important, well known, famous, prominent. Domain is synonymous with area, region, vicinity, and realm. So Eminent Domain means an important area. In order for the government to seize property in this “important area” they have to blight it. Blighted is defined as anything that has an adverse effect, injures, or destroys. It is synonymous with destroyed, shattered, wrecked, ruined, and devastated.
So I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. When that comes to some government officials it means whatever property can get them the most revenue. Never mind that the people kept up their homes and businesses and paid their taxes. The Government through Eminent Domain takes private property from one individual and gives it to another for monetary gain, because the Government can get more tax revenue from the new entity, which is an assault on private property rights.
Embodied in the Fourth Amendment it states the people have the right to be secure in their houses against unreasonable seizures. In the Fifth Amendment, it states nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation. I guess these government officials justify taking private property from one individual and giving it to another (developer) because they will be getting more tax revenue from the new entity.
What I would like to know is what is the Government (taxpayers) paying or giving to the developer to do the project? How much additional taxes will be added on to the purchases in the new development? Have any of these developers given campaign contributions to the government officials? If so, how much money did they give? Ultimately, it’s the taxpayers who are giving money to the developer to do the project, and they will pay more for purchases made in the new development.
I believe there is an injustice being done with government’s abuse of power through the use of eminent domain, which amounts to legalized theft. Again the Fifth Amendment states the government can take private property for Public use after paying just compensation for the property. I would define public use as a road, bridge, or possibly a hospital, not a shopping mall. Laws need to be changed to address this problem concerning private property rights.
Greg Zotta
Imperial
So I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. When that comes to some government officials it means whatever property can get them the most revenue. Never mind that the people kept up their homes and businesses and paid their taxes. The Government through Eminent Domain takes private property from one individual and gives it to another for monetary gain, because the Government can get more tax revenue from the new entity, which is an assault on private property rights.
Embodied in the Fourth Amendment it states the people have the right to be secure in their houses against unreasonable seizures. In the Fifth Amendment, it states nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation. I guess these government officials justify taking private property from one individual and giving it to another (developer) because they will be getting more tax revenue from the new entity.
What I would like to know is what is the Government (taxpayers) paying or giving to the developer to do the project? How much additional taxes will be added on to the purchases in the new development? Have any of these developers given campaign contributions to the government officials? If so, how much money did they give? Ultimately, it’s the taxpayers who are giving money to the developer to do the project, and they will pay more for purchases made in the new development.
I believe there is an injustice being done with government’s abuse of power through the use of eminent domain, which amounts to legalized theft. Again the Fifth Amendment states the government can take private property for Public use after paying just compensation for the property. I would define public use as a road, bridge, or possibly a hospital, not a shopping mall. Laws need to be changed to address this problem concerning private property rights.
Greg Zotta
Imperial
Democrats and Taxes
It seems like the Democrats are the ones who are always looking to raise taxes. Could it be because some of them do not pay their taxes?
Joe Biden wants to take (steal) money from individuals supposedly making $250,000 calling it Patriotic to do so.
New York Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel, Chairman of the tax writing Ways and Means Committee, did not pay taxes on rental income and ended up writing checks to cover taxes due on his 2004, 2005, and 2006 returns. He did not pay penalties and interest in those payments, but says he will if the IRS imposes them. The IRS should not only impose the penalties and interest but they should audit his returns.
Charles Rangel claims the Republican Party has declared guerilla warfare on the Democrats and has made efforts to smear him and members of his party. Is it a smear when it is the truth? He further stated that he made a series of mistakes that are unconscionable, but there was no intention to avoid or evade the law. Al Capone might have said the same thing.
The Republicans have called for the House Democratic leaders to remove him from the chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee but they have refused to do so. Apparently Rangel is unfamiliar with the tax code when it comes to paying his taxes, so why should he be in charge of that committee?
Greg Zotta
Imperial
Joe Biden wants to take (steal) money from individuals supposedly making $250,000 calling it Patriotic to do so.
New York Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel, Chairman of the tax writing Ways and Means Committee, did not pay taxes on rental income and ended up writing checks to cover taxes due on his 2004, 2005, and 2006 returns. He did not pay penalties and interest in those payments, but says he will if the IRS imposes them. The IRS should not only impose the penalties and interest but they should audit his returns.
Charles Rangel claims the Republican Party has declared guerilla warfare on the Democrats and has made efforts to smear him and members of his party. Is it a smear when it is the truth? He further stated that he made a series of mistakes that are unconscionable, but there was no intention to avoid or evade the law. Al Capone might have said the same thing.
The Republicans have called for the House Democratic leaders to remove him from the chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee but they have refused to do so. Apparently Rangel is unfamiliar with the tax code when it comes to paying his taxes, so why should he be in charge of that committee?
Greg Zotta
Imperial
Colin Powell/Republican?
Colin Powell said the Republican Party should be more inclusive to attract more people to the Party. He stated Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter are divisive and nasty, and that Sarah Palin was a polarizing figure.
Colin Powell claims to be a Moderate Republican, and his views were similar to John McCain yet he endorsed and voted for Barack Obama, which leads me to believe that he voted for Obama because he is black. So who is the racist/ racialist? Who is the hypocrite?
You should not compromise on your principles to try to attract others. I believe you should stand on your principles and I would like to see the Republican Party get back to conservative/common sense approach to governing teaching people to be self reliant with a smaller government and less taxes.
In his speech at the 1996 GOP Convention Colin Powell stated, “I became a Republican because I believe, like you that the federal government has become too large and too intrusive in our lives. We can no longer afford solutions to our problems that result in more entitlements, higher taxes to pay for them, more bureaucracy to run them and fewer results to show for them.” But now he is stating Americans do want to pay more taxes and want more government in their life
If Colin Powell wants to compromise on conservative principles, then I think he needs to go to the party that supports those beliefs and join the Democratic/Socialist Party.
Greg Zotta
Imperial
Colin Powell claims to be a Moderate Republican, and his views were similar to John McCain yet he endorsed and voted for Barack Obama, which leads me to believe that he voted for Obama because he is black. So who is the racist/ racialist? Who is the hypocrite?
You should not compromise on your principles to try to attract others. I believe you should stand on your principles and I would like to see the Republican Party get back to conservative/common sense approach to governing teaching people to be self reliant with a smaller government and less taxes.
In his speech at the 1996 GOP Convention Colin Powell stated, “I became a Republican because I believe, like you that the federal government has become too large and too intrusive in our lives. We can no longer afford solutions to our problems that result in more entitlements, higher taxes to pay for them, more bureaucracy to run them and fewer results to show for them.” But now he is stating Americans do want to pay more taxes and want more government in their life
If Colin Powell wants to compromise on conservative principles, then I think he needs to go to the party that supports those beliefs and join the Democratic/Socialist Party.
Greg Zotta
Imperial
Cap and Trade (Cap and Tax)
Obama campaigned on the platform of “Hope and Change,” throughout his race for the presidency. I stated if he gets elected all we will have left is change. At the rate Obama and the Democrats are going we will not even have the change left.
The House of Representatives just passed the Cap and Trade (i.e. Cap and Tax) bill because of the Hoax of global warming. This law will cause our energy prices to rise and make it more difficult for you to sell your home among other things. Obama stated under cap and trade he will bankrupt the coal industry and energy costs will necessarily skyrocket. Under a cap and trade system, government sets a cap on the total amount of carbon that can be emitted nationally; companies (like Goldman Sachs) then buy or sell permits to emit CO2. The cap then gets cranked down over time to reduce total carbon emissions, increasing costs. Remember ENRON? That was a company that traded in CO2 offsets.
This was another bill that was voted on by our Congressman without being read. Is it too much to ask our politicians to at least read the bills before they vote on them? What happened to Obama’s promise of “transparency,” and the bills being on the government’s website for five days for the citizens to review?
Immigration reform (amnesty) and healthcare (Nationalized Medicine) are also on the table. Obama and the Democrats are on the fast track towards Socialism, and that is why they are trying to rush these bills through before the public realizes the harm it will cause this country. What they are doing is not in the best interest of this country, it is about “control.” If they pass these things we will have to endure the results until the 2010 and 2012 elections, when we can get a chance to fire them, and roll these laws back.
Greg Zotta
Imperial
The House of Representatives just passed the Cap and Trade (i.e. Cap and Tax) bill because of the Hoax of global warming. This law will cause our energy prices to rise and make it more difficult for you to sell your home among other things. Obama stated under cap and trade he will bankrupt the coal industry and energy costs will necessarily skyrocket. Under a cap and trade system, government sets a cap on the total amount of carbon that can be emitted nationally; companies (like Goldman Sachs) then buy or sell permits to emit CO2. The cap then gets cranked down over time to reduce total carbon emissions, increasing costs. Remember ENRON? That was a company that traded in CO2 offsets.
This was another bill that was voted on by our Congressman without being read. Is it too much to ask our politicians to at least read the bills before they vote on them? What happened to Obama’s promise of “transparency,” and the bills being on the government’s website for five days for the citizens to review?
Immigration reform (amnesty) and healthcare (Nationalized Medicine) are also on the table. Obama and the Democrats are on the fast track towards Socialism, and that is why they are trying to rush these bills through before the public realizes the harm it will cause this country. What they are doing is not in the best interest of this country, it is about “control.” If they pass these things we will have to endure the results until the 2010 and 2012 elections, when we can get a chance to fire them, and roll these laws back.
Greg Zotta
Imperial
Taxing Times
Apparently in the land of Obama-nation we no longer have to pay taxes. Tim Geithner is to be the next Treasury Secretary overseeing the IRS and he is a tax cheat. He did not pay or have the taxes taken out on the illegal immigrant he had working for him. He also did not pay taxes on the salary he received working for the IMF, even though he was paid more money to cover the taxes. It was only after he was offered the position that he paid the taxes.
Then there’s New York Representative Charles Rangel, Chairman of the tax writing Ways and Means committee, who is also a tax cheat by not paying taxes for several years on rental income claiming it was a series of unconscionable mistakes.
My questions are: Are there laws against tax evasion? Are these men going to be investigated, audited, and possibly prosecuted? I don’t think so.
These are our Leaders and as such are we not supposed to follow their lead. So if we do follow their lead then we no longer have to pay our taxes, unless you are offered a position of power, then you may want to pay them a few days before you accept the position.
Greg Zotta,
Then there’s New York Representative Charles Rangel, Chairman of the tax writing Ways and Means committee, who is also a tax cheat by not paying taxes for several years on rental income claiming it was a series of unconscionable mistakes.
My questions are: Are there laws against tax evasion? Are these men going to be investigated, audited, and possibly prosecuted? I don’t think so.
These are our Leaders and as such are we not supposed to follow their lead. So if we do follow their lead then we no longer have to pay our taxes, unless you are offered a position of power, then you may want to pay them a few days before you accept the position.
Greg Zotta,
Obamacare
President Barack Hussein Obama wants to overhaul the nations healthcare system, because of the so-called 50 million uninsured Americans, and stated he is open to requiring all Americans to buy health insurance. (What about the illegal immigrants?) The estimated costs would be $1.5 trillion over the next ten years. When asked about the costs he had no new solutions to that problem except to say he’d cut costs through such measures as managing chronic diseases and avoiding unnecessary tests and hospital readmissions. Sounds like rationing care and controlling lifestyle to me.
Obama wants it to be done by October. What he is saying is, Let’s hurry up and get this thing done before the people realize what this is all about, and that is “Control.” The loss of freedom, you will be told what you can do, what you can eat etc. because it will be tied to healthcare.
Professor Stuart Altman of Brandeis University attended the hearings in the Senate Finance Committee on health-care reform and he reluctantly stated why waste money on in depth treatment for people who won’t live long anyway? In other words he is saying old people go home and die.
President Obama appointed Dr. Thomas Frieden as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Obama stated Frieden has been a leader in the fight for healthcare reform, and he led the campaign to ban smoking and trans-fats from New York City restaurants. He has been in at the forefront of the fight against heart disease, cancer, and obesity, infectious diseases such as tuberculosis and AIDS, and in the establishment of electronic health records. Making it easier to keep tabs on people and thus control their lives, (no soda or sugary foods for you).
To pay for Obamacare he wants to put the squeeze on doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceuticals. Taxes on beer, wine, liquor, and tobacco would go up. Soda and other sugary drinks and cereals would also be taxed because they lead to obesity. The idea behind the proposed increases is to tax lifestyle choices that contribute to rising medical costs. Controlling our lives!!
Government run Social Security and Medicare are going bankrupt. We do not need the government to run the healthcare system.
The United States has the greatest healthcare system in the world. Sure it needs to be fine-tuned but we do not need socialized medicine or universal healthcare (Obamacare). I urge everyone to contact their representatives in government and have them oppose this government takeover of the healthcare system.
Greg Zotta
Imperial
Obama wants it to be done by October. What he is saying is, Let’s hurry up and get this thing done before the people realize what this is all about, and that is “Control.” The loss of freedom, you will be told what you can do, what you can eat etc. because it will be tied to healthcare.
Professor Stuart Altman of Brandeis University attended the hearings in the Senate Finance Committee on health-care reform and he reluctantly stated why waste money on in depth treatment for people who won’t live long anyway? In other words he is saying old people go home and die.
President Obama appointed Dr. Thomas Frieden as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Obama stated Frieden has been a leader in the fight for healthcare reform, and he led the campaign to ban smoking and trans-fats from New York City restaurants. He has been in at the forefront of the fight against heart disease, cancer, and obesity, infectious diseases such as tuberculosis and AIDS, and in the establishment of electronic health records. Making it easier to keep tabs on people and thus control their lives, (no soda or sugary foods for you).
To pay for Obamacare he wants to put the squeeze on doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceuticals. Taxes on beer, wine, liquor, and tobacco would go up. Soda and other sugary drinks and cereals would also be taxed because they lead to obesity. The idea behind the proposed increases is to tax lifestyle choices that contribute to rising medical costs. Controlling our lives!!
Government run Social Security and Medicare are going bankrupt. We do not need the government to run the healthcare system.
The United States has the greatest healthcare system in the world. Sure it needs to be fine-tuned but we do not need socialized medicine or universal healthcare (Obamacare). I urge everyone to contact their representatives in government and have them oppose this government takeover of the healthcare system.
Greg Zotta
Imperial
Race Relations
Sgt. James Crowley of the Cambridge Police Department arrested a Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. for disorderly conduct.
The facts are, the police responded to a burglary call to Gates’ house from one of his neighbors. The front door had been damaged from a previous burglary attempt. Gates was in the house and was uncooperative in identifying himself. When Crowley was explaining to Gates his reason for being there, which was that he was responding to a burglary in progress, Gates shouted, “Why? Because I am a black man in America?” interjecting race into it. He continued his tirade calling the officer a racist among other things until he was arrested for disorderly conduct.
Gates was outraged by his arrest when a white police officer entered his home without his permission, even though the policeman was doing his job. Professor Gates teaches African studies, and I wonder what is actually being taught in his class.
President Obama initially said the Cambridge officers acted “stupidly” regarding the incident, which he later retracted in later press statements. He went on to say that any one of us would be pretty angry and that it is a fact that African-Americans and Latinos are being stopped disproportionately by law enforcement in this country. He made those statements without knowing the facts of the case. But what would you expect from a Community Organizer?
The next day Obama’s teleprompter told him to say I wished cooler heads would have prevailed and the officer involved was outstanding, but stood by his racial profiling comment. Race relations will not get any better in this country when President Obama gives credence to and was influenced by race baiters like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, and Jeremiah Wright.
My question to Gates and Obama are, “Why the outrage? Why the anger?” The police were doing their job. Gates was the one who escalated the situation. What would they have said if it was not Gates, but actually burglars in the house and the police let them go? Also, I would not be angry for the police doing their job in trying to protect my property.
Statistics show that blacks commit a disproportionate amount of the crime. Therefore, what Obama should be concerned with is reducing the crimes being committed by African-Americans so they will not be “profiled.” Police may be reluctant to do their jobs because of the racial tension caused by Obama’s comments on this issue, thus causing the crime rate will rise.
Greg Zotta
The facts are, the police responded to a burglary call to Gates’ house from one of his neighbors. The front door had been damaged from a previous burglary attempt. Gates was in the house and was uncooperative in identifying himself. When Crowley was explaining to Gates his reason for being there, which was that he was responding to a burglary in progress, Gates shouted, “Why? Because I am a black man in America?” interjecting race into it. He continued his tirade calling the officer a racist among other things until he was arrested for disorderly conduct.
Gates was outraged by his arrest when a white police officer entered his home without his permission, even though the policeman was doing his job. Professor Gates teaches African studies, and I wonder what is actually being taught in his class.
President Obama initially said the Cambridge officers acted “stupidly” regarding the incident, which he later retracted in later press statements. He went on to say that any one of us would be pretty angry and that it is a fact that African-Americans and Latinos are being stopped disproportionately by law enforcement in this country. He made those statements without knowing the facts of the case. But what would you expect from a Community Organizer?
The next day Obama’s teleprompter told him to say I wished cooler heads would have prevailed and the officer involved was outstanding, but stood by his racial profiling comment. Race relations will not get any better in this country when President Obama gives credence to and was influenced by race baiters like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, and Jeremiah Wright.
My question to Gates and Obama are, “Why the outrage? Why the anger?” The police were doing their job. Gates was the one who escalated the situation. What would they have said if it was not Gates, but actually burglars in the house and the police let them go? Also, I would not be angry for the police doing their job in trying to protect my property.
Statistics show that blacks commit a disproportionate amount of the crime. Therefore, what Obama should be concerned with is reducing the crimes being committed by African-Americans so they will not be “profiled.” Police may be reluctant to do their jobs because of the racial tension caused by Obama’s comments on this issue, thus causing the crime rate will rise.
Greg Zotta
Cash for Clunkers
The government program “Cash for Clunkers” is where you can trade in an older model vehicle for certain select new vehicles that gets better gas mileage. The person can receive $4500.00 from the government / taxpayers, and the trade in vehicle must be destroyed.
Some politicians claim it is stimulating the economy, especially the car industry saving jobs. What did these politicians say when hundreds of profitable GM and Chrysler dealerships were forced to close costing jobs, because of Obama’s plan to save the auto industry? What about the used car business?
Most people who take advantage of the program now have a car payment, and must carry full coverage insurance on the automobile in order to get a vehicle that gets a little more gas mileage. There will be some savings in gas, but it will be offset by interest payments on the car loan and added cost for insurance.
What happens if they can’t afford the payments? Will the government pick up the tab and pay for the vehicle like they are doing in Massachusetts?
The problem I have with the “Cash for Clunkers” program is that it is about control, manipulation, and loss of freedom. They are telling you what to buy and mandating it by law (case in point, the incandescent bulb is to be banned). The politicians (Federal Government) are using taxpayers’ money to manipulate people into buying a certain vehicle, just like Pavlov’s dog, but instead of ringing a bell the politicians waive money. They also do it with the tax code. Other programs the government uses to manipulate people and control their behavior with taxpayers money in what I call “Modern day slavery” are Section Eight Housing, Aid to Families with dependent children, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, utilities and phones. The Slave Master housed the slaves, fed them, and took care of their medical needs, so they could work the fields for their Master’s enrichment. Now days, the politicians who champion these programs for their enrichment and power do not need for them (slaves) to work the fields, they just need your vote.
On the US Government (Big Brother) website regarding the “Cash for Clunkers” program, it makes the computer and the network it is on the property of the US Government with the following disclaimer: “This application provides access to the DoT CARS system. When logged on to the CARS system, your computer is considered a Federal computer system and is the property of the US Government. Any or all uses of this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized CARS, DoT, and law enforcement personnel, as well as authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign.” When the light of day was revealed on the disclaimer it was removed from the site. My questions are the following: Why was it on the site to begin with? Who put it on the site? Why was it removed? Is the government still tapping into those computers?
Also, the Obama Administration is refusing to divulge the results of the program as to what vehicles are being bought. So much for transparency!!
Sure, there will be a temporary boost in the sale of automobiles, but what happens when the government (taxpayers’) money runs out? How many more times will the program be replenished with taxpayers’ money? It started with one billion dollars, and now the government added another two billion to the program. What’s next, appliances, clothing? Also,don’t be surprised if you have to pay taxes on the $4500.00 rebate.
My suggestion is instead of the government taking more money from the people, let the people keep more of their money, and let them buy what they want to buy, when they want to buy it.
Greg Zotta
Some politicians claim it is stimulating the economy, especially the car industry saving jobs. What did these politicians say when hundreds of profitable GM and Chrysler dealerships were forced to close costing jobs, because of Obama’s plan to save the auto industry? What about the used car business?
Most people who take advantage of the program now have a car payment, and must carry full coverage insurance on the automobile in order to get a vehicle that gets a little more gas mileage. There will be some savings in gas, but it will be offset by interest payments on the car loan and added cost for insurance.
What happens if they can’t afford the payments? Will the government pick up the tab and pay for the vehicle like they are doing in Massachusetts?
The problem I have with the “Cash for Clunkers” program is that it is about control, manipulation, and loss of freedom. They are telling you what to buy and mandating it by law (case in point, the incandescent bulb is to be banned). The politicians (Federal Government) are using taxpayers’ money to manipulate people into buying a certain vehicle, just like Pavlov’s dog, but instead of ringing a bell the politicians waive money. They also do it with the tax code. Other programs the government uses to manipulate people and control their behavior with taxpayers money in what I call “Modern day slavery” are Section Eight Housing, Aid to Families with dependent children, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, utilities and phones. The Slave Master housed the slaves, fed them, and took care of their medical needs, so they could work the fields for their Master’s enrichment. Now days, the politicians who champion these programs for their enrichment and power do not need for them (slaves) to work the fields, they just need your vote.
On the US Government (Big Brother) website regarding the “Cash for Clunkers” program, it makes the computer and the network it is on the property of the US Government with the following disclaimer: “This application provides access to the DoT CARS system. When logged on to the CARS system, your computer is considered a Federal computer system and is the property of the US Government. Any or all uses of this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized CARS, DoT, and law enforcement personnel, as well as authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign.” When the light of day was revealed on the disclaimer it was removed from the site. My questions are the following: Why was it on the site to begin with? Who put it on the site? Why was it removed? Is the government still tapping into those computers?
Also, the Obama Administration is refusing to divulge the results of the program as to what vehicles are being bought. So much for transparency!!
Sure, there will be a temporary boost in the sale of automobiles, but what happens when the government (taxpayers’) money runs out? How many more times will the program be replenished with taxpayers’ money? It started with one billion dollars, and now the government added another two billion to the program. What’s next, appliances, clothing? Also,don’t be surprised if you have to pay taxes on the $4500.00 rebate.
My suggestion is instead of the government taking more money from the people, let the people keep more of their money, and let them buy what they want to buy, when they want to buy it.
Greg Zotta
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Claire McCaskill
At the town hall meeting held on August 11th, 2009 at Jefferson College in Missouri, Senator Claire McCaskill says she doesn't understand the rudeness, referring to the people opposed to Obamacare stating, "I honestly don't get it"
Could it be because they are being lied to by Obama and the democrats about the health care bill?
Could it be because of the massive amount of debt this administration is putting on the American people?
Could it be because these politicians are passing bills without reading them?
Could it be that they do not like being referred to as NAZI's, terrorists, racists, plants for the insurance indutry, an angry mob, and being unAmerican?
Could it be the condescending attitude these democratic politicians have towards their constituents?
Could it be they do not like that President Obama encouraged goons/thugs to attend the meetings in an attempt to intimidate them?
Could it be all of the above? I say "yes"!!! These people are true Americans, and they are exercising their first amendment right. Obviously, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Claire McCaskill, Barack Obama, et.al. do not understand the first amendment which states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Greg Zotta
Imperial
Could it be because they are being lied to by Obama and the democrats about the health care bill?
Could it be because of the massive amount of debt this administration is putting on the American people?
Could it be because these politicians are passing bills without reading them?
Could it be that they do not like being referred to as NAZI's, terrorists, racists, plants for the insurance indutry, an angry mob, and being unAmerican?
Could it be the condescending attitude these democratic politicians have towards their constituents?
Could it be they do not like that President Obama encouraged goons/thugs to attend the meetings in an attempt to intimidate them?
Could it be all of the above? I say "yes"!!! These people are true Americans, and they are exercising their first amendment right. Obviously, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Claire McCaskill, Barack Obama, et.al. do not understand the first amendment which states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Greg Zotta
Imperial
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
