Bud's Daily Diatribes

Phoebe Prince and her family had crossed the Atlantic Ocean to live in South Hadley in Western Massachusetts last fall. She had left her life and friends behind in Ireland to make a new life with her family in America...home of the free, land of the brave.

I used to live in Western Massachusetts - it was a beautiful and green place to live....winding country roads, rolling hills, fresh streams, and lots of trees...much like the countryside in Phoebe's homeland back in Ireland. And gorgeous historical homes dating back to the days of the Colonials and Quakers. The change of seasons are spectacular, and the autumns world famous.

But the 15-year-old Phoebe had ended up spending all her days in her school subjected to brutal bullying that was unrelenting and became severly intolerable. The poor girl was hounded at lunch-time, in the school's hallways, and as she was walking home from school - she was constantly harassed.

Phoebe’s constant harassment was common knowledge to most of the students, the school faculty and staff, and also by the senior school administrators...but not a damn thing was ever done.

Though much of the bullying occurred at school, a statutory rape is believed to have taken place outside the school grounds. The harassment also included Phoebe being called an "Irish slut". (A hate crime?)

There was also some bullying of Phoebe using the Internet, known as "cyber-bullying", but there was a lack of cooperation from FaceBook and Craigslist when investigated by authorities.

Phoebe’s mother spoke to at least two school staff members about the bullying, but it was reported that there was never any enforcement of the school codes to protect her daughter from this harm.

The day that Phoebe Prince died there was an incident in the school library observed by a faculty member and several students, but it went unreported to administrators (not that it would have done any good anyway). Later that day, Prince was hounded with slurs and pelted with a beverage container as she walked home from school...books were knocked out of her arms.

The harassment that went on for four months (since September, when Phoebe first moved to America) had finally ended after she came home from school that day (January 14th). The 15-year-old sophomore had reached her breaking point, and then hanged herself. Her younger sister found her at their home, still dressed in her school clothes.

An anti-bullying consultant says school officials in western Massachusetts didn't follow all the advice she gave them months before when a harassed freshman girl also committed suicide.

Bullying has been a common problem in America's schools that everyone has been well aware of for many years, decades even; yet no criminal punishment is ever meted out to the kids or their parents unless, or until, some dies. Why is this?

If parents of the victims try to take matters in their own hands, the problem usually escalates, and they themselves get into legal trouble, are violently attacked, or face other forms of retaliation.

The schools and law enforcement don't consider bullying a serious offense, and write it off as just "a part of growing up" or a "right of passage" by being a teenager.

This particular case led to charges against nine teens. Two boys (one of whom was her "ex-boyfriend") were charged with statutory rape. The seven girls are accused of stalking, criminal harassment and violating Phoebe's civil rights.

These 9 teens must be seriously sick individuals, with about as much empathy for human life as a psychopath...because they continued to insult her on FaceBook even after she was dead! That's despicable; but that's the type of trash that we've come to expect from the Millennium generation. But I mostly blame their parents (Obama Zombies?) who should also be held accountable for their children's actions.

Those indicted and the charges they face include:

* Sean Mulveyhill, 17, of South Hadley, on charges of statutory rape, civil rights violations resulting in bodily injury, criminal harassment and disturbing a school assembly.

* Kayla Narey, 17, of South Hadley, on charges of civil rights violations resulting in bodily injury, criminal harassment and disturbing a school assembly.

* Austin Renaud, 18, of Springfield, on a charge of statutory rape.

* Kayla NareyAshley Longe, 16, of South Hadley, on a charge of civil rights violations resulting in bodily injury as a youthful offender.

* Flannery Mullins, 16, of South Hadley, on charges of civil rights violations as a youthful offender and stalking as a youthful offender.

* Sharon Chanon Velazquez, 16, of South Hadley, on charges of civil rights violations as a youthful offender and stalking as a youthful offender.

Source: http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/update_6_indicted_in_phoebe_pr.html

The indictments were returned by a grand jury in Hampshire Superior Court on Friday, and the youths will be summonsed for arraignment in "about a week".

Police have also obtained from Hampshire-Franklin Juvenile Court for delinquency complaints for 3 juveniles - those indicted are 16-year-old girls who are being charged as "youthful offenders" in Superior Court.

The Prince family has asked that the public refrain from vigilantism in favor of allowing the judicial system an opportunity to provide a measure of justice for Phoebe.

I'm so sorry for that poor girl and her parents who moved here from Ireland for a better future in America...only to become victims to the brutality of these scummy punks. I'm embarrassed for this country.

This government, our country, and it's culture is heading down the toilette. With liars, cheaters, and thieves in sports, politics, and as parents - - - the youth in America today no longer have any respectable role models to help guide their moral values.

Gangsta rap, getting high, disrespect, laziness, hand-outs, and violence is promoted and advocated. Those ignorant idiots (the parents) should also pay the highest penalty under the law. I hope they're sued for everthing they have of value...and then the proceeds donated to a foundation named after Phoebe Prince.

And the school should be sued for neglect and the staff members for involuntary manslaughter. The citizens of South Hadley should be outraged and ask for a few pounds of flesh...while at the same time, taking note of their own children's activities.

If that poor girl's civil rights were violated...then where the hell was the ACLU? Is this how LEGAL immigrants are treated in this country these days? If it were an ILLEGAL immigrant from a Pan-American country, the ACLU would be all over this!

I'm so ashamed for this country's youth's slide into degenerateness.

Phoebe Prince - Rest in peace young girl, you've found a much better place.

Rather than provide financial relief in the form of extended unemployment benefits to the long-term jobless during this economic crisis, critics would rather insult them (calling them "lazy") and just have them "go away".

Andrew Stettner, deputy director of the National Employment Law Center, says there’s a good reason why people have been out of work for so long. "The primary reason is a lack of jobs," Stettner said. "There are six unemployed Americans for every available job."

There's NO labor shortage in America.

According to Charles Krauthammer (syndicated columnist), "This is a $15 trillion economy...[unemployment benefits] is not going to have any serious effect on the economy."

MARCH 27, 2010: Wall Street Journal - ObamaCare will be a wholesale destruction of wealth and capital.

MARCH 27, 2010: New York Times -Financial Reform: Wall Street executives say the changes now sought by Democrats could exacerbate the problems, rather than fix them.

MARCH 26, 2010: New York Times - Economists do not expect the restocking of inventories to contribute much to future growth. Forecasts call for the economy to grow at a slower rate in the first quarter of 2010 - far short of the levels needed to significantly reduce the jobless rate, which still stands at 9.7 percent nationally.

* Spending by businesses in the quarter was lower than expected.
* A worsening commercial real estate sector, grappling with high vacancy rates, excess supply and little interest by investors in financing large projects.
* Consumer spending was weaker than originally estimated.
* Economists expect the GNP to slow again.
* Slow economic recovery.
* Spending by businesses lower than expected.

So it's the ECONOMY you idiots! Not the JOBLESS that's the problem! If one of those critics were to call me lazy to my face, I'd punch 'em in their damn nose!

But they won't, because they're just cowards; like any other common bully picking on a weaker person (such as a jobless one).

I'm starting to get real angry at these idiots (who themselves have jobs) making wise cracks about the jobless. Most of the newly unemployed have worked all their life - most likely longer than most of these critics have lived, and who have been probably been whining and complaining during their own entire pathetic lifetimes.

And all these "experts" on the unemployed will probably be the first ones to condemn the tent cities that start springing up like Hoovervilles when families are evicted from their homes. These unforgiving name-callers might have survived in this economy, but not everyone has been as lucky...and they shouldn't be throwing stones from their glass houses, because they themselves could end up being jobless as well.

I will almost bet that these dispassionate non-Christian selfish fools would be the first ones to call the police to report a homeless man as an "eye sore" on the street, instead of giving the poor bastard a lousy dollar to buy food or booze because they are too damn cheap.

Those who were lucky enough to hold their jobs, and have always worked, could not have walked in the shoes of those that did lose their jobs - so they could never know their predicament or feel their pain, let alone, be their critic.

And many wealthy people in America would rather give to those "great Hollywood causes" in foreign countries, rather than helping their fellow citizens here in the United States (as though they hate this country). Yes, even in America there is poverty...and not ALL of them are drug addicts, winos, or lazy bums!

And I'll also guess that these critics of the jobless didn't TEXT a paltry $10 to the Red Cross for Haiti Relief either - - - or gave to any other charities for that matter (unless they could get a tax deduction for themselves). Yet they probably drive a nice, brand-new, shiny, Lincoln Navigator while on their way to the local mall to go shopping, and then throw their McDonald's trash out the window (as they're belching) on their way home to the suburbs with their spoiled kids.

Maybe these critics of the jobless should read about the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl to realize that catastrophes really do happen in America, and that real people of good character suffer...people that may have, at one time or another, been their next-door neighbor.

These "lazy" people once owned homes and had hopes and dreams too. Raising kids, going to the movies, buying supplies at Home Depot, and washing their cars in the drive way on Saturday.

These "all-knowing" fiscally conservative bigots don't feel the desperation that the less fortunate do, so it's easy to throw rocks at the helpless. (My blood is boiling right now, seeing them in my mind...finger-pointing, accusing, and blaming.) But if they were to call me "lazy" to my face, or point one their bony fingers at me, I'd punch 'em in their damn nose!

For most of those who have worked, paid bills, and lived as ordinary people all their lives, one would have to be much more ambitious and fit, and much more than just plain "lazy", to want and try to survive on the mean streets. Those clueless critics don't seem too realize that for these "bums", having a job would be more of a luxury, compared to sleeping under a bridge and foraging for rancid food in back-alley dumpsters...and seeing their kids sitting on the filthy ground and crying.

Today is Sunday...I hope some of those critics put some of their "chump change" in the basket at church...and thank God they don't have to defend themselves to critics for losing their job.

But the critics don't know the fear, confusion, and defeat that a jobless person feels.

If I were living on the street and saw one of those a-hole critics, I'd kick their ass to the curb and then wait for the cops to arrest me...at least some jail time will get me a roof over my head and a few warm meals.

And what would be the value of bloodying their noses? What would it be worth to have the pleasure of seeing the look of fear, confusion and defeat on the faces of these pompous and mealy-mouthed critics?

Priceless!

My other posts related to unemployment

No, Unemployment Benefits is not an Inalienable Right
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/15/no-unemployment-benefits-is-not-inaliena

Senator John Ensign and the GOP - "Let the Jobless Eat Cake"
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/27/john-ensign-and-gop-let-the-jobless-eat

The Jobless Have Been Lost in Debate Over Healthcare
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/27/the-jobless-lost-in-debate-over-healthca

Like the last Great Depression, Unemployment and Foreclosures, Might See Rise in Suicides
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/10/unemployment-foreclosures-might-see-rise

The New Poor - Millions of Unemployed Face Years Without Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/21/the-new-poor-millions-of-unemployed-face

Government Jobs (Bigger Government) Drive Employment Numbers
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/01/government-jobs-bigger-government-drive

Actual Unemployment in 2010 - Recession Worse than Reported
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/04/actual-unemployment-in-january-2010-rece

Deep Recession Shows No Sign of Letting Up - Maybe Getting Worse
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/24/deep-recession-shows-no-sign-of-letting

Largest U.S. Labor Union: AFL-CIO says Jobs Won't Return
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/01/07/largest-u-s-labor-union-afl-cio-says-job

More Bad News for the Unemployed in 2010 - and Beyond
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/23/more-bad-news-for-the-unemployed-in-2010

Almost 1 out of 5 People are Out of Work in the U.S.A.
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2009/12/31/unemployment-december-2009-new-release

FOX News Wages War on Unemployed - Thinks They're Lazy
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

Tea Party, Fox News, and Conservatives Attack the Unemployed
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/04/tea-party-gets-in-wrong-on-unemployment

Obama-Care © Verses Unemployment and Suicide in 2010
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/07/out-of-work-buy-a-shotgun

27 Million of 154 Million in Workforce w/o Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/15/27-million-of-154-million-in-workforce-w

Fox News Continues to Insult Unemployed
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/13/fox-news-continues-bashing-the-jobless

"Diversity" and Illegal Hiring Practices
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog2.php/2010/03/12/mgm-mirage-illegal-hiring-practices

Obama-Care© Makes it Easier to Fire Older Workers!
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog5.php/2010/03/27/obama-carec-makes-it-easier-to-fire-olde

Too Old for the Workforce in 2010 - Unemployed Because of Age
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/06/too-old-for-the-workforce-in-2010-unempl

UPDATE: April 4, 2010 - Sen. Ensign might face indictment. In the federal penal code, it is known as “structuring.”
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/apr/04/why-sen-ensign-should-be-worried-about-possible-in/

Senator John Ensign (R-NV) supports extentions to unemployment benefits...

BUT

...WITHOUT ADDING TO DEBT.

I went to his web site and he says:

"I understand the importance of helping those Nevadans who are in need right now, and I will continue to work hard to ensure that we address this problem in a way that does not increase our nation's debt even more. The time has come for Congress to live within its means the same way every American family has to."

"Without adding to the debt?" I thought to myself, "The time has come?"

So I Googled this clown to see what he was about.

R&R Partners is known for creating the famous Las Vegas slogan. But it’s the firm’s Washington connections - and its deep ties to scandal-plagued "Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) - that have drawn it into a Senate Ethics Committee investigation and, potentially, a Department of Justice inquiry. Sen. John Ensign, the Nevada GOP Senator who last year admitted to having an affair with a married staffer, believes the press has been treating him unfairly."

Also see: Dems: GOP backlash coming after unemployment benefits blocked

This creep who lives above the law wants to deny his fellow Las Vegas citizens extended unemployment benfits?

So I wrote to him...

Dear Sir:

Though YOU may not have to worry about the elections this year (not until 2012), Republican voters will be FORCED to re-elect the Democrats in office because the GOP is all-of-a-sudden being stubbornly "fiscally conservative" on the backs of the unemployed.

Your statement seems VERY insincere.

You say, "The time has come." Who determined the time? When exactly did the time come?

* Did the time come when $780 billion was spent on TARP for banks like Goldman Sachs who got paid 100% on the dollar for credit default swaps made with AIG?

* Did the time come when billions of dollars more of taxpayer money was freely spent to bailout AIG? And then soon after, GM, GMAC, and Chrysler?

* Did the time come when hundreds of billions more went down the Black Holes of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

* Did the time come when $821 billion of a "Stimulus Package" is being spent on waste, fraud, frivolous college research, and on foreign companies? And when millions more went to districts that don't even exist?

* Did the time come when $1.25 trillion was allocated for a mortgage-securities-buying program (mostly benefiting "low-income" people who lied and said they could afford to pay a balooning interest A.R.M. loan?)

* Did the time come when $1.2+++ trillion was signed off on Obama-Care for "non-income people" (costing corporations like AT&T and Caterpillar hundreds of millions of dollars in increased premiums, killing any new job creation.)

Just when EXACTLY did "this time come" for Republicans?

Or did the time come AFTER your banks, insurance companies, and other "special interests" were bought off? What stocks do you own?

The laid-off workers didn't cause this mess, you guys did! (And earning $174,000 annually plus full benefits for the pleasure of doing so.)
See: Congress Votes Themselves Pay Raise

The conservative fiscal watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste awarded Ensign a 92% lifetime rating - (I suppose that means extended unemployment benefits is a "waste" on Nevada citizens.) It's shame that our representatives in Congress are voting the "Party Line" on this issue, rather than taking care of the folks back home.

Poor government regulation, bad foreign trade policies, greedy banks (35-1 ratios on credit default swaps), backroom deals with the Federal Reserve and foreign central banks, irresponsible government spending and accountability, unregulated hedge Funds, corrupt union officials and mismanaged pension funds, poor SEC oversight of investment firms (i.e. Bernie Madoff, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, etc.), out-sourcing of jobs by multi-national corporations, and ridiculous EPA and environmental government impositions on U.S. businesses...

This is what caused the recession, not the citizens of this country! The unemployed didn't cause the current financial crisis...they are the victims of the current financial crisis.

A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose yours. ~ Ronald Reagan

Nevada's unemployment rate is the second worst in the nation at 13.2% in February 2010. In Las Vegas alone there are 136,000 unemployed workers. And the foreclosure rate is now the highest in the nation. But let the good people just eat cake John?

Republican Senator Coburn is working on a military bill that is not funded, adds to the deficit, provides no offsets and in part provides monies to put both Iraqi and Afghani citizens to work, and pay them with US tax dollars, unfunded adding to the deficit US Taxpayers monies. But won't extend benefits for Americans???

You're funding Iraqi and Afghani citizens to work, but denying millions of AMERICAN citizens who need help from our elected representatives?

Andrew Stettner, deputy director of the National Employment Law Center, says there’s a good reason why people have been out of work in America for so long. "The primary reason is a lack of jobs," Stettner said. "There are six unemployed Americans for every available job."

John, your "concern" about the national debt is like finding Jesus after the Congress has already emptied piggy bank. That lame excuse will not do! I find your remark "the time has come" to be flippant and meaningless when people's lives are at stake.

It's a shame about the GOP when they were making such great strides in the polls - because I bet half of the unemployed are Republicans and will vote the other way in November...if for no other reason than to preserve their benefits.

Enjoy your vacation while millions of others lose their sleep tonight.

Sincerely Yours,

Bud Meyers

* Sean Hannity Asks John Ensign -http://www.hannity.com/politicians/john_ensign/13325

* John Ensign at Twitter
"Nevada’s economy is still hurting & Congress isn’t realistically addressing job creation."
http://twitter.com/JohnEnsign

C Street Links: Hookers?

While in Washington, D.C. there are rooms at a facility known as "The Fellowship" AKA "The Family", an organization which operates a property as a tax-exempt church and subsidized residence for several congressmen and senators. Recently one Senator moved out after a lawsuit challenged the tax favored status of the facility as a "church"; and also on the grounds that many "ordinary" church activities did not actually occur there - and due to the secretiveness of the organization. When asked about it, Senators usually deny all knowledge. (What DOES go on there, hmmm?)

http://michiganmessenger.com/23484/stupak-denies-knowledge-of-connections-to-mysterious-c-street-house

http://writechic.wordpress.com/2009/10/07/the-c-men-of-c-street/

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/jul/19/behind-closed-doors-c-street/

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090717175231AAe4Wnf

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=118412.15;wap2

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/06/24/sanford-cites-secretive-christian-groups-role-in-helping-confront-affair.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/25/AR2009062504480.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ensign

Hey John, see my other posts related to unemployment...maybe you can learn to feel a little empathy for the less fortunate than you.

They're not Lazy! They Can't Find A Job You Idiot!
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/28/they-re-not-lazy-they-can-t-find-a-job-y

No, Unemployment Benefits is not an Inalienable Right
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/15/no-unemployment-benefits-is-not-inaliena

The Jobless Have Been Lost in Debate Over Healthcare
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/27/the-jobless-lost-in-debate-over-healthca

Like the last Great Depression, Unemployment and Foreclosures, Might See Rise in Suicides
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/10/unemployment-foreclosures-might-see-rise

The New Poor - Millions of Unemployed Face Years Without Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/21/the-new-poor-millions-of-unemployed-face

Government Jobs (Bigger Government) Drive Employment Numbers
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/01/government-jobs-bigger-government-drive

Actual Unemployment in 2010 - Recession Worse than Reported
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/04/actual-unemployment-in-january-2010-rece

Deep Recession Shows No Sign of Letting Up - Maybe Getting Worse
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/24/deep-recession-shows-no-sign-of-letting

Largest U.S. Labor Union: AFL-CIO says Jobs Won't Return
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/01/07/largest-u-s-labor-union-afl-cio-says-job

More Bad News for the Unemployed in 2010 - and Beyond
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/23/more-bad-news-for-the-unemployed-in-2010

Almost 1 out of 5 People are Out of Work in the U.S.A.
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2009/12/31/unemployment-december-2009-new-release

FOX News Wages War on Unemployed - Thinks They're Lazy
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

Tea Party, Fox News, and Conservatives Attack the Unemployed
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/04/tea-party-gets-in-wrong-on-unemployment

Obama-Care © Verses Unemployment and Suicide in 2010
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/07/out-of-work-buy-a-shotgun

27 Million of 154 Million in Workforce w/o Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/15/27-million-of-154-million-in-workforce-w

Fox News Continues to Insult Unemployed
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/13/fox-news-continues-bashing-the-jobless

"Diversity" and Illegal Hiring Practices
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog2.php/2010/03/12/mgm-mirage-illegal-hiring-practices

Obama-Care© Makes it Easier to Fire Older Workers!
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog5.php/2010/03/27/obama-carec-makes-it-easier-to-fire-olde

Too Old for the Workforce in 2010 - Unemployed Because of Age
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/06/too-old-for-the-workforce-in-2010-

Commentary/Opinion
by Bud Meyers

Millions to Lose Unemployment Benefits
Can mass homelessness be far away?

While millions are suffering and worrying about how they're going to pay their rent/mortgage next month, the partisan in-fighting and political maneuvering in Congress over Obama-Care, the budget, immigration reform, cap-and-trade, and the Jobs Bill have left the unemployed wondering, "How we are ever going to survive?"

The jobless numbers that have been bandied about by economists and politicians seem more like impersonal statistical numbers rather than REAL people. And these numbers seemed to be used more for political argument and debate, rather than as a measuring tool for fixing the economy and restoring jobs and continuing benefits for the unemployed.

The immediate concern for the jobless has taken a back seat to other less pressing matters...such as a tadpole in the San Joaquin Valley or the safe-sex practices of college kids.

Since the crash of 2008, most long-term unemployed people used to work and pay taxes for years on end before they suddenly lost their jobs through no fault of their own -

But for:

Poor government regulation, bad foreign trade policies, greedy banks (35-1 ratios on credit default swaps), backroom deals with the Federal Reserve and foreign central banks, irresponsible government spending and accountability, unregulated hedge Funds, corrupt union officials and mismanaged pension funds, poor SEC oversight of investment firms (i.e. Bernie Madoff, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, etc.), out-sourcing of jobs by multi-national corporations, and ridiculous EPA and environmental government impositions on U.S. businesses.

The unemployed didn't cause the current financial crisis...they are the victims of the financial crisis (the economists may call it a "recession", but to the unemployed, it's a "depression".)

And the present government (the Democrats) have just passed Obama-Care!
A $1.2 trillion program that "non-income" people (not "low-income" people) mostly benefit from.

Now the jobless are being scape-goated by members of Congress (mostly Republicans) and are "being made an example of" regarding proper government budgeting (Pay-As-You-Go). But isn't that like "closing the barn door after the horse is already gone?" And why do this now at the expense of the ones who are suffering the consequences?

See my post: "The Great Depression: Then and Now - Is There a Difference?"

10 million people now depend on unemployment benefits just to pay their rent and feed their families.

A Tier V and beyond is needed to further extend unemployment benefits for those who will soon expire.

And adding insult to injury, now the jobless are being vilified by bankers (of all people), accusing the unemployed as being a drain on the economy! Some say they are just lazy!

While that may be the case with a very few unemployment recipients, economists also believe that those problems are far outweighed by the advantages brought to the economy by the unemployment payments themselves. The money tends to be quickly injected back into the economy...there is a bigger upside for providing a safety net for people who are facing long-term unemployment.

Anyone reading the accounts of those who are unemployed can quickly discern that there is no "lavish living" going on in the world of unemployment. For most, it's just basic survival.

On the Fox News' web site, according to Charles Krauthammer (a syndicated columnist), "This is a $15 trillion economy...[unemployment benefits] is not going to have any serious effect on the economy."

The cost is barely a blip on the economic radar screen.

* $780 billion went for TARP where banks like Goldman Sachs got paid 100% on the dollar for credit default swaps made with AIG

* then billions of dollars in taxpayer money had to bailout AIG! Then GM, GMAC, and Chrysler.

* hundreds of billions of dollars went down the Black Hole of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

* $821 billion for a Stimulus Package where billions was wasted on fraud, frivolous college research and foreign companies. Millions more went to districts that don't even exist!

* $1.25 trillion mortgage-securities-buying program (mostly used for low income people hustled in to high interest ARM loans.)

* $1.2+++ trillion on Obama-Care for "non-income people" (costing corporations like AT&T and Caterpillar hundreds of millions of dollars in increased premiums, killing any new job creation.)

But the critics, who HAVE jobs (and applauded saving the banks), want to let the unemployed slip into the Abyss!

~ Never take away someone's hope...it may be all they have.~

How many jobs did the Stimulus Bill REALLY create? How many jobless people did the Stimulus Bill help? What portion of the Stimulus Bill went to "saving" jobs that weren't as-of-yet ACTUALLY ever lost? What portion of the Stimulus Bill went to creating jobs for the short-term unemployed or to the long-term unemployed? Were most of them Democrats or Republicans? Break it down in to demographics, region, etc.

...and how many jobs did the jobless (who receive unemployment benefits) get from the Stimulus Bill?

If you collected benefits, and got a job because of Stimulus Bill, please write me and I'll post your story.

See: John Ensign and GOP - "Let the Jobless Eat Cake"
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/27/john-ensign-and-gop-let-the-jobless-eat

Extended Unemployment Updates Regarding Tier V Benefits

My other posts related to unemployment

Like the last Great Depression, Unemployment and Foreclosures, Might See Rise in Suicides
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/10/unemployment-foreclosures-might-see-rise

The New Poor - Millions of Unemployed Face Years Without Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/21/the-new-poor-millions-of-unemployed-face

Government Jobs (Bigger Government) Drive Employment Numbers
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/01/government-jobs-bigger-government-drive

Actual Unemployment in 2010 - Recession Worse than Reported
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/04/actual-unemployment-in-january-2010-rece

Deep Recession Shows No Sign of Letting Up - Maybe Getting Worse
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/24/deep-recession-shows-no-sign-of-letting

Largest U.S. Labor Union: AFL-CIO says Jobs Won't Return
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/01/07/largest-u-s-labor-union-afl-cio-says-job

More Bad News for the Unemployed in 2010 - and Beyond
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/23/more-bad-news-for-the-unemployed-in-2010

Almost 1 out of 5 People are Out of Work in the U.S.A.
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2009/12/31/unemployment-december-2009-new-release

FOX News Wages War on Unemployed - Thinks They're Lazy
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

Tea Party, Fox News, and Conservatives Attack the Unemployed
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/04/tea-party-gets-in-wrong-on-unemployment

Obama-Care © Verses Unemployment and Suicide in 2010
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/07/out-of-work-buy-a-shotgun

http://www.modifymymortgage.com/home.html

http://www.youcanrefi.com/

Those who often accuse others of something, are usually themselves guilty of the charge...deflecting blame away from themselves, to better hide behind their ugly mask of deceit.

Reverse discrimination (also known as positive or benign discrimination) is what the Progressives promote. Congress is infested with Progressives. The A.C.L.U. are racists too, because they promote the same thing - prejudice and discrimination against whites. Therefore, they are racists.

Yet, they blame OTHERs of racism. Why?

Ethnic minorities and their Caucasian sympathizers in the Progressive Caucus have their racists roots linked to radical ideologies that propagated during the 1960's...emulating "social justice".

The Progressives seek to bear witness to, and empathize with, the lives of the "less fortunate". In the 1960's it was with African-Americans who had a "Black Theology", and this was when Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground had worked with the Black Panther Party when they were terrorizing America.

And it had nothing to do with the Civil Rights Movement or the anti-Viet Nam War Movement, but of revolution. The "Progressives" of yesterday hijacked those causes just like they hijacked the Democratic Party...they're just radical thugs hell-bent on taking over the government and bringing the country down.

* Since Abraham Lincoln, Republicans have been there for blacks when it counted. Nevertheless, Democrats invariably take all the credit for the success of the civil rights movement and invariably fail to give any credit to Republicans.

In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats
("Dixie-crats") opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes, up to the Civil Rights Act in 1964.

* It was a Democrat (JFK) who initiated the U.S. involvement in Viet Nam and was responsible for the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in Cuba.

* It was a Republican who ended the Viet Nam War (Richard Nixon - Though he initially escalated the conflict in an effort to win the war, American military personnel were gradually withdrawn and he successfully negotiated a ceasefire with North Vietnam in 1973.

The Progressives ignore real history, and re-write it to indoctrinate the kids in college to believe their version of historical events.

See my post "Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn: Cold Case Files" to see how the May 19th Coalition (a white group) worked with the Black Liberation Army in the robbery of a Brinks armored car in New York (killing 3 guards)- - - and how these people are tied to the Progressives in U.S. Congress today.

As an aside: Remember when the Beatles stormed America and appeared on the Ed Sullivan Show in 1963? We thought THEY were radical, when really, it was mostly John Lennon who eventually took up the REAL radical causes that plagued America back then - - - associating with members of the far-left like SDS, Bill Ayers, and John Kerry (D-Ma). (Three years later Kerry went to Viet Nam and returned to claim that he committed atrocities and that the men who ordered him to so, were like Lieutenant Calley - war criminals.)

And Obama learned these values from his professors in college, exercised them through his associates, and gained the Progressive backing of the left-wing machine during his days spent in Chicago.

Now these very same people ARE the government (or, as they would have said back in the 1960's "The Establishment" or "The Man".

These days the Progressives try to appear to be in solidarity with the "working class" but yet, demean the "serendipitous" benefits that come to those with white skin...as though the "working class" were only ethnic minorities (primarily favoring African-Americans and Hispanics)...instead of plain, simple, and ordinary hard-working people, of ALL races.

But then the Progressives seem surprised to learn that not all of the "oppressed" poor want the things THEY want for them. They wonder, "Why weren’t THEY as eager as WE to criticize imperialism?" They don't understand that not ALL minorities want to live in a Socialist America.

After a judgment by the Supreme Court reversing Judge Sotomayor's decision in the Court of Appeals, Lieutenant Ben Vargas (a Hispanic man) of the New Haven Fire Department said, "I do not want to be promoted by empathy or sympathy, but only by my merits."

Lieutenant Colonel Allen West (a Black man) while running for as a candidate for Congress from Florida's 22 Congressional District said, "The Constitution says 'promote the general welfare', not 'provide welfare.' "

Liberals search for "victims of injustice", and why liberals won't leave minorities alone. - P.J. O'Rourke

The Progressives want "social justice", which is really a re-distribution of wealth...forcefully taking away from the rich, and freely giving to the poor - - - translated to: taking from "white imperialist oppressors" and giving to "poor ethnic minorities."

This is done under different guises, using government and corporate policies such as "diversity" to promote "tolerance". But the tolerance they strive for is to have the "white imperialist oppressors" be more "tolerant" of the "poor ethnic minorities" as they continue to immigrate and multiply, and to unfairly take a disproportionate amount of the jobs that exceed the actual demographics of the minority population. They hijacked all the unions to help accomplish this.

And why do the Democrats Progressives always cater to the minorities?

To use them, for Votes!

Immigration Reform, Cap-and-Trade, Green Jobs, and health care reform are other tools they'll use to promote their agenda - to "fundamentally transform America".

And now they are going to use tax-collectors ( the IRS) as Gestapo agents to keep you in line.

Are You 18 to 30 Years Old?

Read my post to understand where the Progressives of today came from, and who they are. Yes, it started in the mid 1960's, but...this ain't ancient history kids, this was only 45 years ago! A blink of time in human history.

Just imagine when (if) you reach 65 years old, and then look back at your own life. You were nothing but a nano-second on the scale of time. And you'll be telling your kids that today didn't happen so very long ago...that YOU weren't ancient history either.

The young today could almost be pitied, because I fear they truly believe in the nonsense and crap that the Progressives have spoon-fed them...just like the Communist sympathizers in the 1960's who loved Castro's Cuba...and who then eventually became our tyrannical rulers today.

Progressivism is a cancer in our schools, our government, and our corporations...and what's really concerning to people like me is, they might have also infiltrated our military and law enforcement agencies too. (And might be how Bill Ayers escaped prosecution, because his wealthy father had connections to the attorney general and judges in Chicago.) "Guilty as hell, free as a bird!"

If this is true, America is REALLY screwed!

America needs a Conservative Revolution, and we should start looking for Progressives in America and rooting them out the way we once looked for Communists with *McCarthyism in the 40's and 50's. The liberals are already aware of this, and are calling it "The Third Red Scare".

* FDR (also a Progressive who believed in "economic activism") who's wife (Eleanor Roosevelt) had reservations about John F. Kennedy for his failure to condemn McCarthyism.

Do these people look like they want to burn down Washington D.C.?

American Heritage Foundation - (Far right: Dana Loesch *Conservatarian talk raido show host and blogger)

It's not the majority of the whites, the Tea Party members, or the people who believe in old fashion values such as hard work and promotions through personal merit and responsible policies...it's the Progressives, who are the true racists that want to steal from the "haves" and give to the "have-nots"...

...but the Progressives aren't Robin Hoods with an "Obama Stash", they're just nasty Marxists...with a twisted belief that "they know better than the masses" and want to control them.

I've corresponded with Senator Harry Reid a few times; and while he might seem to be a nice and personable individual, I do NOT want him running our government or telling me what to do.

Also see: "Congress Gets Death Threats - Little to No Moral Outrage"
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/24/congress-gets-death-threats-by-their-own

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

conservatarian [con-serve-a-târ-e-an]
noun:

1. - a mainstream conservative in the Goldwater/Reagan tradition who subscribes to the fiscal and modern federalist principles of the libertarian philosophy. Unlike traditional "neo-conservatives" (compassionate conservatives) who's political philosophy fails to enthusiastically advocate less spending by government, making tax cuts most effective.

2. - a "modern federalist" or "conservative libertarian"

3. - Adherers to the original Constitution of United States (as opposed to a "Living Constitution"), and believes in The Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

Sub Note:

Socialism and Misinformed Minorities

James Warren Jones studied Stalin, Karl Marx, and Adolf Hitler when he was young.

In 1951 James Jones became a member of the Communist Party when he was 20 years old.

He became interested in the Progressive Eleanor Roosevelt's speeches about the plight of African Americans.

Later Jones had once asked himself, "How can I demonstrate my Marxism? - Infiltrate a church."

He became the "Reverend" Jim Jones and was the founder and leader of the Peoples Temple.

In 1962 Jones made his first trip into Guyana, and studied the receptiveness of racial minorities to his message.

By the mid-1970s, his Temple's headquarters was in San Francisco while Nancy Pelosi had been working in Democratic politics.

Jonestown, Guyana - November 18, 1978: The "Reverend" Jim Jones was responsible for the "revolution suicides" of more than 900 of his Temple members (mostly black, including over 200 children).

...along with the deaths of nine other people at a nearby airstrip (including a Democratic member of Congress.)

Socialism always seems to lead to death and destruction.

When Vice President Joe Binden said, "This is a big f *cking deal", I wasn't offended or outraged by his language. If anything, it only proved to us that those
f *cking idiots in the White House are only ordinary people...just like us. They put their pants on one leg at a time, and like Joe, sometimes put their foot in their mouths.

And let's be honest...don't you think that amongst themselves, they ALWAYS speak like that with each other. Would you be shocked to hear Obama say,
"F *cking - A right Joe!"

Which only re-enforces my argument: Why do they wear their fake public personas of being "superior" to us, and act so "uppity" towards the Tea Party people - when it is THEY who are the laughing stocks.

And I'll bet that Joe Biden passes just as much gas as Al Gore (maybe more). Remember when Obama said, "Nobody messes with Joe!"

And like us, Vice-President "Dash" Biden, President "Barry" Obama, Rahn "Dead Fish" Emanuel, Valerie "Val" Jarrett, David "The Axe" Axelrod, and Nancy "Itsy-Bitsy Spider" Pelosi are not above the law either.

I respect their HIGHER OFFICES, but not the clowns who occupy them.

Face it folks...we have a community organizer, a campaign manager, a ballerina, a slumlord, a 70-year-old senile woman, and a guy who doesn't even know his own web site "number" - running the country!

And they're all godless Marxists, tearing down this country. (Bill Ayers must me laughing his ass off!)

You wanted "change"? Be careful what ya' wish for, 'cause ya' just might get it.

"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."

In 1992, in New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992), for only the second time in 55 years, the Supreme Court invalidated a portion of a federal law for violating the Tenth Amendment. Justice O’Connor wrote that the federal government can encourage the states to adopt certain regulations through the spending power (i.e., by attaching conditions to the receipt of federal funds, see South Dakota v. Dole), or through the commerce power (by directly pre-empting state law). However, Congress cannot directly compel states to enforce federal regulations.

In 1997, the Court again ruled that the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act violated the Tenth Amendment (Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997). Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, applied New York v. United States to show that the law violated the Tenth Amendment. Since the act forced participation of the State’s executive in the actual administration of a federal program, it was unconstitutional.

According to the Tenth Amendment, the government of the United States has the power to regulate only matters delegated to it by the Constitution. Other powers are reserved to the states, or to the people (and even the states cannot alienate some of these).

In modern times, the Commerce Clause has become one of the most frequently-used sources of Congress's power, and thus its interpretation is very important in determining the allowable scope of federal government.

In the twentieth century, complex economic challenges of the Great Depression triggered a reevaluation in both Congress and the Supreme Court of the use of Commerce Clause powers to maintain a strong national economy.

In United States v. Lopez 514 U.S. 549 (1995), a federal law mandating a "gun-free zone" on and around public school campuses was struck down because, the Supreme Court ruled, there was no clause in the Constitution authorizing it. This was the first modern Supreme Court opinion to limit the government's power under the Commerce Clause. The opinion did not mention the Tenth Amendment, and the Court's 1985 Garcia opinion remains the controlling authority on that subject.

The federal system limits the ability of the federal government to use state governments as an instrument of the national government. Congress often seeks to exercise its powers by offering or encouraging the States to implement national programs consistent with national minimum standards; a system known as cooperative federalism.

One example of the exercise of using cooperative federalism is the allocation of federal funding where certain state laws do not conform to federal guidelines.

For example: The nationwide state 55 mph speed limit, the .08 legal blood alcohol limit, and the nationwide state 21-year drinking age were imposed through this method; the states would lose highway funding if they refused to pass such laws.

National Health Care Nullification - As of March 2010, 30+ states have introduced legislation which would declare certain provisions of any proposed national health care bill to be null and void within the state; the legislation passed in Arizona, Idaho, Utah, and Virginia. Such provisions include mandatory participation in such a system as well as preserving the right of a patient to pay a health care professional for treatment (and for the professional to accept it) outside of a single-payer system. Arizona's legislation passed as a proposed constitutional amendment, to be submitted to the voters in 2010.

On February 1, 2010, the Virginia Senate took a stand against a key provision of a proposed federal health care overhaul, passing legislation declaring that Virginia residents cannot be forced to buy health insurance. On March 17, 2010, the Governor of Idaho signed a bill requiring the Attorney General to sue the Federal Government if Idaho residents are required to buy health insurance.

The Commerce Clause

The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution has in the last two decades played a part in the Court's view of the Commerce Clause. The Tenth Amendment states that the federal government has only the powers specifically delegated to it by the Constitution. Other powers are reserved to the states, or to the people. The Commerce Clause is an important source of those powers delegated to Congress, and therefore its interpretation is very important in determining the scope of federal power in controlling innumerable aspects of American life.

The Commerce Clause has been the most widely interpreted clause in the Constitution, making way for many laws which, some argue, contradict the original intended meaning of the Constitution. Justice Clarence Thomas has gone so far as to state in his dissent to Gonzales:

"Respondents Diane Monson and Angel Raich use marijuana that has never been bought or sold, that has never crossed state lines, and that has had no demonstrable effect on the national market for marijuana. If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything - and the federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers."

Uniform Rule of Naturalization

To be a U.S. Citizen:

Article I, section 8, clause 4 of the United States Constitution expressly gives the United States Congress the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization. The Immigration and Naturalization Act sets forth the legal requirements for the acquisition of, and divestiture from, citizenship of the United States. The requirements have become more explicit since the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, with the most recent changes to statutory law having been made by the United States Congress in 2001.

The purchase of healthcare insurance in not mentioned.

http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog5.php/2010/04/02/uniform-rule-of-naturalization-obama-car

Also see "Obama-Care: What You'll Pay - How It Works - The Timeline"
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog5.php/2010/03/22/obama-care-what-you-ll-pay-how-it-works

"Non-income" people such as 2 or more adults on welfare (and also qualifying for food-stamps and other government substitutes from the "Obama Stash") can share the expenses of living in a rented apartment AND ALSO qualify for Free Obama-Care!

But "low-income" people such as factory worker working *40 hours a week earning the minimum wage (or people who rightfully collect **unemployment benefits) would NOT qualify for Free Obama-Care - they'd be ABOVE poverty threshold.

(* $7.25 an hour, times 40 hours, times 52 weeks = $15,080 annual income)

(**If you're collecting unemployment benefits, you EXCEED the "poverty threshold".)

This healthcare plan is specifically geared to "Non-income" people, not "Low-income" people as the Progressives in the Democratic Party would have you believe.

But if you're a single mom with 3 or 4 kids, you would qualify for Free Obama-Care.

Or if you're single with no children with an annual wage or income of $11,161 or below, you would also qualify for Free Obama-Care.

Who in America lives on $11,161 a year?????? No one.

See my post here for a full explanation:

http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog5.php/2010/03/22/obama-care-what-you-ll-pay-how-it-works

----(Click HERE for Updates on Extended Unemployment Benefits )----

NOTE: When you're finished reading THIS post, read the Counter Argument:"Unemployment Extensions ARE Needed For Benefits"
(There were 120 comments as of my reading)

Blog Moderator: And then answer this question: Who ARE these individuals who "always make mention that there are many jobs available"? What jobs? Where? They are saying that there are 17.5 unfilled jobs (lost over last 2 years) in the United States? - That America is experiencing a severe labor shortage? I haven't seen any CEO's on TV pleading this scenario.

Are executives in big banks taking million-dollar bonuses from their stockholders while at the same time berating the poor?

If the public relations battle over whether to extend unemployment benefits longer than the current maximum cap of 99 weeks wasn't complicated enough, along comes a new report which claims the current tiers of extended benefits have only increased the national unemployment rate.

Economists have known for a long time that extending unemployment benefits can slow the speed in which some people receiving the payments find a new job. Workers who are receiving a regular weekly unemployment check tend to spend more time looking for a job that is the best fit for them. They will shun lesser paying jobs in favor of less-likely opportunities closer to their previous field of employment.

But while that is the case with some unemployment recipients, economists have also believed that those problems are outweighed by the advantages brought to the economy by the unemployment payments themselves. The money tends to be quickly injected back into the economy. And while some people may wait a bit hoping to find the "perfect" job, there is a bigger upside from providing a safety net for people who are facing long-term unemployment.

JPMorgan's Michael Feroli argues in a new research note that these extensions of emergency benefits (a total of 99 weeks' worth of which have been passed in this recession) have significantly added to the unemployment rate. He estimates that the current tiers of extended benefits have added nearly 30% to the time the average recipient remains unemployed. He believes the extended benefits are also responsible for nearly 1.5% points of the post-recession increase in the national unemployment number.

In other words, if the current national rate was 10%, half of that (or 5%) is what you would typically expect to see in a healthy economy. Of the remaining 5%, 1.5 points is attributable to the extension of unemployment benefits past the recent historical threshold of 26 weeks.

Blog Moderator: *Michael Feroli thinks that only 3.5% of the workforce are legitimately collecting extended benefits who remain unemployed?

Republican pundits had been repeating that 1.5 point number, using it as a talking point in favor of letting the extended benefits expire. It also makes a pretty strong-sounding argument against adding even more weeks to the extended unemployment benefits coverage.

But there are a couple of problems with this theory. The national unemployment rate peaked in late 2009, and at that point, only 20 of the 47 weeks of extended coverage had been enacted. If you believe Feroli's theory, the addition of another 27 weeks of coverage should have sent the national unemployment rate back up sharply. Instead, the number remained at pretty much a steady level.

The other problem with Feroli's theory is that this recession has remained an unusually jobless one. Even as the economy may have slowly recovers and the rate of "newly" unemployed eased, those workers who are already unemployed are finding very few available jobs. That is especially the case with workers who are older (55+) and/or have less education and/or lack experience. It is those workers in particular who would benefit from a real extension of unemployment benefits.

You might hear this 1.5 point number thrown around a lot, but it's important to remember that just because a "smart-sounding" person says something, that doesn't make it true.

Blog Moderator: *And we know all about the big banks, their profits, and thier million-dollar bonuses too.

My related posts concerning unemployment in 2010

Like the last Great Depression, Unemployment and Foreclosures, Might See Rise in Suicides
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/10/unemployment-foreclosures-might-see-rise

The New Poor - Millions of Unemployed Face Years Without Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/21/the-new-poor-millions-of-unemployed-face

Government Jobs (Bigger Government) Drive Employment Numbers
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/01/government-jobs-bigger-government-drive

Actual Unemployment in 2010 - Recession Worse than Reported
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/04/actual-unemployment-in-january-2010-rece

Deep Recession Shows No Sign of Letting Up - Maybe Getting Worse
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/24/deep-recession-shows-no-sign-of-letting

Largest U.S. Labor Union: AFL-CIO says Jobs Won't Return
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/01/07/largest-u-s-labor-union-afl-cio-says-job

More Bad News for the Unemployed in 2010 - and Beyond
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/23/more-bad-news-for-the-unemployed-in-2010

Almost 1 out of 5 People are Out of Work in the U.S.A.
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2009/12/31/unemployment-december-2009-new-release

FOX News Wages War on Unemployed - Thinks They're Lazy
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

Tea Party, Fox News, and Conservatives Attack the Unemployed
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/04/tea-party-gets-in-wrong-on-unemployment

Obama-Care © Verses Unemployment and Suicide in 2010
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/07/out-of-work-buy-a-shotgun

Original Source for this post:
http://www.allyourtv.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1014:beware-the-cable-tv-news-talking-point-extended-unemployment-benefits-encourage-joblessness&catid=78:featurescoveringmedia

GO HERE FOR "Extended Unemployment Benefits in 2010 - Fully Explained"
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/02/16/extended-unemployment-benefits-in-2010

---- March 22, 2010 ----

WILL EXTENDED BENEFITS SOON END FOR THE LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYED!

Will the Democrats put illegal aliens first, before American citizens looking for work?

Immigrant and activists, chanting Obama’s campaign slogan "Yes we can" in Spanish and English, are protesting and demanding "IMMIGRATIOM REFORM" (to give legal status to millions of illegal immigrants.)

Now that Obama-Care has just passed, many are worried that the Democrats may take up "amnesty" as their next great "social cause", and NOT JOBS!!!

Should the unemployed also organize and march?

No "Tier V" has been proposed, though there is NO shortage in the job market - and millions of "legal" Americans still remain unemployed.

SOURCE:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/22/us/politics/22immig.html

My related posts concerning unemployment in 2010

Are executives in big banks taking million-dollar bonuses from their stockholders while at the same time berating the poor?
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/22/j-p-morgan-unemployment-benefits-encoura

Like the last Great Depression, Unemployment and Foreclosures, Might See Rise in Suicides
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/10/unemployment-foreclosures-might-see-rise

The New Poor - Millions of Unemployed Face Years Without Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/21/the-new-poor-millions-of-unemployed-face

Government Jobs (Bigger Government) Drive Employment Numbers
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/01/government-jobs-bigger-government-drive

Actual Unemployment in 2010 - Recession Worse than Reported
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/04/actual-unemployment-in-january-2010-rece

Deep Recession Shows No Sign of Letting Up - Maybe Getting Worse
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/24/deep-recession-shows-no-sign-of-letting

Largest U.S. Labor Union: AFL-CIO says Jobs Won't Return
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/01/07/largest-u-s-labor-union-afl-cio-says-job

More Bad News for the Unemployed in 2010 - and Beyond
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/23/more-bad-news-for-the-unemployed-in-2010

Almost 1 out of 5 People are Out of Work in the U.S.A.
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2009/12/31/unemployment-december-2009-new-release

FOX News Wages War on Unemployed - Thinks They're Lazy
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

Tea Party, Fox News, and Conservatives Attack the Unemployed
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/04/tea-party-gets-in-wrong-on-unemployment

Obama-Care © Verses Unemployment and Suicide in 2010
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/07/out-of-work-buy-a-shotgun

This is what to expect with an Obama-type of Western European Socialist government in Amerika:

What do the European labor unions do in the middle of a depression?

They go on strike because they don't get a salary increase.

Poo-poo! Poor babies!

British Airways cabin crews went on strike first, then the labor strife started spreading to other European airlines.

Air France crews are to walk off the job for four days beginning Sunday, and pilots at Lufthansa and TAP Portugal are also in a combative mood.

The British Airways’ strike began Saturday because of the company's efforts to cut annual costs through a two-year wage freeze for cabin crews.

Holy Batman! Freeze wages in the middle of depression?

But according to the British Civil Aviation Authority, British Airways cabin crew salaries are already nearly DOUBLE their rivals’ - and the airline argues that the savings are necessary if it is to remain competitive at a time when the industry is struggling.

The Lufthansa pilots’ union said in a statement Monday that pilots at Lufthansa, Lufthansa Cargo and Germanwings were also planning to strike for four days beginning April 13 because the current union contract offer consists of a 21-month contract with no salary increase either.

Those poor slobs,
Who still have jobs,
Want to strike and sob,
Like a spoiled mob.

~Bud Meyers~

How Obama-Care Works: What You'll Pay - How It Works - The Timeline
CLICK THE LINK DIRECTLY BELOW FOR A FULL EXPLANATION:
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog5.php/2010/03/22/obama-care-what-you-ll-pay-how-it-works

Or look at my plan...Instead of the Socialized Healthcare Bill that the Progressives in Congress just passed...why not try my simple and easy-to-use solution.

If America wants to insure "another 32 million" people (those who do not currently have healthcare), why not just keep it simple.

Sometimes "simple" is "better".

Try something similar to this: (A ONE PAGE DOCUMENT (unlike the current 2,300 page bill) MY bill would insure 309 million people!

Just have Congress pass a sweeping law with a mandate: Starting January 1, 2011, ALL U.S. citizens will automatically and IMMEDIATELY become insured under Medicare (this will encourage illegal immigrants to obtain legal citizenship); but just like foreign tourists, illegal immigrants will still be able to receive emergency medical care. (Immigration reform to follow)

No abortions. Those who DO wish this, MUST purchase their own private plans (buying "expanded coverage") which would be offered by private insurers. - "Expanded coverage" as defined below.

Doctors must be fully reimbursed (100%) within 60 days of submitting their medical invoices. There will be a nominal co-pay ($25 per visit) by the patient to discourage unnecessary visits and/or un-necessary and/or redundant tests - unless recommended by the attending physician, in which case, the second visit's fee would be waved. (2nd opinions are allowed in cases where surgery is NEEDED and/or a life-threatening illness/major disability is of a real concern.)

All medical care under Medicare would EXCLUDE any form of vision and dental coverage, unless a person is either below the poverty threshold, is unemployed, or is over 65 - or unless it's a major medical emergency, where loss of sight is a possibility (such as blindness due to glaucoma), or infections due to a tooth abscess (when anti-biotics and pain pills will be needed. But all co-pays would still apply.)

NO ELECTIVE SURGERIES OF ANY TYPE AS PREVIOUSLY DEFINED (breast enlargements, "tummy tucks", etc). Fertility drugs, birth control, and male enhancement prescriptions would be allowed, but a co-payment would be imposed on the patient (10 to 20% cost of a generic drug) to deter re-sale and other types abuses and fraud.

All prescriptions would be computerized, but like all other medical information, will be kept safe for privacy concerns. Any mis-use would warrant SEVERE PENALTIES.

All FDA-approved prescriptions after 7 years (or the time it takes to recoup drug research and marketing costs) that are on the market and prescribed, will be considered "generic" and priced accordingly. (People would not need to go on-line to buy drugs from Canada or elsewhere.)

Severe and strict provisions will be enforced including fines and penalties (and not excluding criminal prosecution and prison) for ANY fraud, either by the patient or by the doctor/hospital. Medicare investigators would be hired specifically for this purpose, and they would be paid a base salary and reimbursed for needed expenses, PLUS rewarded on a commission basis for all fraud and abuse that is discovered and eliminated.

No ONE can be rejected because of pre-existing conditions, and Medicare could not put caps on long-term care such as rehabilitation or surgeries and/or transplants. (Transplants on a lottery pick - no sale can be made, no bartering, no bidding. ALL ORGANS.)

To pay for this, Medicare taxes will immediately be raised (ALMOST DOUBLE) in all payroll wages and salaries (including the value of stock options given for employee compensation, appraised by years-end, and/or based on capital gains taxes paid if sold before years-end) from 2.9% to 5% (employers co-pay will be raised from 1.45% to 2.5% - whether they offer expanded coverage plans or not.)

Major corporations will be able to buy large lots of coverage for "expanded coverage plans" at discount rates for their employees (if they wish), and be better able to compete with Standard Medicare Plans, and can be offered as part of their "employee compensation package" (i.e. union contracts, etc.)

Small business owners (employing less than 250 people, or has a gross net income of less than $1 million annually), will have other tax incentives that are not offered to larger companies (yet to be determined, if cost effective and fair, and places no undue financial burden on the business).

In the case of self-employed individuals (and those earning over $100,000 a year gross income before taxes through wages, etc.), the entire 7.5% tax must be paid by the individual, however half of the tax can be deducted from the income calculated for income tax purposes at the end of the year. (Self-employed individuals file quarterly).

Insurance companies may compete across state lines to vie for business by competing for Medicare patients, or if a union and/or employer would like to offer "expanded coverage" such as preventative medicine, non-essential elective surgeries, vision-care and major dental-care (implants, dentures,etc), and abortions.

Foreign doctors would be needed for increased care to 32 million more people in the pool, without degenerating the current quality of the present healthcare system.

Special provisions regarding tuitions will be made for medical students who specialize in areas where there may be a shortage (incentives that would also be extended to "big animal" veterinarians needed to keep the food supply safe. (i.e. Madate 4 years of government service with the same benefits and honors as non-Veterans of military service.)

(***The "new" government Medicare plan may be re-named to "National Healthcare" or "Obama-Care"...who cares. Make up an acronym.)

Yes, I made this all up on my own this morning. Any holes in my theory?

Opinion by Bud Meyers

The name "American Civil Liberties Union" (A.C.L.U.) may be (in my opinion) a bit of a misnomer. While they DO lead the charge in protecting and advocating "civil rights", I believe they primarily only do so for "ethnic minorities".

They would NOT reply to me when I requested information regarding protecting the civil rights of a German-American (Caucasian) regarding a "reverse discrimination" inquiry about a major corporation who had a disproportion amount of employees as opposed to the actual demographics of the local community.

I see the A.C.L.U. as really a far-left organization that promotes an ideology (Black Liberation Theology?), and as NOT really a true protector of Constitutional Rights for all Americans. They appear to be VERY selective about who and what they represent.

And they are racists as well.

The A.C.L.U. should NOT to be confused with the A.C.L.J. (American Center for Law and Justice - http://www.aclj.org/) which is more conservative and more true to basic average American values...those who are the MAJORITY of the population in the United States of America.

FOR EXAMPLE: A member of the Black Panther Party who might be accused of killing a policeman may want the A.C.L.U. to represent them. Or maybe an atheist who is repulsed by the public display of a Christian symbol (and wanted to file a frivolous lawsuit, wasting taxpayer's money to defend against) may also want the A.C.L.U. to lead their "cause".

But either way, I'm sure the A.C.L.U. will defend my right to free speech...even if I am WHITE.

I'm worried that Obama's new Jobs Bill (H.I.R.E.) will only create menial low-paying jobs - or temporary "shovel ready" construction jobs for infrastructure projects...

...and it will be more like FDR's "New Deal" (based in liberal ideas, big city machines, and empowered labor unions). The Great Depression still continued for years thereafter.

We need HUGE corporate and capital gains tax cuts to entice American-based "multi-national" companies to bring lost jobs back to the United States, and reinvest in this county's manufacturing base.

END OUT-SOURCING to MEXICO, INDIA and CHINA!

If Wal-Mart continues to import goods made in China to sell to unemployed people in America, how does that help our GDP?

Labor Union Abuse

Also, legislation should be enacted by Congress to keep from forcing pay raises and other increases in benefits to union workers if a company can show that corporate profits don't allow for them. Why must union workers be allowed to strangle businesses like the UAW did to the auto industry, forcing jobs overseas or into non-union work places.

Example of Abuse:
Spoiled Euros Strike During Depression

The heads of these unions aren't protecting worker's job security, the union "business agents" (reps or stewards) are just enriching themselves with worker's union dues. They already manipulate most of the union pension funds, keeping millions (if not billions) of dollars in unclaimed pension benefits in a variety of ways.

Michigan has the highest unemployment rate, and not by accident - and not completely because of the auto-manufactures (due to automation), but because of the unions. They "out-priced" typical common labor out of the job market place.

Fat and greedy union contracts, and an unwillingness of the reps to compromise and/or take cut-backs. (Paying workers 80% of their salaries during layoffs?)

I'll guess that some of these pension funds will be long gone when they want to retire...gone like a Bernie Madoff ponzi scheme.

They Can Build Them, Why Can't We?

READ: "How the UAW Brought Down America's Big 3"

Google "history of labor unions" and the first hit you get is a Wikipedia page with a picture of SEIU's Andy Stern. Say enough?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_unions_in_the_United_States

Just my opinion.

Disclosure: I was a dues-paying member with several unions over the last 30 years.

Related posts on the current unemployment situation:

Unemployment - Foreclosures, Might See Rise in Suicides
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/10/unemployment-foreclosures-might-see-rise

The Great Depression: Then and Now - Is There a Difference?
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/08/the-great-depression-then-and-now-is-the

The New Poor - Millions of Unemployed Face Years Without Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/21/the-new-poor-millions-of-unemployed-face

The Jobless and Suicides in 2010
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/07/out-of-work-buy-a-shotgun

Government Jobs (Bigger Government) Drive Employment Numbers
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/01/government-jobs-bigger-government-drive

Actual Unemployment in 2010 - Recession Worse than Reported
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/04/actual-unemployment-in-january-2010-rece

Deep Recession Shows No Sign of Letting Up - Maybe Getting Worse
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/24/deep-recession-shows-no-sign-of-letting

Largest U.S. Labor Union: AFL-CIO says Jobs Won't Return
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/01/07/largest-u-s-labor-union-afl-cio-says-job

More Bad News for the Unemployed in 2010 - and Beyond
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/23/more-bad-news-for-the-unemployed-in-2010

Almost 1 out of 5 People are Out of Work in the U.S.A.
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2009/12/31/unemployment-december-2009-new-release

FOX News Wages War on Unemployed - Thinks They're Lazy
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

Extended Unemployment Benefits in 2010 - Fully Explained
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/02/16/extended-unemployment-benefits-in-2010

The Health-Care Wars Are Only Beginning

Is this the REAL reason why there's no TORT reform?

"The president's health plan won't solve a problem. It will be the start of bitter fights over funding and policy that will consume the nation for decades to come."

By FRED BARNES for the Wall Street Journal

On Dec. 7, 1941, an announcement was made during the football game between the hometown Washington Redskins and the Philadelphia Eagles. All the generals and admirals at Griffith Stadium were instructed to report to their duty stations. Little did they know their lives would be changed forever and America would be at war, or on war footing, for the next half-century. Pearl Harbor had been attacked.

America will be in a constant health-care war if ObamaCare is enacted. Passage wouldn't end the health-care debate. Rather, it would perpetuate ObamaCare as the dominant issue for decades to come, reshape politics, create an annual funding crisis in Congress, and generate a spate of angry lawsuits. Yet few in Washington seem aware of what lies ahead.

We only have to look at Great Britain to get a glimpse of the future. The National Health Service-socialized medicine-was created in 1946 and touted as the envy of the world. It's been a contentious issue ever since. Its cost and coverage are perennial subjects of debate. The press, especially England's most popular newspaper, The Daily Mail, feasts on reports of long waiting periods, dirty hospitals, botched care and denied access to treatments.

A Conservative member of the European Parliament, Daniel Hannan, last year in an interview on Fox News denounced the NHS as a "60-year mistake," declaring he "wouldn't wish it on anybody." As prime minister, Margaret Thatcher bravely cut NHS spending in the 1980s, but current Tory leaders regard criticism of the NHS as too risky. "The Conservative Party stands four square behind the NHS," its leader, David Cameron, said in response to Mr. Hannan.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi believes ObamaCare would have a more congenial fate-that it will become as popular as Social Security and Medicare with voters. She's kidding herself. Social Security and Medicare were popular from the start and passed with bipartisan support. ObamaCare is unpopular and partisan. It's extremely controversial. Its passage is far more likely to spark a political explosion than a wave of acceptance.

Democratic leaders believe the public doesn't focus on the process of how legislation is enacted. But in this case they're wrong. I've been amazed at how many people understand "reconciliation"-a process that allows budget and spending bills to pass in the Senate with only 51 votes, instead of 60. Many voters are also now studying the details of the "Slaughter solution," which would allow the House to "deem" the Senate health-care bill to have passed without actually voting on it and then to vote through changes to the Senate bill. These legislative shortcuts are already infuriating ObamaCare's opponents.

If ObamaCare passes, sooner or later the backlash against it would morph into a movement to repeal it. Republicans would likely make repeal a top issue in congressional elections this November. The GOP is expected to win a substantial number of seats in Congress this fall. If Republicans take control of the House or Senate or both, clashes over health care would be unavoidable.

Assuming it passes, ObamaCare wouldn't go into effect fully until 2013. This fact alone would make the health-care plan a paramount issue in the 2012 presidential race, regardless of whether Mr. Obama is on the ballot. As long as he's president, Mr. Obama would surely veto legislation to repeal or gut ObamaCare. With a Republican in the White House things would be different. Republicans might be successful in dismantling the program.

But Democrats wouldn't give up. Having gone to great lengths to enact ObamaCare, they'd go all out to protect it or revive it. Mrs. Pelosi is already talking about expanding ObamaCare. She favors adding a "public option" to compete with private insurers. "Once we kick through this door [and pass it], there'll be more legislation to follow," she told liberal bloggers on Monday.

So the struggle would go on and on. If you think the fights over funding of Medicare and Medicaid in recent years have been unpleasant, wait until the funding battles over ObamaCare start. It's all but inevitable that they would occur every year given the way Mr. Obama has proposed to finance his health-care program.

ObamaCare low-balls its cost and exaggerates the means for paying for it. "Our proposal is paid for," the president insisted in a speech in Ohio on Monday. It's not. The financing includes billions that are obligated elsewhere. It claims to cut the budget deficit by $118 billion but achieves this by borrowing hundreds of billions more.

At the same time, Mr. Obama's plan offers a cornucopia of new benefits: free preventive care, coverage for those with pre-existing conditions, guaranteed issue, no lifetime or annual benefit caps, and subsidies for insuring 30 million people now uninsured. All of this would increase the use of health-care services. The tendency is to underestimate just how large this increase might be. This was true with Medicare and Medicaid, whose costs have ballooned far beyond initial projections. The annual struggles in Congress over funding for ObamaCare would be intense.

The courts would also get involved. In anticipation of passage of the president's health-care plan, three states-Virginia, Idaho and Utah-have passed laws to nullify ObamaCare's mandate that everyone purchase health insurance. Other states are expected to follow suit. Arizona voters will decide the matter in a referendum in November. Ultimately, federal judges would decide if these state laws are constitutional. Other issues would also end up in court. That includes the constitutionality of the process that Democrats used to pass ObamaCare. We could expect years of litigation.

Enacting ObamaCare would be only the beginning. The controversy surrounding its passage and how it might work would preoccupy the president, Congress and millions of average Americans for the foreseeable future-and then some.

Mr. Barnes is executive editor of the Weekly Standard and a commentator on Fox News Channel.

Original Source:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704743404575127540906168462.html

Also see my post: "The Tenth Amendment and Socialized Healthcare"

Thanks, Kasha. I'll let the Senator know your concerns.

----- Original Message -----
From: Kasha
To: Al Grahms
Cc: Bud Meyers
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 7:25 AM
Subject: RE: H.R. 3200

PLEASE PERUSE and inform me as to your thoughts on this matter:

Article I - The Legislative Branch
Section 9 - Limits on Congress

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed." (ex post facto - adj. Formulated, enacted, or operating retroactively.) [Med Lat., from what is done afterwards]

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To provide for general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States. (Does this exclude Louisiana, Florida, Nebraska, and the labor unions?)

Section 2 - State citizens, Extradition

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States [meaning as in all other states, equally]. (Does this exclude Louisiana, Florida, Nebraska, and the labor unions?)

***Also, see Section 7 - Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto

The House of Representatives must vote up or down, and the healthcare bill can not be "deemed" passed and sent to the President to be signed into law.

Argument: Mandating auto insurance as opposed to health insurance

Operating a vehicle on public streets in the U.S. is a privilege, and a driver's license is required to legally drive. Accessing the streets and sidewalks (the "by-ways" of our land) is a Constitutional Right. Auto insurance is "State mandated" only if one possesses and registers a vehicle for the purpose of driving said vehicle on these public streets (paid for with public tax
dollars) - One can also purchase auto insurance across state lines.

One is not legally mandated to purchase auto insurance to drive a plow on a farm (private land rights). One is not mandated by law to operate a vehicle on public highways, but only if they CHOOSE to do so.

Merely "existing" is an inalienable right granted by God (as stated and guaranteed to us by the U.S. Constitution), and forcing someone by law to purchase something (i.e. healthcare insurance) just because they EXIST, is unconstitutional - "I didn't choose to exist, therefore I just do because my mother didn't abort me."

No U.S. citizen can be forced to purchase anything - (commerce protection laws, consumer rights, etc)

BRIBERY - FEDERAL LAWS REGARDING "SPECIAL DEALS" - Louisiana, Florida, Nebraska, and the labor unions. (Private trips aboard Air Force One?)

TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I--CRIMES
CHAPTER 11--BRIBERY, GRAFT, AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC203

PENAL CODE
TITLE 8. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 36. BRIBERY AND CORRUPT INFLUENCE
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.36.htm

Sincerely,
Kasha Waluskie
Las Vegas, NV

RELATED News Articles:

The president's health plan won't solve a problem. It will be the start of bitter fights over funding and policy that will consume the nation for decades to come.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704743404575127540906168462.html

Dems pushing ObamaCare look increasingly desperate and creepy.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704743404575127690939847922.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular

'Nobody Wants to Vote for the Senate bill'
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703734504575125693906113572.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular

ObamaCare's Worst Tax Hike
For the first time, payroll levies will hit investment income.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704131404575117623860083574.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular

The Failure of RomneyCare
The former Massachusetts governor enacted something very similar to the Obama health plan. It isn't working well.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703625304575115691871093652.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular

And is the President and/or his administration?

"...Our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal." ~ Abraham Lincoln - Thursday, November 19, 1863 ~

Today 541 men and women in the U.S. government essentially controls every aspect of 309 million American lives.

1 - President (Top of the Executive Branch)
531 - Congress (Legislative Branch - 431 Reps + 100 Sens)
9 - Supreme Court (Judicial Branch - Chief Justice and 8 Associates with life tenure)
___
541 - TOTAL

If you or I break a law (i.e. tax evasion, bribery, lewd and lascivious behavior, DUI, involuntary manslaughter, etc.), "ordinary" citizens are immediately made to pay a penalty or fine, and/or we lose our liberties, and/or we are forced to spend time imprisoned behind bars.

People in Congress do anything they want.

It's a crime to file a false police report or to lie to a FBI agent when questioned during an official government investigation - obstructing justice and perjury are crimes, are they not? And "ordinary" Americans could be fined or imprisoned. Shouldn't elected officials (except in cases where Top Secret operations in the course of protecting Americans for National Security) be convicted, fined, and imprisoned for LYING to their constituents? After all, they take an oath to office and swear to God (perjury).

Nobody's holding Congress to a higher standard, just to the same standards that "ordinary" citizens are obliged to meet.

Wouldn't it be ludicrous to give someone your trust, and then pay them to lie to you? Pay them to cheat? Pay them to steal? Pay them to break the laws that you, yourself, would be punished for? Does that sound sane?

(See "Congress Votes Themselves Pay Raise"

"Rangel, pay your damn taxes or go to prison!"

Going forward, every elected member of Congress should sign a legally binding document that, upon a state referendum, be immediately impeached if they do not uphold the will of their constituents in their districts. No "pardons" by the House Speaker...the members of Congress should answer ONLY to the people who elected them into office.

The only exceptions would be for tax cheats like Charlie Rangel, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, who oversees the tax laws; but evaded paying income taxes for years, which is a Federal offense (high crimes) and he should have been sent to jail a long time ago. (At his age, I fear he will escape juctice.)

Who Enforces the Law?

Who polices the police?

If Eric Holder breaks the law, who investigates and prosecutes him if he's the boss and dictates everything that the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the ATF, the ICE, the XYZ does?

On August 11, 1999 President Bill Clinton offered clemency to 16 members of the *FALN. Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder was credited with with the unconscionable effort to circumvent the standard pardon process, not consulting with the Department of Justice's pardon attorney and keeping deliberations hidden from the district U.S. attorney and investigative agencies. Weather Underground terrorists Linda Evans and Susan Rosenberg were also pardoned.

*The Puerto Rican Armed Forces of National Liberation (Spanish: Fuerzas Armadas de Liberación Nacional Puertorriqueña or F.A.L.N.) - Advocated complete independence for Puerto Rico. At the time of its dissolution, the FALN was responsible for more than 120 bomb attacks on United States targets between 1974 and 1983. The FBI classifies the FALN as a terrorist organization.

If law enforcement officers in all the top law enforcement agencies where appointed and/or hired by Congress, and who allocated taxpayer funds to pay their salaries, how could "ordinary" people expect them to enforce the law of the land? The laws being, ones that Congress had passed, and supposedly, with the will of the people?

Government Tyranny

If a member of Congress is guilty of a crime, but holds a vote in the Senate to promote an agenda of the President, how can "ordinary" people expect justice be done in our government?

If the President was guilty of high crimes and treason, and the House and Senate hold a majority, how can "ordinary" citizens rid themselves of a tyrant and have him impeached?

They all swore an allegiance to God and country, to serve and protect, against all enemies, foreign and domestic...but if some don't believe in God, or want to overthrow this country, how can "ordinary" Americans like you and I save ourselves and the Republic from a dictatorial rule?

If a tyrant in government controls all the "militia", and "the people" have inalienable rights, how can they protect themselves from this tyranny if it is THEY who are accused by this tyrannical government as being the "enemy of the state"?

The "people" were said to be governed by the will of the people; but what can one do when the government imposes its will upon you?

In the preamble of the Constitution of the United States, it states "We the People of the United States" ...which encompasses ALL American citizens...you and I and ALL members of Congress.

Section 5 - Membership, Rules, Journals, Adjournment

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for *disorderly behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.

*Define - "disorderly Behavior" (See links below)

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To provide for general *Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States. (Does this exclude Louisiana, Florida, Nebraska, and the labor unions?)

*welfare n. 1. health, happiness, or prosperity; well-being. (ME wel faren, to fare well)

Welfare in today's context also means organized efforts on the part of public or private organizations to benefit the poor, or simply public assistance. This is NOT the meaning of the word as used in the Constitution.

No Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, *accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.

*The Prime Minister of England gave Mr. Obama an ornamental pen holder made from the timbers of the Victorian anti-slave ship HMS Gannet. (The Prime Minister got an iPod in return.)

Impeachment - Proceeding for the removal of a public official charged with *misconduct in office. An impeachment trial may result in either an acquittal or in a verdict of guilty. In the latter case the impeached official is removed from office; if the charges warrant such action, the official is also remanded to the proper authorities for trial before a court.

*Define - "misconduct in office" (See links below)

Article I - The Legislative Branch - Section 6

They shall in all Cases, except *Treason, Felony and *Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same...

*define - "Breach of the Peace" (See links below)

*Defined (Section 3 - Treason)

Treason is the offense of attempting to overthrow the government of one's country or of assisting its enemies in war.

Is giving American civil rights to members of al Qaeda (foreign-born terrorists and homicidal maniacs with no "green Card" indicating legal immigration status) held by American military forces in a foreign land during time of war, then transporting them to U.S. controlled territories as POWs and providing them lawyers at taxpayer's expense "assisting its enemies in war"?

Article II - The Executive Branch Note
Section 4 - Disqualification

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, *Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

*Define - "Bribery" and "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" (How much does it cost taxpayers to fly undecided Senators on "field trips" aboard Air Force One?) (See links below)

TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I--CRIMES
CHAPTER 11--BRIBERY, GRAFT, AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC203

PENAL CODE
TITLE 8. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 36. BRIBERY AND CORRUPT INFLUENCE
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.36.htm

Section 2 - State citizens, Extradition

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States [meaning as in all other states, equally]. (Does this exclude Louisiana, Florida, Nebraska, and the labor unions?)

Amendment 14

No member of Congress shall have engaged in *rebellion against the [United States], or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.

*Define "rebellion" (Affiliations with people like Bill Ayers who bombed the Pentagon, police buildings, and other U.S. government installations as did the Weather Underground? Or like advocating over throwing the government like Andy Stern, who trained in the tactics of radical activism at the Midwest Academy formed by SDS?) (See links below)

ALSO: H.R. 3200 "Deemed" Unconstitutional by Scholars
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/18/h-r-3200-deemed-unconstitutional-by-scho

FEDERAL CITATIONS and STATUTES

18 U.S.C. § 201 Bribery of public officials and witnesses
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC201
18 U.S.C. § 202 Definitions
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC202
18 U.S.C. § 203 Compensation to Members of Congress, officers, and others in matters affecting the Government
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC203
18 U.S.C. § 204 Practice in United States Claims Court or the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit by Members of Congress
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC204
18 U.S.C. § 205 Activities of officers and employees in claims against and other matters affecting the Government
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC205
18 U.S.C. § 206 Exemption of retired officers of the uniformed services
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC206
18 U.S.C. § 207 Restrictions on former officers, employees, and elected officials of the executive and legislative branches
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC207
18 U.S.C. § 208 Acts affecting a personal financial interest
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC208
18 U.S.C. § 209 Salary of Government officials and employees payable only by United States
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC209
18 U.S.C. § 216 Penalties and injunctions
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC216
18 U.S.C. § 218 Voiding transactions in violation of chapter; recovery by the United States
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC218
18 U.S.C. § 219 Officers and employees acting as agents of foreign principals
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+18USC219

It will be interesting to see what Democratic congress-people that voted for "Obama-Care" (and are then voted out of office in November because of their vote) are then appointed by Obama to diplomatic positions, such as U.S. Ambassadors...

...until a Republican President is voted into office in 2012 and fires them all.

Who are the current US Ambassadors and how many vacancies are there?
http://hillbuzz.org/2009/03/02/who-are-the-current-us-ambassadors-and-how-many-vacancies-are-there/

Ambassadors of the United States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambassadors_of_the_United_States

Reformers in U.S. Call For Fewer Ambassador Daddy Warbucks
http://www.washdiplomat.com/December%202008/a2_12_08.html

Progressivism first emerged in the late 19th century.

There were two notable state progressive parties: the Wisconsin Progressive Party and the Vermont Progressive Party. The latter is still in operation and currently has several high ranking positions in state government.

Today, most progressive politicians in the United States associate with the Democratic Party or the Green Party. In the U.S. Congress there exists the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which is often in opposition to the more conservative Democrats, who form the Blue Dogs caucus.

In the United States, liberals and progressives are often conflated, and in general are the primary voters of the Democratic Party which has a "large tent" policy, combining similar (if not congruent) ideologies into large voting blocs. Many progressives also support the Green Party or local parties such as the Vermont Progressive Party.

Many left wing radicals from the 1960's who belonged to groups like SDS - Students for a Democratic Society - (think of Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground) never held REAL jobs for very long, they were more like professional students (while working at the local pizzeria or working as "teachers" in daycare centers to pay tuition) attending college for years on end; and many of them became teachers in public schools and joined the SEIU's teacher's unions...and Bill Ayers and others went on to become professors in the colleges and universities.

Many more (who were 1960's "advocates", anti-war protesters, and eco-terrorists during this time) claimed to have had empathy for "the oppressed" and minorities, but ironically, they associated themselves with Socialism and Communism - and aligned their loyalties with the USSR and Cuba - and practiced Marxism. And many went into U.S. Federal and local politics. Today, Congress is riddled with Progressives...they no longer hide their agenda (see: Congressional Progressive Caucus).

The kids these people influenced throughout the 70's and 80's (through schools and government policies), then graduated after being "indoctrinated" with the left-wing progressive ideology.

Then afterwards (about 1990 to today), these same kids entered the corporate workforce, rising through the ranks and taking their "Progressive" ideologies with them, and injecting them into many corporate company polices.

MGM Mirage and their "diversity policy" is but one such example. The Progressives also believe in "spreading the wealth" and "social justice" using the IPCC, IMF, and Cap-and-trade litigation to further promote (force) their ideas on others.

After Congress, American corporations, and labor unions were infiltrated, jobs were then out-sourced for cheaper labor to 3rd world countries ("foreign minorities").

Many of the jobs remaining, went to domestic minorities...many illegal immigrants.

Now MGM Mirage has over 50% of it's workforce as "ethnic minorities", in a city (Las Vegas) whose demographics has a census of 75% "non-ethnic" people in its population.

The Progressives Today

One thing I fail to understand is why the Progressives are so hell-bent on changing our society in the United States (to be more Socialist and Marxist, or "Green") - and moving farther away from the U.S. Constitution. There are already many societies like that, they already exist (China, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, etc.)

If they don't enjoy the freedoms they have here in America, why whine and complain so much when they have the FREEDOM to leave the United States, renounce their citizenship, and take up residence elsewhere?

The Progressives are a minority in this country, but like dictatorships in socialist countries, they would rather have the power to rule the majority here, in America.

Are the masses all around the world risking their lives to enter China, Russia, Cuba, and Venezuela? Or do they come to America - the country that the Progressives seem to hate so much in it's current political state?

Why do the Progressives remain here, like a thorn in our paw, instead of hero-worshiping Mao and Lenin in these other countries, whose governments were crafted after those "Utopian" ideologies?

It just doesn't make any since to me, unless...

...they are morally corrupted.

Call me old-fashioned, but I believe in American exceptionalism, and if these "progressive" idiots don't believe in the U.S. Constitution, maybe it's time they pack their bags and row an old wooden raft to Cuba...and give Castro my regards.

progressives, "green", Marxism, transforming America, Obama, diversity, socialism, Congressional Progressive Caucus, indoctrination, Bill Ayers, SDS

but it's the RIGHT thing to do.

...it's simply a safety net that we extend to others who are less fortunate.

(Watch Glenn Beck tomorrow)

I don't consider unemployment compensation to be an inalienable right granted by God (guaranteed to us by the U.S. Constitution); nor do I consider it to be an "entitlement" or a "right" granted by our "righteous" members of the Congress. And I don't consider it to be "Social Justice" either.

I consider unemployment compensation to be more like charity (dispensed with compassion) that is freely given by the working American people to their fellow citizens...who, by no fault of their own, lost their means to gainful employment.

I certainly don't consider unemployment compensation to be nothing more than a free hand out given to lazy bums who don't want to work, and only want a free ride on the backs of others.

Some may say "It's the Christian thing to do." It's called "helping others".

It can (and has) been argued that it was excessive and fraudulent government spending (i.e the Stimulus Bill), and poor government regulation of multi-national corporations (i.e. out-sourcing jobs) and financial institutions (i.e. TARP and the FHA), that led to the unemployment situation of today.

How can someone who has worked hard all their life, was a productive member of society, has always paid their bills and taxes on time, and has always obeyed the law (unlike many members of Congress) now be held to blame for this countries financial woes...just because they were laid off from their jobs? Jobs they may have held for decades? Nonsense!

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, FOX NEWS SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: "This is a $15 trillion economy. The jobs bill (extending unemployment benefits) is $15 billion. That's one tenth of one percent of the gross domestic product. It's not going to have any serious effect on the economy."

If the American people (who are realistically represented through votes by members in Congress) want to terminate assistance to their fellow countrymen, and plunge millions into homelessness (but yet, still wish to continue paying for contributions to foreign aide, the IPCC, and the IMF), then so be it.

But in the mean time, I don't considered it to be proper etiquette to insult the jobless when most are suffering.

And if you have a job and see a homeless man, give him a damn dollar, and stop your whining!

http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

March 15, 2010 - Officially, there are 14.9 million jobless Americans. Of those, 11.4 million collect unemployment compensation (State and Federally extended). Actual total workforce is about 154 million (50% of the total U.S. population).
http://www.bls.gov

Total U.S. population: 308,872,323
http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html

There were 120 Million 2010 Census forms mailed today (representing 120 million "households".)
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/2010_census/014624.html

The government last reported a 9.7% unemployment rate (but the unofficial rate is more like 17.5% (27 million people) - a number that the government doesn't want to admit because it peaked at 24% during the Great Depression.
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2009/12/31/unemployment-december-2009-new-release

And the number grows every month as "new people" enter the workforce - It's been recently reported by economists that at least 100,000 jobs a month need to be created to just stay at the current level.

The Congressional Budget Office said in a February 2010 report that people receiving unemployment benefits tend to plow the money right back into the economy, making them "both timely and cost-effective in spurring economic activity and employment".

Adding insult to injury

But Fox News has been waging war on those 11.4 jobless Americans that are collecting unemployment benefits:

Mediamatters.org reports that Fox News' Eric Bolling appeared to suggest that a large number of unemployed workers are staying on the dole in order to take advantage of the generous government gravy train.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201002120001

Fox News commentator Stuart Varney quipped, "Cut off their unemployment benefits and maybe they'll go find a job."
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

On Neil Cavutoe one commentator suggests that, [paraphrased] "99 weeks of unemployment checks is too much."

And then another commentator claimed that, [paraphrased] "collecting unemployment checks does not encourage people to find work."
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/13/fox-news-continues-bashing-the-jobless

Even my buddy Sean Hannity (who's doing a great job with his recent segments "Waste 101") once thought the economic recovery act had actually raised unemployment, citing minutes from a January Federal Reserve meeting.

But in fact, the Federal Reserve minutes Hannity cited actually stated that the provision had the effect of raising the "measured unemployment rate" because people who lost their jobs sought to remain in the workforce in order to receive benefits, rather than leaving the workforce and being counted as "discouraged workers" - instead of being classified as "unemployed."

(Mistakes can happen. You, I forgive Sean.)

NO labor shortage in America

Andrew Stettner, deputy director of the National Employment Law Center, says there’s a good reason why people have been out of work for so long. "The primary reason is a lack of jobs," Stettner said. "There are six unemployed Americans for every available job."
http://carczarconsulting.com/03/12/14-9-million-jobless-americans-now-out-of-work-an-average-of-29-7-weeks-i-paid-into-the-system-for-25-years-and-now-i-need-it/

Manufacturing still lags, showing that an economic recovery is still a ways off.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/g17/Current/default.htm

There might be as many as 27 million people of the 154 million in the U.S. workforce that are without Jobs - and there is NO labor shortage in America.

On Fox News' web site, according to CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, FOX NEWS SYNDICATED COLUMNIST : "This is a $15 trillion economy. The jobs bill [which extends filing for unemployment benefits] is $15 billion. That's one tenth of one percent of the gross domestic product. It's not going to have any serious effect on the economy."

Maybe Fox News doesn't know all these well-known facts. Maybe I should tell them.

Related posts on the current unemployment situation:

The Great Depression: Then and Now - Is There a Difference?
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/08/the-great-depression-then-and-now-is-the

The New Poor - Millions of Unemployed Face Years Without Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/21/the-new-poor-millions-of-unemployed-face

Unemployment - Foreclosures, Might See Rise in Suicides
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/10/unemployment-foreclosures-might-see-rise

Government Jobs (Bigger Government) Drive Employment Numbers
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/01/government-jobs-bigger-government-drive

Actual Unemployment in 2010 - Recession Worse than Reported
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/04/actual-unemployment-in-january-2010-rece

Deep Recession Shows No Sign of Letting Up - Maybe Getting Worse
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/24/deep-recession-shows-no-sign-of-letting

Largest U.S. Labor Union: AFL-CIO says Jobs Won't Return
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/01/07/largest-u-s-labor-union-afl-cio-says-job

More Bad News for the Unemployed in 2010 - and Beyond
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/23/more-bad-news-for-the-unemployed-in-2010

Almost 1 out of 5 People are Out of Work in the U.S.A.
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2009/12/31/unemployment-december-2009-new-release

FOX News Wages War on Unemployed - Thinks They're Lazy
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

Extended Unemployment Benefits in 2010 - Fully Explained
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/02/16/extended-unemployment-benefits-in-2010

Not "Fair and Balanced" to the Unemployed and Soon-to-be Homeless People

I really like Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and Glenn Beck. They are looking out for us. Lately Sean has been reporting on all the waste and corruption in the Stimulus Bill - and other Obama frauds; Glenn continues to expose all the radicalism in the administration - and the poor fiscal condition of our government...and teaching us history; and Bill takes the folksy approach of addressing the latest headlines - and letting us see the patriots and pinheads.

But what about many of those "other" commentators?

The Fox News commentators have been looking very well groomed these days - the men in their impeccable pressed suits and bright swanky ties, and the glamorous women wearing the latest fashions, in high heels crossing their waxed legs, smiling with glossy lips and bright white teeth. Fox News has a wardrobe department and make-up artists who fuss and primp over these "beautiful people" before putting them on the air.

The commentators are all full of spunk and vigor in their viewpoints, and confident in their opinions...opining and pontificating over all the modern issues of the day. They are supreme in their righteousness, knowing that they are all winners, working for the most watched news network in history. They are "stars" and "celebrities", enjoying a fame that most common people could never know or begin to understand.

The commentators have a friendly and comradely relationship amongst themselves; comfortably working in a top-shelf environment, with other people at their beck and call, "Can someone get me another cup of coffee?"

They meet with and interview famous people like politicians, rock stars, and military heroes. They are surrounded by and mingle with truly important people and the power brokers of our day. It must be very invigorating and exciting to be around such people, the people who really matter most.

They really must feel "the power of FOX", and feel very proud when they are first introduced to other people as Fox News employees, or if they're recognized when they're out in the general public. I'm sure their loved ones are very proud of them as well.

Yes, the commentators at Fox News are all looking happy, proud, and beautiful these days...because, that's what being gainfully employed can do for a person.

...and most of the unemployed people in America know this; they don't WANT to be unemployed; they're not proud to be unemployed. The commentators at Fox News have escaped the cutbacks and layoffs that millions of other people didn't. The commentators have been insulated from the real pain that ordinary people are feeling, enjoying their continued success at Fox.

But what about the millions of unemployed and suffering people who live between the mansions in Hollywood and the sterile studios of Fox News in New York City?

Officially, almost 15 million people in America are jobless - Unofficially, about 27 million people.

Most of these unemployed people watch Fox News.

So why today, on Neil Cavuto, did the commentators AGAIN continue their new-found hobby of bashing the unfortunate unemployed people of this country?

One commentator suggests that, [paraphrased] "99 weeks of unemployment checks is too much."

Another commentator claimed that, [paraphrased] "collecting unemployment checks does not encourage people to find work."

Or last week when Stuart Varney said [paraphrased], "cut off their unemployment benefits and maybe they'll go find a job."

Mediamatters.org reports that Fox News' Eric Bolling appeared to suggest that a large number of unemployed workers are staying on the dole in order to take advantage of the generous government gravy train.

Many of these commentators, who work in fabulous mid-town Manhattan in a high-rise skyscraper in the glamorous city of New York...are exactly who they blame others to be - OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE PEOPLE!

The Fox News commentators, who are gainfully employed, garner fat paychecks (so much more than the $40k average annual income that regular working people in America earn). But they all need to step off their soapboxes in NYC, get in a bus together, and travel across America to meet REAL people like Sarah Palin did.

Having a job is a privilege, and those commentators should realize that unemployed people know this very well...they do not CHOOSE to collect unemployment checks from the government. They are NOT too lazy to work - they really DO want to wake up every morning and go to a job to earn money to buy things for their children.

When did these commentators last read the HELP WANTED ads? Where are all the blaring newspaper headlines declaring "SHORTAGE IN THE WORKFORCE" or "COMPANIES MUST IMPORT LABOR". I never saw any CEOs of multi-national corporations being interviewed on Fox and complaining that they couldn't find people to work - because they can, in foreign countries! (If one has a college education and/or is a military Veteran, some jobs can be found at http://www.usajobs.gov, thanks to bigger government and more taxpayer funded government spending.)

The pampered Fox News commentators can snipe at their Manhattan neighbor (the New York Times) all they want, but they should not be insulting unemployed people. They are dignified people who suffer enough already as it is; and to make them feel more shame and humiliation is downright mean.

And to attack them for recieving unemployment benefits (their only source of income) is inhumane.

But I can't totally blame the Fox News commentators...after all, they never read or reply to a single e-mail that the average viewer sends them...so how could they possibly ever know what the regular folks in America are thinking or feeling? How could they know their pain? But I bet Sarah Palin would know.

I'm guessing that Fox News has a huge mail room, but only has one lonely person who randomly selects one e-mail out of every 100,000 sent, then forwards it on to some assistant producer for casual perusal. Maybe Fox News should hire some of these lazy unemployed people to answer some of their unread e-mail...thoughts that their viewers took the time and effort to send. Sometimes, people just want to be heard. Fox news ignores too many of them. Not everybody has the number to Glenn Beck's red phone.

Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and Glenn Beck take on the REAL causes of the economic environment - unlike many of the other commentators at Fox, who have been attacking the victims of that economic environment.

I almost envy these Fox commentators, because then I too could smugly cash my paycheck every week and have drinks at the local bar on Avenue of the Americas with my co-workers after work, dressed to the nines and stylin' with a wallet of cash - - - and very few worries in my life.

But after leaving the Fox News building and looking down at the homeless man sitting outside with his dog on the sidewalk, rather than publicly demeaning him or blaming him for the government's budget woes, I'd be thinking to myself, "There but for the grace of God go I."

And then I'd give the poor bastard a dollar.

See >>> FOX News Wages War on Unemployed - Thinks They're Lazy
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

UPDATE MARCH 14, 2010 - Watch a replay of Sean Hannity's "Waste - 101" tonight on Fox News...then you'll understand.

Corrupt Nepotism and Criminal Theft

Am I alone in my daily outrage? Millions and millions of taxpayer dollars from the Stimulus Bill has been gushing to Progressive liberal academics in colleges for frivolous, ridiculous and arcane studies. So much so, I would call it criminal.

The latest rip off?

How many of you saw "Hookin' Up - 101" on Sean Hannity tonight? About paying campus students at Syracuse University $10 for their opinions on such things as how they "hook up" with others...(sexually transmitted diseases, etc) - opinions that they might have otherwise offered for free.

When I was 14 years I knew that if you had casual sex with multiple strangers and didn't use a condom you could get syphilis! Somebody has to "research" the mating habits of college kids?

Cost to us? Another $270,000...another fraud.

When asked about how many jobs this "study" created, two "researchers" defending the study to Fox News came right out and admitted, "It was never about jobs, it was about the health of our young, who will be important to our future workforce."

What!!!!!!!! What about the health of the CURRENT UNEMPLOYED WORKFORCE!!!!!!!

I also believe it's more about spreading the wealth around, by first using deceptive practices to get these funds allocated, then miss-using these taxpayer funds in a fraudulent and wasteful manner, and using nepotism in the distribution of these funds, and promoting Obama's far-left Progressive agenda with the students.

It's political mal-practice.

Where the %!*#$)@0! is Joe "Dash" Biden, the vice-president who Obama said would be watching this fund and that, "Nobody messes with Joe!"

Hogwash! They are both liars and thieves and traitors to this country and should be impeached! The whole damn administration is so corrupt, it's beyond belief! Rotten to the damn core!

If I sound a little pissed it's because, HELL YES I AM! Every day we hear about this more and more and more and more...

...the political deception never ends. And the money keeps flowing out of our pockets.

It must really piss off the Secret Service that they have to defend and protect these clowns in office...if I were them, I would HATE my job.

(From an anonymous blogger)

The reason we are not coming out of this recession is we have lost our industrial base that made us the powerful country we once were.

In WWII when Japan attacked us, they were far superior in military might that we were. They did not fear our military, they feared our industrial capability to build an endless supply of weapons and field troops endlessly. ("I fear we have only awoken a sleeping giant.") Back then we had the edge because our economy was based on goods and services.

Since the 1980's when Ronald Reagan removed tariffs on foreign goods, businesses have begun moving overseas to take advantage of cheap labor, and remove the crippling greed of the labor unions, which when first organized, were a necessary entity in order to protect the worker from the robber barons.

Now, our economy is completely service based, leaving it volatile - we are at that "tipping point" of an economy having less income than goods are available.

It is impossible for government to not be involved in private business because we are all part of the government - we are all part of the community. Greed spawned this recession just as it did the Great Depression. But as an individual, I have no power to stop Wall Street from running companies into the ground to increase profit for rich share holders and insuring CEO bonuses.

It is obvious that the argument that we should leave big business alone to keep the best and brightest almost seems invalid. Obviously, big business is rewarding bad business practices more than they are the good. What happened to honest corporate governance?

Health care is out of control because of greed. Banks are out of control because of greed. Oil prices are out of control because of greed. Political power, profits and salaries rule this country...and soon (because of our national debt), China could.

Out of work? Thank Obama for wasting all our time on "healthcare reform" instead of creating jobs - then buy yourself a gun.

For the sake of argument, let's say the national average for rent on a one-bedroom apartment is $750 a month.

Then add another $750 a month for:
* car payment
* car insurance (State mandated)
* heat (electric, gas, or oil)
* electricity
* water
* phone (land-line or cell)
* (cable - not optional, necessary in many areas)

Average unemployment benefits doesn't even cover this!

Now, how much is left over for food, gas, and other basic necessities? Do you like eating macaroni and cheese 7 days a week?

If you're single, unmarried, live alone, and don't have children, you won't qualify for food stamps either. Do you still have a few dollars in the bank for a rainy day? Better not have much or you're also disqualified for food stamps.

Forget about having any healthcare (even Obama-care). COBRA won't help, it's nearly impossible to afford it if you also want to eat.

And if you're not yet 65, forget about Medicaid or Medicare too (unless you're a single mom with lots of kids).

Never take away someone's hope, it might be all they have.

Are you without friends, co-workers and familiy members?

If you're over 40 years old (but not yet 65), you probably won't get a job; but you can't get Social Security either. Forget a pension too, at least until you're 55, but most likely with a 50% reduction of what you would normally receive.

No room-mate or someone to help share the monthly expenses? You're in deep trouble - close to living on the street. Start looking at the homeless shelters...

Unless you're strong and fit and have the wherewithal to survive on the mean streets, you'll probably succumb to a long miserable death by starvation, exposure to the elements, or by brutal violence.

If you end up homeless, you'll also have to face the humiliation and ridicule as well...it's a cruel world out there and teen-agers may laugh and throw garbage at you.

See > "To Be A Homeless Man"
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog5.php/2010/05/09/to-be-a-homeless-man

...or consider buying a gun while you are still enjoying the comfort of a roof over your head. Your local Wal-Mart might help you.

No one lives forever anyway...have a cigarette and a glass of wine, and then write your final note...remembering to thank Obama focusing on jobs.

Then just pretend you're going to sleep, but you'll never wake up to know the difference.

The Jobless and Suicide - Direct Connections

In situations where continuing to live is intolerable, some people use suicide as a means of escape.

The most common reasons for suicide are:

#1- an underlying mental disorder which include depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, alcoholism and drug abuse.

#2 - Financial difficulties or other undesirable situations play a significant role.

Over one million people commit suicide every year, making it the tenth-leading cause of death worldwide.

External circumstances, such as a traumatic event, may trigger suicide but it does not seem to be an independent cause. Thus suicides are more likely to occur during periods of socio-economic, family and individual crisis.

Socio-economic factors such as unemployment, poverty, homelessness, and discrimination may trigger suicidal thoughts. Poverty may not be a direct cause but it can increase the risk of suicide, as it is a major risk group for depression.

In the United States 52% of suicides involve the use of firearms.

According to 2005 data, suicides in the U.S. outnumber homicides by nearly 2 to 1 and ranks as the 11th leading cause of death in the country.

The ones being passed over for jobs

In the United States, the rate of suicide is increasing for the first time in a decade. The increase in the overall suicide rate between 1999 and 2005 has been due primarily to an increase in suicides among whites aged 40-64, with white middle-aged women experiencing the largest annual increase.

In the USA, Caucasians are nearly 2.5 times more likely to kill themselves than are African Americans or Hispanics.

The Moral Issue - And why many think it's OK

In most forms of Christianity, suicide is considered a sin. In Catholic doctrine, the argument against suicide is based on the commandment "Thou shalt not kill". However, it is believed that mental illness or grave fear of suffering diminishes the responsibility of the one completing suicide.

Counter-arguments include the following: that the sixth commandment is more accurately translated as "thou shalt not murder", not necessarily applying to the self; that taking one's own life no more violates God's law than does curing a disease; and that a number of suicides by followers of God are recorded in the Bible with no dire condemnation.

Some see suicide as a legitimate matter of personal choice, and maintain that no one should be forced to suffer against their will, particularly from conditions such as incurable disease, mental illness, and old age - and have no possibility of improvement.

Pro and Cons for Suicide

Most people don't really want to die...suicide is not chosen; it happens when pain exceeds your resources for coping with that pain (be it physical, mental, or emotional).

So if you experience circumstances beyond your control, and you have exhausted every possible solution to your dilemma without coming to a suitable conclusion to your circumstances, you may choose to escape the inevitable.

Pros:

* Those who choose suicide and have no family, spouse, or children that rely upon them (and so therefore, are not emotionally beholden to anyone), will not have to worry about hurting loved ones - nobody will grieve your demise. At the very most, you will only be a nuisance to government employees (who, unlike you, still have a job) who will have to remove your decaying body and burying your remains in some pauper's grave.

(You're not a rock star or celebrity - you're just another anonymous statistic. It's a fact, so get over it. Most people, as mere individuals, aren't really that important to humankind. Michael Jackson was a rock star and a celebrity, but he didn't do a thing to get Neil Armstrong to the moon.)

* Rather than succumb to an illness that may incapacitate you (such as a stroke, coma, etc.) suicide offers you a way to get your affairs in order, and allows you to chose the time, place, and setting of your final moments (as opposed to being found on a toilet seat after a fatal heart attack). This enables you to pass away with more dignity.

* While you are still relatively physically able, and are still living in familiar and comfortable surroundings, you will be more at peace with yourself - knowing you have accomplished your final goal in your own manner - and having had the opportunity of leaving your final thoughts and saying your good-byes - as opposed to those in a fatal auto accident, who don't have that opportunity.

Cons:

The last time you "sleep", you won't have dreams (but you won't have nightmares either). Also, you will never be able to watch your favorite TV shows anymore; nor will you ever know if December 2012 really is the end of the world.

NOW: Clean your house, shower and dress in your Sunday best, have a drink for courage, write down your final thoughts, thank Obama for "healthcare reform", say one last prayer to God, and bravely squeeze the trigger...

Related posts:

Like the last Great Depression, Unemployment and Foreclosures, Might See Rise in Suicides
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/10/unemployment-foreclosures-might-see-rise

The Great Depression: Then and Now - Is There a Difference?
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/08/the-great-depression-then-and-now-is-the

The New Poor - Millions of Unemployed Face Years Without Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/21/the-new-poor-millions-of-unemployed-face

Government Jobs (Bigger Government) Drive Employment Numbers
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/01/government-jobs-bigger-government-drive

Actual Unemployment in 2010 - Recession Worse than Reported
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/04/actual-unemployment-in-january-2010-rece

Deep Recession Shows No Sign of Letting Up - Maybe Getting Worse
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/24/deep-recession-shows-no-sign-of-letting

Largest U.S. Labor Union: AFL-CIO says Jobs Won't Return
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/01/07/largest-u-s-labor-union-afl-cio-says-job

More Bad News for the Unemployed in 2010 - and Beyond
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/23/more-bad-news-for-the-unemployed-in-2010

Almost 1 out of 5 People are Out of Work in the U.S.A.
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2009/12/31/unemployment-december-2009-new-release

FOX News Wages War on Unemployed - Thinks They're Lazy
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

Extended Unemployment Benefits in 2010 - Fully Explained
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/02/16/extended-unemployment-benefits-in-2010

Being 50 to 65 years old is like being between a rock and a hard place in 2010 - Too old to be hired for work, but too young to qualify for a pension or Social Security.

The big FIVE-O is about where most potential workers are left on the sidelines. When we were younger we weren't chosen for the team if we weren't big enough, quick enough, tall enough, or old enough.

We couldn't WAIT to be older so we could hang out with the older kids and do all those cool things they could...like stay up late and watch those scary movies.

We used to lie about our ages to be older so we could buy beer or drink in a bar, or to get a certain job, or to drive a car, or to join the Army.

We never used to be old enough to do many things, but now it seems people think we're too old to do anything...as if they themselves will never be 50 to 65 years old. And what happens to those people who think so - when suddenly they themselves are also "old"?

Let me explain to them.

Aging is as natural as birth and death, but younger people consider it a handicap. Maybe it is - I myself am a little slower than I was when I was 21; but I also know that I'm not going to live forever anymore either. Age does have some advantages...like acquiring more common sense.

In most cultures outside the U.S., the elderly are respected and taken care of by their families and society as a whole. Here, they're tossed to the curb like an old beer can.

I remember very well when I used to be 21 and considered myself somewhat "cool" for my time. I once drove a sports car, customized a motorcycle, played guitar a little, smoked pot around a campfire on the beach in California (when it was once permitted - the campfire, not the pot - that wasn't permitted in those days).

But when I was doing all those things (enjoying my youth), I never outwardly disrespected older people; though I must admit, because of my immaturity and lack of understanding, I did privately feel some ridicule for them.

It's impossible to explain these things to younger people...but when they get older themselves and gain more life experiences, they ALL eventually understand this point of view (if they are lucky to live long enough).

It's all part of nature's life-cycle. You're born, you get a driver's license, you get laid, you get a hangover, you get a job and work like a dog all your life. Then you get insulted for being old, before you finally slow down, get sick, and die. It happens to all of us. It will happen to your wife or husband, to your mom and dad, to your brother and sister, and it will happen to you...no matter how young, cool, and pretty you are at this moment in time. You will get old and you will be discriminated against.

Some of the older people get angry at the younger generation for harboring those feelings of age discrimination - - - but me, I get angry at the employers (the enablers) who have the economic power to perpetuate this discrimination on the elderly. Profits and productivity is always the argument. 30-year-old managers are going to hire 21-year-old punks to boss around - not older people with more experience than them!

If you're 21 today, plan on facing this same dilemma when you too are older...trust me, I know, it will.

And some of the younger people are angry at the older generation, as if we're in their way, slowing down progress, or somehow denying them of something. To them I say,"Look in a mirror. One day you will be me."

Now I have to go...I'm old and tired and have to take my daily nap.

See all my well-researched posts on the current unemployment situation:

The New Poor - Millions of Unemployed Face Years Without Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/21/the-new-poor-millions-of-unemployed-face

The Jobless and Suicides in 2010
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/07/out-of-work-buy-a-shotgun

Government Jobs (Bigger Government) Drive Employment Numbers
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/01/government-jobs-bigger-government-drive

Actual Unemployment in 2010 - Recession Worse than Reported
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/04/actual-unemployment-in-january-2010-rece

Deep Recession Shows No Sign of Letting Up - Maybe Getting Worse
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/24/deep-recession-shows-no-sign-of-letting

Largest U.S. Labor Union: AFL-CIO says Jobs Won't Return
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/01/07/largest-u-s-labor-union-afl-cio-says-job

More Bad News for the Unemployed in 2010 - and Beyond
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/23/more-bad-news-for-the-unemployed-in-2010

Almost 1 out of 5 People are Out of Work in the U.S.A.
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2009/12/31/unemployment-december-2009-new-release

FOX News Wages War on Unemployed - Thinks They're Lazy
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

Tea Party, Fox News, and Conservatives Attack the Unemployed
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/04/tea-party-gets-in-wrong-on-unemployment

Extended Unemployment Benefits in 2010 - Fully Explained
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/02/16/extended-unemployment-benefits-in-2010

What "Bozo" will Fox News hire next?

(Click image to enlarge)

Did Fox News commentator Sir Stuart Varney ever see the TV show "Dirty Jobs"?

If he did, then he would know that every treasure he prizes, every creature comfort he enjoys, and the very food he eats every day, was all made possible by common people who proudly worked hard to make sure he lived a civilized lifestyle.

Sir Stuart Varney, who hails from England (and says he's an expert on class-warfare), should appreciate the unemployed Americans because, through no fault of their own, they lost their jobs - - - jobs that these commoners once took great pride in to satisfy Sir Stuart Varney's every need, want, and desire.

For Sir Stuart Varney to say on Fox News (seen around the world) "Cut off their unemployment benefits and maybe they'll go find a job" is totally despicable; and Sir Stuart Varney should himself be fired from Fox News; then he can stand in line with the other miserable poor people who also lost jobs.

The only difference being...the pompous Sir Stuart Varney will have deserved to lose his job.

I tried writing to Sir Stuart Varney, but I recieved no response...maybe he was too cowardly and ashamed to reply.

Full story here:
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

Despite the current excessive Democratic government spending, the conservatives would do well to stay away from one bill - The Jobs Bill. They should tread VERY lightly with any proposition of eliminating (or reducing in any way) extended unemployment benefits for a VERY good reason.

With real unemployment near 17% and well over 11 million people on state and federal unemployment rolls, many Republicans, conservatives, and Tea Party members might vote for Democrats (no matter how much they're hated) just to keep their benefits. It's called survival!

See all my well-researched posts on the current unemployment:

The New Poor - Millions of Unemployed Face Years Without Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/21/the-new-poor-millions-of-unemployed-face

Government Jobs (Bigger Government) Drive Employment Numbers
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/01/government-jobs-bigger-government-drive

Actual Unemployment in 2010 - Recession Worse than Reported
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/04/actual-unemployment-in-january-2010-rece

Deep Recession Shows No Sign of Letting Up - Maybe Getting Worse
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/24/deep-recession-shows-no-sign-of-letting

Largest U.S. Labor Union: AFL-CIO says Jobs Won't Return
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/01/07/largest-u-s-labor-union-afl-cio-says-job

More Bad News for the Unemployed in 2010 - and Beyond
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/23/more-bad-news-for-the-unemployed-in-2010

Almost 1 out of 5 People are Out of Work in the U.S.A.
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2009/12/31/unemployment-december-2009-new-release

FOX News Wages War on Unemployed - Thinks They're Lazy
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

Tea Party, Fox News, and Conservatives Attack the Unemployed
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/04/tea-party-gets-in-wrong-on-unemployment

Extended Unemployment Benefits in 2010 - Fully Explained
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/02/16/extended-unemployment-benefits-in-2010

Of all the bills he took a notable stand on, the Job Bills was the ONE bill he should have stayed away from. He chose the wrong soap box from which to preach his gospel of finally finding Jesus. Why did he choose a bill that directly affects the unemployed, the ones who are suffering the most during this recession?

All the current conservative posturing should have started in 2008 with the massive Troubled Asset Relief Program, better known as TARP (and the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act) costing hundreds of billions of dollars...before the Democrats got their fingers into the laughable $780 billion "Stimulus Package".

When Congress voted for TARP, why was it that the Federal Reserve (populated with ex-employees of Goldman Sachs) payoff Goldman Sachs (and other banks including foreign ones) 100% on the dollar for credit default swaps made with AIG...who in turn (after making huge profits and getting multi-million bonuses and giving away "golden parachutes) paid back the TARP, continued to raise interest rates (even though the banks borrowed from the Fed at .05%), and foreclosed on homeowners...those mostly with ARM loans?

And why didn't the TARP agreement specify this - forcing ALL the banks to renegotiate all the ARM loans into conventional 30-year fixed rate mortgages at say, 6%? This could have drastically improved the housing market and economy, instead of evicting people to allow the homes to be vacant and vandalized, and allowed to slip into disrepair --- further lowering the surrounding home values?

And AIG, like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - A BIG BLACK HOLE - is still begging for more taxpayer money for their government-backed "loans".

The current Jobs Bill might have been MUCH smaller today (which compared to current spending, is barely a blip on the radar as it is). And Senator Bunning would not have had to make such a "bold" and "brave" stand on government spending.

Just a thought.

It's not odd that I can support the Tea Party, Fox News, and the Conservatives...and then criticize them too. No one person or organization is perfect.

The unemployed are NOT the root of today's budget woes, or the cause of the waste and fraud in Washington's spending. Just as during the Great Depression, the unemployed are the victims of poor government policy and of financial institutional risks. (Google "The Money Masters" for more on this argument).

Most of the unemployed are not lazy kids living with mom and dad. I would guess that most are parents trying to raise their children, and using unemployment benefits as their only source of income (which is below the poverty level).

And I would also guess that they aren't lazy; that most held full-time jobs and worked hard all their life.

To attack these people (whose political associations have no bearing on their present predicament), is not only morally wrong, but naively miss-guided.

I understand the frustration of out-of-control government spending, but shoving unemployed people on the streets will not solve your problems...but probably will only make them worse.

Why was the focus re-directed from government ineptness and corruption, and passed to the unemployed? Because of a failure for the citizens to correct the real problems? Were unemployed people an easier target to blame for this country's ills?

The Jobs Bill was insanely MEAGER compared to what we give to charities and in foreign aide alone. Why diss your neighbors, brothers and sisters, and your own countrymen for all the woes of the country today? Don't you think most would rather have a job?

I believe they would. There's something to said about the pride one feels for a job well done; the pride of getting up and going to work - to survive. Accepting "hand-outs" is shameful for most, but an economic reality. Food and shelter comes before pride - surviving to live and be proud another day.

A job occupies their time during the day; sitting in front of a TV watching re-runs get very old, very fast. Co-workers are a pleasure to be around for most people - experiencing a comradery that can't be found at home. Time spent on the job offers diversity during the day, and new experiences. A beer after work with your co-workers can't be matched to standing in line to collect an unemployment check.

The unemployed know hardships that they have no control over, and feel the desperation and shame and helplessness that someone WITH a job could never understand. They are not PROUD to be out of work, and sometimes end their life because they are.

The unemployed wants better for themselves and/or their families, not less. But the unemployed must make due with what they have...no shopping, movies, or restaurants.

Yet the people who are out of work must now contend with ridicule as well...

I'm conservative but very concerned about the conservative's (and Fox News) attack on the unemployed (which by the way, could be up to 20% of the population!)

All the Liberal blogs says the Tea Party supports Senator Bunning (which they do), as does Fox News. But consider this:

$780 billion went for TARP to help the banks, but they still foreclosed on mortgages and raised interest rates. (Too many people have already fallen behind in their mortgage payments and lost their home. The banks didn't want to renegotiate their adjustable-rate mortgages to conventional 30-year loans at 5% or 6% - - - and keeping the property occupied and maintained, while upholding the housing market prices. Instead, those homes were abandoned, vandalized, and fell in disrepair. Now some of those evicted families are living in their cars.)

The Stimulus Bill (now projected to be $821 billion) went for waste and fraud (much going to jobs in foreign countries).

$180 billion went to AIG (who wants another $10 billion more) to pay domestic AND foreign banks 100% on the dollar for risky credit-default-swaps.

Hundreds of billions more went to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to back government guaranteed loans to those nice banks.

Not to mention billions of dollars more are going to the IMF and to foreign aide. So what's the fuss if we help our own brothers and sisters?

...yet the Tea Party, the conservatives, and Fox News wants to hail Bunning as a hero for blocking as measly $10 billion to help the unemployed? What are they thinking? Using the down-trodden as the scapegoat for the liberal's wasteful spending???

I would guess that 60% of the unemployed are either Republican, conservative, or a Tea Party member. I don't see how punishing them would help their cause. Even if a small percentage of those collecting unemployment benefits were supposedly "lazy", how can that possibly compare to "cash-for-clunkers", cash-for-caulkers", cap-and-trade, Obama-care, TARP, Stimulus Package, Omnibus Bill, or the national debt?

As a conservative with alliance to the Tea Party, I believe that attacking the unemployed only hurts the TPP's cause. Bunning could have used any other spending bill to make his case, but he picked the smallest one (and targeting the weakest people) to make his point.

The jobs bill (to help American citizens out of work) is paultry compared to the government excess and waste in Washington.

Senator Bunning is on his way out, and could care less about the Tea Party or the Progressives running our government...he is a cranky and senile old guy that the Tea Party does NOT want.

Unemployed Republicans, conservatives, and a Tea Party members can still vote!

On my blog, I question Fox News' attacks on the unemployed as well.

Many people are desperate. Stop the attacks on the unemployed, but give them a job instead. We'll ALL be better off.

Related posts on the current unemployment situation:

Unemployment - Foreclosures, Might See Rise in Suicides
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/10/unemployment-foreclosures-might-see-rise

The Great Depression: Then and Now - Is There a Difference?
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/08/the-great-depression-then-and-now-is-the

The New Poor - Millions of Unemployed Face Years Without Jobs
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/21/the-new-poor-millions-of-unemployed-face

The Jobless and Suicides in 2010
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/03/07/out-of-work-buy-a-shotgun

Government Jobs (Bigger Government) Drive Employment Numbers
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/01/government-jobs-bigger-government-drive

Actual Unemployment in 2010 - Recession Worse than Reported
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/04/actual-unemployment-in-january-2010-rece

Deep Recession Shows No Sign of Letting Up - Maybe Getting Worse
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/24/deep-recession-shows-no-sign-of-letting

Largest U.S. Labor Union: AFL-CIO says Jobs Won't Return
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/01/07/largest-u-s-labor-union-afl-cio-says-job

More Bad News for the Unemployed in 2010 - and Beyond
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/02/23/more-bad-news-for-the-unemployed-in-2010

Almost 1 out of 5 People are Out of Work in the U.S.A.
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2009/12/31/unemployment-december-2009-new-release

FOX News Wages War on Unemployed - Thinks They're Lazy
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog1.php/2010/03/02/real-reason-why-extended-unemployment-be

Extended Unemployment Benefits in 2010 - Fully Explained
http://tobuds.com/blogs/blog3.php/2010/02/16/extended-unemployment-benefits-in-2010