Question #1:
What does this article mean??...(brief summary please)?
Anti-abortion Group Targets Democrats In Radio AdsAnti-abortion Group Relies On Supreme Court Ruling To Call For Defeat Of 3 Democrats
Font size Print E-mail Share
(AP) WASHINGTON (AP) - An anti-abortion group plans to air radio ads in three congressional races calling for the defeat of Democratic incumbents, among the first ads to capitalize on a Supreme Court ruling this year that freed corporations to directly influence elections.
The group, AUL Action, is targeting Democratic Reps. John Boccieri of Ohio, Christopher Carney of Pennsylvania and Baron Hill of Indiana. AUL Action is the legislative arm of the nonprofit Americans United for Life.
The ads cross a new threshold in campaign communication and embrace the latitude granted by the Supreme Court in its 5-4 decision in January to increase the power of corporations and unions to sway government decisions.
Ad spending is on a record pace as outside groups raise more money from corporations, individuals and unions. As the November general election nears, political strategists believe more groups will follow AUL's path.
AUL Action is incorporated as a nonprofit under section 501(c)4 of the tax code. As such, it now enjoys the expanded rights granted by the court. Before that ruling, groups such as AUL were limited to airing "issue ads" that drew attention to candidates positions but could not recommend whether voters should vote them in or out of office.
Audio clips of the ads were obtained by The Associated Press from a Republican strategist not affiliated with Americans United. The group confirmed the placement of the ads.
Last month, AUL relied on the court's decision to endorse Colorado Republican Jane Norton for the Senate. Norton eventually lost to tea party-backed candidate Ken Buck, a county prosecutor.
AUL Action says Boccieri, Carney and Hill are the first of about a dozen members of Congress it intends to target with ads. The one-minute ads are scheduled to begin airing Friday for one week. They criticize Boccieri, Hill and Carney for voting for President Barack Obama's health care law. In a statement, AUL Action President Charmaine Yoest said the vote amounted to "the largest expansion of federal funding of abortion ever."
"They will not be able to hide from that vote any longer," she said.
Before the bill passed, Obama signed an executive order affirming long-standing restrictions on taxpayer-funded abortions.
Under the law, private plans in new insurance markets opening for business in 2014 can cover abortion, but payment must come from enrollees themselves, not from federal tax credits that will be offered to make premiums more affordable.
In the ads, a female narrators says, "The life of an innocent child may not matter" to Boccieri, Hill and Carney.
"It's time to send someone to Washington who shares our values, not Nancy Pelosi's," the ads say.
(This version CORRECTS to show Boccieri represents Ohio, not Indiana.)
&&&& How does this affect the community or the U.S as a whole
Question #2:
apart from NEIS what are the possibilities for a sole trader just starting a business?
I got my ABN in July and am now enrolled in the NEIS training program.Are there any other kinds of help available from federal, state or local governments organisations ?
or any private help (mentoring, sponsorships, grants and so on) ?
thanks for your input it will be greatly appreciated !
thanks Bec.. went to your websites and subscribed to a couple mailing lists (sent also an email through the contact us form on hatching online)
Keep in touch !
Question #3:
Would you vote for a Conservative that wanted to deregulate, cut taxes, get rid of the IRS,?
believes that mandated hospital emergency treatment for illegal aliens should be ceased and that assistance from charities should instead be sought because there should be no federal mandates on providing health care for illegal aliensbelieves children born in the U.S. to illegal aliens should not be granted automatic birthright citizenship.[56] He has called for a new Constitutional amendment to revise fourteenth amendment principles and "end automatic birthright citizenship,"[57] and believes that welfare issues are directly tied to the illegal immigration problem
climate change is not a "major problem threatening civilization
rejects universal health care, believing that the more government interferes in medicine, the higher prices rise and the less efficient care becomes
repeal of the seventeenth amendment
Strongly pro-life, feels it should be left up to the states to decide
believes that Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called 'diversity' actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist
would substantially reduce the government's role in individual lives and in the functions of foreign and domestic states; he says Republicans have lost their commitment to limited government and have become the party of big government.[74] He would eliminate many federal government agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Education,[75] the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Department of Commerce,[76] the US Department of Health and Human Services,[76] the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Internal Revenue Service
Obamabot..
Your answer indicates that you know nothing about Ron Paul.... because this is his platform..
Funny how people support people yet know nothing about them
Question #4:
Why do liberals hate the word socialism when...?
Why do liberals hate when people call their policies socialistic when they obviously are? Check out Click Here and take a good look at what are called "grants" under the Opportunities tab. This means that anyone can apply for a check from the federal government, but I seriously doubt that they'll approve grants to upper-middle class Americans, and that the grants are directed towards lower income families in the hopes that they'll spend the money and maybe even stimulate the economy (so far, I'm not seeing much stimulus).So in effect, this is a redistribution of wealth, or an attempt at equalizing the spending power of all classes, which is by definition socialism. My question to liberals is, why are you so afraid of the word "socialism" in the face of the truth that you are indeed running a socialistic system in a capitalistic economy?
Question #5:
What crimes can Obama be impeached for?
The redistribution of property by force and subterfuge; and the unequal application of tax laws amounting to punitive action against certain groups of American People and providing favored status to other groups?Willful and purposeful devaluation and destruction of American currency?
Targeting and labeling law-abiding American citizens as domestic terrorists ?
Declarations that disagreeing with policy is unpatriotic, racist, or disloyal to our country?
Intrusions into the privacy of law-abiding American citizens (expanded Bush's domestic spying)?
Perpetual massive indebtedness to foreign countries?
Infringement upon the rights of the People to keep and bear arms through oppressive regulation and taxation designed for the very purpose of infringement?
Passing laws and taxes without deliberation and without reading the legislation; said action is tantamount to the American People not having any representation?
Enacting ex post facto laws and Bills of Attainder?
Granting Constitutional rights and privileges to illegal aliens and prisoners of war?
Funding mercenary organizations that engage in voter fraud and paid harassment of law abiding American citizens?
Unprecedented and arbitrary federal power, through the United States Treasury, for government intervention into, control of, and confiscation of, private property, private industry including but not limited to banking, insurance, manufacturing, farming and other sectors of the private economy?
Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law?
Acts regarding religion (providing preferential treatment Muslim over Christian) ; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press?
Failing to enforce/comply with Federal Law on border security. Directing Federal Agencies to VIOLATE Federal Law on Immigration.
Question #6:
Obama I said let the illegals go free but Fed agents frustrated by judges’ immigration decisions?
In March, Jose Manuel Gonzalez-Sandoval — who had committed serious crimes in the United States since 1998 — stood before Florence, Ariz., Immigration Judge Bruce Taylor on a deportation hearing. That day the judge canceled his removal proceedings, allowing him to stay in the United States.Four months later, Sandoval was arrested again on an outstanding warrant but was released. Three days after that release he led police on a 100 mph car chase. Then in August, in response to a 911 call from his family, he shot at Arizona deputies who came to his home. That night, he escaped. He later turned himself into authorities after they began a public manhunt for him.
Sandoval, who had resident status, is only one example of a legal system that lacks working mechanisms for deporting criminal aliens, said Rep. Ted Poe, a Texas Republican and former judge.
“The federal government has the responsibility, the moral duty to send these criminal aliens back where they came from after they do their prison time and before they commit more crimes,” said Poe, who is co-chair of the Victims’ Rights Caucus. He said both the Obama and Bush administrations handled the issue ineffectively, hiding facts from the American people and “sugar-coating” the truth regarding the deportation of criminal aliens.
This month, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency announced that the Obama administration is planning to dismiss thousands of illegal alien deportation cases, possibly 17,000, if the immigrants have a potential path to legal residency or overstayed their visas.
But critics say many illegal aliens with long criminal records composed of what some courts consider to be lesser charges will see their deportation cases dismissed as well. They cite Sandoval as an example.
“The system is skewed to release these criminals,” said Poe, a former judge. He recalled many times he saw repeat criminal offenders back in his courtroom after issuing detainers, which required the federal government to deport them after they served their U.S. sentences.
“The detainers don’t work, because we either don’t have enough federal agents, the administration doesn’t make it a priority and there isn’t any accountability when alien criminals are released back into society,” Poe said.
ICE, Border Patrol and local law enforcement officers told The Washington Examiner that law enforcement agencies are frustrated by the judicial system’s approach to handling immigrants charged with crimes.
“In the case of Sandoval, ICE did the right thing,” said a federal official who spoke on the condition that he not be named. “They checked his long criminal history, he had two or more crimes involving morale turpitude and should have been deported and had his residency taken away. What does the administration have to say about this? He’s only one of thousands of bad guys that get away with this.”
Said an ICE agent: “What can we do when immigration judges are granted this huge discretionary authority? There is no oversight. This case could have resulted in the death of a police officer.”
Kathryn Mattingly, with the Executive Office for Immigration Reform, said, “The Office of the Chief Immigration Judge regularly monitors immigration judge performance and conduct through EOIR’s performance management program and through its daily supervision of the courts.”
She said that in “instances where concerns regarding an immigration judge’s conduct arise ... any allegations are investigated and resolved in a fair and expeditious manner,” adding that “such investigations could include scenarios where an immigration judge consistently makes ill-advised decisions.”
Sandoval’s Department of Homeland Security arrest record history was obtained by The Examiner.
He had used an alias, Samuel Mendoza, and as early as 1998 he had been arrested for damage to private property and simple assault. Since then he has been arrested for drunken driving, drug charges multiple aggravated assaults, multiple endangerment charges and use of a deadly weapon. In many cases, he was not prosecuted, simply fined and released, according to the documents.
The federal law governing criminal immigrants states that “if you have been convicted of two crimes involving moral turpitude not arising out of a single scheme of criminal misconduct,” you are supposed to be deported.
However, judges have repeatedly used their own discretion not to deport him.
“There is no legal liability on the part of the judge, and you can’t charge a judge for using their discretion,” Poe said. “The judge is morally responsible to follow through with the law because if someone is killed or injured, the blood is on the judge’s hands.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: Click Here
Question #7:
Fiscal conservatives, did you not hear about Hal Rogers?
I'm wondering because I haven't seen any questions about it from all of those that like to reference the 'drain the swamp' phrase, or the rest that go on day after day about government waste.CAGW Names Rep. Hal Rogers August Porker of the Month
WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today named Rep. Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) August Porker of the Month for sponsoring legislation that could give federal funding to his daughter’s nonprofit organization, which promotes overseas wildlife protection for cheetahs.
According to a July 26, 2010 article in the Lexington Herald-Leader, “U.S. Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Somerset, is sponsoring a bill to give $5 million a year to conservation groups that work overseas on behalf of endangered ‘great cats and rare canids,’ such as cheetahs, lions and Ethiopian wolves. One group interested in applying, should Rogers’ bill become law, is the Namibia-based Cheetah Conservation Fund. Its grants administrator, Allison Rogers, is the congressman’s daughter.”
Click Here
He's now in a tight race with Democrat Jim Holbert, and this isn't going to help his cause.
@obamahood --- I know, I just asked why everyone leaves this guy out.
@Mjǫllnir --- You should check out the website for the cagw, get a taste of unbiased information. You sound like you need it.
Question #8:
Why do blacks embrace the Democratic Party ?
In reading The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow. I find this passage most interesting. Most whites rallied around the Democratic Party as the party of white supremacy. Between 1868 and 1871, terrorist organizations, especially the Ku Klux Klan, murdered blacks and whites who tried to exercise their right to vote or receive an education. The Klan, working with Democrats in several states, used fraud and violence to help whites regain control of their state governments. By the early 1870s, most Southern states had been "redeemed" -- as many white Southerners called it -- from Republican rule. By the time the last federal troops had been withdrawn in 1877, Reconstruction was all but over and the Democratic Party controlled the destiny of the South.-- Richard Wormser
It would explain why the Honorable Senator Robert Byrd lasted so long in the Democratic Party. As I read further in this interesting site. I find it curious in wondering just how many blacks have read it or even bothered to read more about Jim Crow.
Whom was Jim Crow These words are from the song, "Jim Crow," as it appeared in sheet music written by Thomas Dartmouth "Daddy" Rice. Rice, a struggling "actor" (he did short solo skits between play scenes) at the Park Theater in New York, happened upon a Black person singing the above song -- some accounts say it was an old Black slave who walked with difficulty, others say it was a ragged Black stable boy. Whether modeled on an old man or a young boy we will never know, however, it is clear that in 1828 Rice appeared on stage as "Jim Crow" -- an exaggerated, highly stereotypical Black character.
But Jim Crow came to be, more often used to describe the segregation laws, rules, and customs which arose after Reconstruction ended in 1877 and continued until the mid-1960s. How did the name become associated with these "Black Codes" which took away many of the rights which had been granted to Blacks through the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments?
I am not saying that the Jim Crow era was in any way fair or good for American People, and it was by no means fair to the Blacks. It was an abomination, that has ripped this country down the middle every sense the eighteen hundreds. I also find it curious that it was actually the Then called Radical Republican wing of the Republican Party that wanted emancipation, and supported abolition.
Anyway, I will continue to read these stories. As it find them interesting. I am sorry to say, as a White man, that I never really found much reason to look into Jim Crow. But now that I have I can understand better how Blacks felt, but I don't understand their embracing the Democratic Dogma, with such fervor. I still say that its really the Democratic Party that keeps their foot on the neck of our Black black Citizens. You might notice that I use the word Black. that is because I don't think it makes any sense to have to call them African-Americans. We are either all Americans, or we are not. I don't think that any of the current generations of Blacks, have been forcibly brought to this country, as slaves or anything else. To me anybody that is a citizen, by birth or nationalization are just Americans, and always will be. Having your ancestral country, your religion, or any other identity makes no sense to me.
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Well, I think that you had better read and research further.
I care because you are just as much an American than I am, unless of course you think I owe you something more than that. And because your a human being. Is there anything more important than that. If you were a sponge, i might have my doubts.
i would further say, that I care, about the history of these United States, and its Citizens, regardless of what ethnic background they have. I also feel as strongly about how this country treated and still treats the Native Americans, And you might notice I did not use a hyphen. That is because they are the true Americans. Buy fact that we were the usurper's. And we started mistreating them before we started mistreating the Blacks. and then the Chinese, And the Hispanics. Unless we come together as just Americans, we are destined to repeat history. And that would be tragic.
Martin Luther King, once had a dream, of unity and freedom for all Americans. I to have a dream. That it comes true, and that this melting pot of peoples, unites, and moves forward as a free and understanding people. Yes it will be hard, but it takes us all to work it out. The sad thing is neither political party is going to do that. It takes the people, to be honest and open with themselves and their fellow citizens. You can throw the hateful wards back and forth until time in memorial, and it won't change a thing, now will it. I say treat each other as a individual, and private person. Then come together for the collective good.
well Loveylada, I have not seen the job market grow yet, I have not seen education improve, and I have seen on that is the Union grow. I have not seen the health care improve, in fact I see it getting worse, and sooner than later.In fact I have seen nothing get better with more tax and spend policies, and more entitlement polices. As for taxes until you have a system in which everybody pays a fair share of tax on the money they make, nobody will benefit.
Well its about time that all the voters stop drinking the cool-aid. and learn for themselves what the issues are, from both sides. And make informed decisions when voting. And not just following all the lemmings, with that warm tingly felling up their legs. You don't vote somebody in office based on their Race, Ethnic, Creed, Gender, Color, or Religion. You vote them into office on your informed views on the issues. And how that person can help the citizens, withing the guidelines of the Constitution. Not based on ideology, progressive, socialist or religious beliefs. I find it so sad that so many just vote because they can, or because they buy what somebody else is feeding them, with is often times bigoted, or biased beyond belief. I also find it sad that a good many questioned as to why they voted, or asked about an issue, they have no logical answer......
Question #9:
id like to start a juvenile rehabilitaion home anyone know how to get government or federal grants any advice?
im in june alke, ca and id like to how to qualify, or talk to about regulations of having a youth home, for juveniles. To rehabilitate.Question #10:
Opening sealed records?
About two months ago I wrote to the governor, senators, and state representatives about opening adoption records in Hawaii. Please let me know what you think of the response I received from Senator Daniel Akaka (D). (He is the only one who has responded thus far.)Dear Ms. R.,
Thank you for contacting me to express your support for changing adoption laws in Hawaii and other states to provide adult adoptees unfettered access to their birth records. You also asked that I express support for and agreement with this proposed change.
The states rather than the federal government shape adoption policy in this nation. Accordingly, adoption policy differs from one state to another. Under Hawaii law, an adoptee may submit a request to inspect his or her adoption records to the family court in which his or her adoption was finalized. If the birth parents have not filed a confidentiality affadavit, those records would be provided for inspection by the adoptee only.
***The debate to grant adult adoptees full access to their original birth records has taken place at the state level, where policymakers continue to weigh how they may empower one party to the abortion debate without ignoring or minimizing the concerns of other parties to the same debate.***
The separation of powers doctrine that divides the federal government into three branches (executive, legislative, and judicial), each with powers that neither of the other two may usurp, also separates the powers of the states from that of the federal government. Accordingly, it has been my policy not to intervene in matters that fall under the purview of the states. If and when the U.S. Congress considers legislation that urges the states to change their adoption policy to give adult adoptees full access to their original birth records, I will keep your concerns in mind.
If you have not done so already, I urge you to contact the governor as well as your representatives in the state legislature to inform them of your concerns regarding the rights of adult adoptees to access their original birth records.
Thank you again for contacting me.
Aloha pumehana,
Daniel K. Akaka, U.S. Senator
Do you think he meant "abortion" in the starred (***) paragraph or was that a typo? I'm confused. I never mentioned abortion in my letter to Senator Akaka or any of the other legislators, and it doesn't seem to make sense to me here. What am I missing? Any other thoughts?
Thanks.
Question #11:
Are we Americans ever going to wake up about the middle east?And YES THIS IS a religious question.?
Declassified Senate Investigation Files Reveal Clandestine Israeli PR Campaign in AmericaWASHINGTON, Aug. 18 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Declassified files from a Senate investigation into Israeli-funded covert public relations and lobbying activity in the United States were released by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) on July 23rd, 2010. The subpoenaed documents reveal Israel's clandestine programs for "cultivation of editors," the "stimulation and placement of suitable articles in the major consumer magazines" as well as U.S. reporting about sensitive subjects such as the Dimona nuclear weapons facility.
Documents are now available for download from Click Here include:
Dimona (excerpt): "The nuclear reactor story inspired comment from many sources; editorial writers, columnists, science writers and cartoonists. Most of the press seemed finally to accept the thesis that the reactor was being built for peaceful purposes and not for bombs." Click Here
Content placement and promotion (excerpt): "The Atlantic Monthly in its October issue carried the outstanding Martha Gellhorn piece on the Arab refugees, which made quite an impact around the country. We arranged for the distribution of 10,000 reprints to public opinion molders in all categories… Interested friends are making arrangements with the Atlantic for another reprint of the Gellhorn article to be sent to all 53,000 persons whose names appear in Who's Who in America…Our Committee is now planning articles for the women's magazines for the trade and business publications." Click Here
Pressure campaigns (excerpt): "It can be said that the press of the nation…has by and large shown sympathy and understanding of Israel's position. There are, of course, exceptions, notably the Scripps-Howard chain where we still need to achieve a 'break-through,' the Pulliam chain (where some progress has been made) and some locally-owned papers." Click Here
Magazine Committee achievements (excerpt): "We cannot pinpoint all that has already been accomplished by this Committee except to say that it has been responsible for the writing and placement of articles on Israel in some of America's leading magazines...." Click Here
According to Grant F. Smith, director of IRmep, "It is frightening how easily some in the American news media surrendered to a foreign public relations campaign that spent the 2010 equivalent of $36 million over two years. Time has proven most of the planted content to be misleading, if not dangerous. These historical documents hold many important lessons for Americans who have long needed—but rarely received—straight reporting on key Middle East issues."
The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is the nation's record keeper. It retains 1%-3% of the most important documents of business conducted by the United States Federal government. The Israel Lobby Archive, Click Here is a unit of the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy in Washington.
SOURCE Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy
Question #12:
NEVER REGISTERED FOR SELECTIVE SERVICES PLS SOMEONE HELP!!!!!?
Hello everyone,I got a couple of questions for whoever can guide me in the right direction.
Every year when I file for Student Financial Aid (FAFSA), I run into problems because I never registered with Selective Service. I came into this country when I was 13 years old as a tourist and for fear of our lives, my family applied for asylum, which was granted when I was about 22 years old. So between 13 and 22 yrs. old, I was under no legal status, which is basically an illegal “alienâ€Â. I continued being under asylum and became a Legal Resident when I was 29 years old. I NEVER received anything from the Government stating I needed to register. Matter of fact, I just never ever imagined that it was required for one to register. All I ever heard my entire life was that men weren't required to serve in the military here in the U.S. Registering therefore never crossed my mind since I knew men weren't required to serve. I bluntly did not know. Well, problem is that my ignorance is now catching up to me. Every time I file FAFSA I have problems and have to write a letter to Selective Service, and than it gets taken care of for that year, until I have to file again, and redo everything over. But I recently found out that because I never registered, I may be ineligible for Financial Aid, Citizenship and Federal Employment. How can I remediate this problem?
any help would be greatly appreaciated thank you
P.S its not because i chose to ignore the paper work I was not aware of this paper if I was aware of this paper I would have been more then willing to sign it .........considering..... the fact that I tryed to join the United States Army and was told I needed to be a citizen I was also told recently that my high school should have givin it to me so this is my dillema
Question #13:
For everyone who protests the war: What would you do?
If you protest the war then answer this:Your wish has been granted. All soldiers return home from Iraq and Afghanistan. A few weeks go by and Afghanistan's haphazard government falls to pieces as the Taliban regains control. In Iraq a constant fear of suicide bombers keeps the cities awake. The small terrorist forces regain control of previously US controlled land. The terrorist forces are happy the Americans are gone, but they are just getting started. They begin to force recruits into their alliance. People are living in extreme poverty conditions and have no choice but the follow. Before the US fed some of the villagers. Now there is no food because the Taliban takes it all.
We are back where we started and the variety of terrorist groups are recruiting more and more. Sooner or later they will hit targets. Its not that hard. Anyone can make a bomb, and anyone can drive up next to a bank. Anyone can, and they WILL.
Protest the war? Love anarchy?
We didn't kill hundreds of thousands of their people. So your facts are false, and your answer loses credibility.
Question #14:
What I'm I politically?
I'm going to describe what I believe the best government could be and I want input as to whether I'm conservative, liberal, libertarian, authoritarian, moderate, centralist, whatever.I believe in a electoral corporate state. I believe there should be a federal government, but it should only really be involved in peoples' lives when it comes to granting freedoms and restrictions. I believe corporations should actually carry out the laws, not the government. I also believe that people should elect both their government and their corporate bosses, where every vote should be completely private and it is impossible to be fired from your job for not voting for a particular boss. I also think that the working class should be able to have the most votes, as they should vote in all their bosses in, from management to executives, whereas mid-management should simply vote their bosses in; just the executives.
I believe that literally everything should be run by corporations and that they should have the right to tax you on public products and services, as I do not believe in tolls in roads. I believe in securing gun rights, the right to life, and the complete and utter right to freedom of speech, media, property (as long as you have the money), and religion.
I believe corporations and businesses should make private schools but should be regulated by the government, I believe that water and electricity should be private but again should be regulated by the government, and the same goes with police, libraries, and the fire department. I also believe that military corporations have the right to invade other countries so long as they obey the laws of electing corporate officials on foreign soil.
I always consider myself a conservative-libertarian, but I'm not sure if it is really that, because my type of corporation is kind of like a government within itself.
What do you think I am politically?
I am not a Fascist because I don't believe in big government or wars for the simple cause of expansion, and I'm not a Tripartist because I really don't believe in labor unions, I mean, I believe they should have the right to organize, but I inherently think that paying labor union dues is wrong and any union that drastic of a cause should be maintained by the government as law.
I DON'T believe corporations as you view them are as good or bad in dealing with services as the government. I believe that electoral corporations would be more beneficial for people than the government or corporations as we know them. To me, electoral corporations would be the balance between the powers of the working class and management/executives. Electoral corporations would take what is best with both worlds: Democracy in government and Entrepreneurism in Business, and combine it to one endeavor.
thumbs down for truth: One government law would be that will be illegal to make the victims of crime pay for the crime itself ... the money for the police would come from the criminals themselves.
As far as potholes are considered, have you've noticed that private roads are much better maintained than their public counterparts? The only thing I don't like about private roads is the constant tolls which just drag traffic down ... I believe that private non-toll roads would be the most satisfactory solution to transportation needs.
Question #15:
What do you think Boston judge blasts leak in Obama aunt asylum case?
BOSTON (AP) - A judge who granted asylum to President Barack Obama's African aunt ruled she deserved to stay in the United States because a federal government official leaked her status to a news organization, making her a potential target for persecution in her native Kenya.U.S. Immigration Judge Leonard Shapiro blasted the leak by the unnamed official in his 29-page ruling granting asylum to Zeituni Onyango in May. His written decision was released this week through the Freedom of Information Act and first was reported by The Boston Globe.
Shapiro found that a federal government official disclosed Onyango's immigration status and her relationship to Obama to The Associated Press three days before the November 2008 election in which Obama was elected as the first black president.
The AP's story stated that Onyango, the half sister of Obama's late father, had been living illegally in the United States after an immigration judge rejected her request for asylum four years earlier. Information about Onyango's case was disclosed and confirmed by two sources, one of them a federal law enforcement official. Onyango, 58, has been living in public housing in Boston.
Shapiro called the disclosure "a reckless and illegal violation of her right to privacy which has exposed her to great risk," and he criticized the official for using the information for political reasons.
"The disclosure intentionally linked the Respondent's status as an asylum applicant with President Obama's presidential campaign, and the effect was to politicize confidential information about the Respondent which the United States government had no authority to release," Shapiro wrote. "The illegality and political ramifications of this breach were made apparent when, following the breach, President (George W.) Bush swiftly issued a directive requiring federal agents to obtain high-level approval before arresting fugitive immigrants."
Shapiro found that because Onyango's identity and status were disclosed, she would be a target in Kenya not only for those who oppose the United States and Obama but for members of the Kenyan government "who oppose President Obama's politics and/or his ethnicity, which the Respondent shares."
A Department of Homeland Security official speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the issue said an internal investigation launched into the leak in 2008 is expected to come to an end soon.
In his ruling, Shapiro said the Department of Homeland Security acknowledged Onyango was identified in the media as an asylum applicant but did not concede the disclosure was made by a U.S. government official.
DHS argued the disclosure "did not create a new risk of harm" to Onyango because the AP article did not reveal any facts about her asylum claim and because she and her attorney later gave some details about the claim to the media.
The agency said the disclosure did not put her at risk, citing other family members in Kenya who have not been harmed. It also noted the Kenyan government celebrated Obama's election as president and sponsored a delegation of several family members to travel to the 2009 presidential inauguration in Washington, D.C.
Shapiro, however, said Onyango's relationship to Obama is distinct from her Kenyan family members' relationships to him because she has lived in the United States since 2000 and applied for U.S. asylum.
One of Onyango's Cleveland-based lawyers, Scott Bratton, said the asylum process is confidential, in part to protect people who may be sent back to their home countries. Leaking the information just before the election put Onyango at greater risk, he said.
"She is known to everybody now," he said. "She is known to have applied for asylum. She's been thrust into the spotlight, and because of that she has a fear of returning."
In Obama's memoir, "Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance," he affectionately referred to Onyango as Auntie Zeituni and described meeting her during his 1988 trip to Kenya.
Onyango's case inflamed the national debate over immigration, with some questioning whether Onyango had been given special treatment because of her relationship with the president. The White House has said Obama had no involvement in the case.
Bratton also said the president played no role.
"This wasn't a favor to the president," he said. "The president wasn't involved in this case at all. She went through the asylum process just like anybody else would, and the case was granted."
Onyango initially came to the U.S. in 2000. Her first request for political asylum in 2002 was rejected, and she was ordered deported in 2004. But she didn't leave the country and continued to live in Boston.
A judge later agreed to suspen
Question #16:
economics help please asap!?
Question 1 You are a member of Congress and your aide reports that the inflation rate continues to drop and is below the rate associated with a growing economy. Some economists have begun talking about the possibility of deflation. To address this concern, you vote for the bill that aims todecrease spending on grants for small businesses.
increase taxes on sales of luxury goods.
increase taxes for large corporations.
reduce taxes for business owners.
Question 2 Decreasing government spending usually
increases the inflation rate.
decreases the inflation rate.
increases the stagflation rate.
decreases the stagflation rate.
Question 3Increasing government spending usually
increases the unemployment rate.
decreases the unemployment rate.
increases the stagflation rate.
decreases the stagflation rate.
Question 4To promote economic growth, countries would most likely act so that inflation
is eliminated.
remains at a high level.
remains at a low level.
is a negative number.
Question 5 Unemployment is on the rise though inflation is quite low. Gross Domestic Product is rising but more slowly than the goal rate. The Federal Reserve may buy government securities in open market operations in order to
increase the money supply and encourage economic growth.
decrease the money supply and encourage people to save in difficult times.
give consumers more money to open their own businesses.
force the banks to stop giving out loans in an uncertain economy.
Question 6
When the economy is operating at point B, the Federal Reserve is most likely to follow
expansionary fiscal policy.
contractionary fiscal policy.
expansionary monetary policy.
contractionary monetary policy.
Question 7Buying securities in open market operations may promote economic growth because
the U.S. Congress guarantees the value of government securities.
the U.S. Congress allows the securities to be used for business expansion.
this action increases banks’ cash, allowing for more loans and investment.
Question 8
Use this image to answer the following question. In the business cycle phase marked A, economists expect
inflation to be high.
unemployment to be low.
economic growth to slow down.
consumer sales to increase.
Question 9Inflation is low but the unemployment rate is the highest seen in several years. Economists report signs that the economy is beginning to improve. The economy is likely in
recession.
expansion.
a peak.
a trough.
Question 10 The inflation rate is increasing and unemployment is decreasing. The economy is likely in
recession.
expansion.
a peak.
a trough.
Question 11 Imagine you read an article that says “economists agree we have seen the worst of the inflation rate impact and expect it to lower very soon." The economy is likely in
recession.
expansion.
a peak.
a trough.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 12 (Multiple Choice Worth 5 points)
[04.02]Governments use wage and price controls in an attempt to
monitor business profits.
protect business interests.
encourage economic growth.
control citizens’ spending habits.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 13
[04.02]
In the diagram above, what will happen if the government sets the price for potatoes at Point B?
There will be a shortage of potatoes.
There will be a surplus of potatoes.
The price of potatoes will rise to meet equilibrium.
The price of potatoes will fall to meet equilibrium.
Question 16 ]One benefit of regulating a natural monopoly is that
consumers have many choices.
competition between products improves quality.
consumers do not have to research different companies.
Question 17
The best reason to regulate bridge construction is to
ensure safety standards are met.
reduce the number of bridges the public has to fund.
eliminate multiple bridges in one area because they are not pleasing to the eye.
minimize route options because different bridges often confuse drivers.
Question 18The state legislature asks you to analyze several product markets for natural monopoly qualities. The legislature wishes to regulate one of the products to provide safer, more efficient, and standard quality to its citizens. Which product do you recommend?
student tutoring services
bottled water plants
auto detailing services
paint manufacturing
Question 19The accumulation of years of spending more money than is collected in revenues over several years creates a budget
debt.
deficit.
surplus.
reversal.
Question #17:
I sustain that there is no illegal immigration in the USA. Can you tell me where my logic argument is wrong?
There's no part in the U.S. Constitution giving the Congress the power to pass laws restricting immigration. This power has never been delegated to the Federal Government by the states*. Therefore, there are no illegal immigrants in the USA, there are only undocumented immigrants which have the right to be in the USA, because no federal law can forbid it.* "An Act concerning Aliens, which assumes power over alien friends not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void and of no force." (Thomas Jefferson)
“Responsibility over immigration can only belong with the States since this is where the Constitution kept the power.” (President Grant)
Source of the quotes: Click Here
@George L: I wonder if the Supreme Court really matters. Any common judge would say that there is no such a thing as illegal immigration. Maybe this never achieved the supreme court, and many people are getting the Green Card by common trials. Maybe the people known as "illegals" are just the ones that doesn't know how to hire a lawer: do you think this is possible?
Question #18:
Is the Constitution for smaller government, or federal neutrality?
Alot of people claim that the Constitution is for overall smaller government. I agree.But is it for small enough government?
Bear with me for a second. The Constitution guarantees SOME civil liberties, as listed in the Bill of Rights. However, most of these freedoms are irrelevant to the average citizen. For example:
- Freedom of the Press. If I'm not a publisher, how does this affect me?
- The 3rd through 8th amendments all protect criminals' rights. If I'm not a criminal, then I will probably never exercise these freedoms in my lifetime.
While there is pretty much no "big government" provision in the Constitution, there are only a few civil liberties granted, and the states have the freedom to take away the rest of our liberties via the 10th amendment. (And please don't say you can just move to another state, because alot of times having a good job, house, life, etc. can be tempting to stay put.)
(Not that I don't think these freedoms are important, but I don't think they are enough. I think more should have been included for the average law abiding citizen.)
So hypothetically speaking, a state could prohibit me from burping, farting, and swearing and there would be nothing I could do about it in terms of Constitutional law. Only the limited liberties that are listed in the Bill of Rights apply to the States, nothing else.
So the main question is this - does the Constitution necessarily grant us ultimate freedom from government, or does it just hand the power to oppress us to the States?
Should the Constitution have included more liberties? And I'm sorry if I seem disrespectful of the Constitution...it is a great document but I don't think it is perfect.
Thank you
P.S. Sorry if the question was a bit long.
@jaker: I'm worried about mob rule. Not even the majority should have the right to take away a civil liberty.
Question #19:
American Government and Economics?
1. What department has the responsibility for managing the money the national government brings in through taxes: (Points: 2)White House
U.S. Treasury Department
Federal Reserve
Central Bank
2. What was the initial hope of most of the colonists for the outcome of the conflict with England? (Points: 2)
Independence
Restoration of rights as British subjects
To move back to England
Remove the King from power in England
3. If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns a law based on Constitutional issues, Congress: (Points: 2)
Does nothing. If the Supreme Court has ruled the law unconstitutional, then the law is dead.
May propose a Constitutional Amendment under Article V to change the Constitution to make the law Constitutional.
Must re-write the law and pass it again.
Can override the Supreme Court, similar to how it overrides a presidential veto.
4. When a person buys a book in a bookstore the bookstore's economic role is the: (Points: 2)
supplier
consumer
manufacturer
retailer
5. In western culture, the concept of limited government originated with: (Points: 2)
the Magna Carta
the Declaration of Independence
the Roman Republic
Article of Confederation
6. What margin of error do even the most precise public opinion polls possess? (Points: 2)
0
5%
10%
15%
7. What party ran third party candidate, Ralph Nader, for President in 1996: (Points: 2)
Green Party
Libertarian Party
Reform Party
Democratic Party
8. Which term best defines 'civil disobedience'? (Points: 2)
Peaceful tactic where people write letters of protest.
Peaceful tactic where individuals break laws.
Violent tactic that often leads to riots.
Violent tactic that has led to war.
9. What is the best way for the president to gauge what the people, collectively, view as important? (Points: 2)
ask them individually
public opinion poll
personally visit each state
establish campaign offices in each state
10. How many Circuit Courts of Appeal were established by the Judiciary Act of 1789? (Points: 2)
1
2
3
4
11.
A form of authoritarian government where power is shared among a small number of people.
(Points: 2)
Authoritarian government
Oligarchy
Monarchy
Autocracy
12. In order to limit public opinion, originally the state legislatures of the individual states elected what federal position? (Points: 2)
members of the House of Representatives
Senators
judges
President
13. What was the decision of the First Continental Congress in 1774? (Points: 2)
Tax goods sent to England
Refuse to pay taxes to England
Enact an embargo on British goods
Go to war against England
14. Which of the following is a direct result of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution's basis on individual rights? (Points: 2)
Innocent until proven guilty
Miranda rights
Right to a speedy trial
Probation hearing
15. The Committees of the House and Senate that are organized on a permanent basis are called: (Points: 2)
Standing Committees
Special Committees
Committees of the Whole
Committees for Special Interests
16. In order to limit public opinion, what was established in Article II of the U.S. Constitution? (Points: 2)
the Electoral College
the Bill of Rights
Freedom of the Speech
Voting Rights for all citizens
17. A lobbyist generally is employed by: (Points: 2)
an individual
an interest group
a family
a Congressman
18. How many rules does the House of Representatives have? (Points: 2)
28
56
74
102
19. What Senate committee is responsible for all legislation and reports that deal with national defense? (Points: 2)
National Defense Committee
Military Committee
Armed Services Committee
Homeland Security Committee
20. Which part of the U.S. Constitution explicitly lists the powers granted to Congress? (Points: 2)
Article 1 Section 8
Article 1 Section 10
Article 3 Section 6
Article 3, Section 4
21.
After the terrorist attacks of 9-11-2001 the government had to provide an economic bailout of the airline industry of billions of dollars. If the country did not provide this funding the airline industry may not have survived and all the companies may have gone out of business. The reason for government intervention was that supporting the airline industry :
(Points: 2)
would decrease tax expenditures
would increase tax expenditures
prevent a recession
was in the interest of public good
22. When analyzing a public opinion poll it is most important to determine question: (Points: 2)
reliability
format
validity
open-endedness
23. Which of the following is an appropriate public opinion poll question? (Points: 2)
Looking ahead to the next election when George Bush will be leaving office, should we consider electing a woman President.
Looking ahead to the next election when George W. Bush will be
Question #20:
Do a majority of liberals actually believe the federal government is intended to control the state governments?
i saw in a previous question that people were stating the hierarchy of the levels of government to befederal government controls the state government
and state government controls the local government
anyone who has actually looked at the constitution will know that this is not the case
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
amendment 10
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 1 Section 10 - Powers prohibited of States
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 4
Section 4 - Republican government
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
weird, i did not see where it said the federal government has control of the state governments...
scourge, i actually intended to put that in my original, i guess i missed it by mistake.
however, it still does not say anything about the federal government having control of the state governments
amendment 14
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
the question i was reading to make me ask this question:
Click Here
i will let you read and see who the uneducated to state such claims were...
** Powered by Yahoo Answers