About Me

Name: Jax Hawk
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

REDISTIBUTION OF TAX PAYERS HARD EARNED MONEY BY OBAMA

Wednesday, October 07, 2009

ROBBING PETER TO PAY PAUL IN DETROIT

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

Apparently Ronald Reagan had it right when he said" if it stops moving subsidize it". The "IT" he was refering to was not the it that is being subsidizes(aka given), but  money given to the non-earners from hard working tax payers.

When you compare the billions given to Wall Street bankers with the amount that is now given in Detroiy,15 million dollars, it is insignificant. But when you realize that 99% of the recipients are minorities who will vote for Democrats in 2010, and the bankers will not only vote but contribute large sums of money to re-elect those who gave them the money. You can understand that this is just another example of reditribution of wealth only to those who support Obama and the Democrats!

The stimulus bill was sold to the public as a "shovel ready program" that would put people back to work, but with the unemployment hovering around 10%  it appears that all the stimulus is doing is reassuring that Obama and his Congressional sycophants get re-elected!

The assistance in Detroit, announced by the media today, is from a 15 million dollar pile of money coming to Detroit, Michigan as part of the stimulus package.
I believe in charity for the homeless in the form of food kitchens and temporary housing for the really homeless, but it should come from the private sector via the Churches and Community organizations like San Francisco's Glide Memorial Center, which has been doing GODS work for decades. Not from the tax payers!

The thing that is going on Detroit has two fatal flaws that make it a non-starter before it began. One is that if you give money in the form of cash or check how do you know that the people whom you are giving it to will spend it on the intended purpose for which you gave the money?
The second is the final qualification sentence in the list of things that woul qualify a person or family for  the assistance. "That they must be able to maintain housing after receiving assistance. How can a homeless person do this?And by the wat how will those giving away the money determine that those who apply as homeless have bee residents of Detroit for at least six months. Will they evn try?
Also, a resident must make 50 percent less than the median area income, which would be less than $24,850 for single Detroit residents and less than $35,500 for a family of four.

All this is accomplishing is redistributing the wealth as we know Obama has promised he will do.
But there is a brewing problem with this seemingly good deed. The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center recently disclosed that close to half of all households will pay no income tax this year. Some will pay less than zero -- that is, they'll get money from those of us who do pay taxes.


The Tax Policy Center adds that this year the average income-tax rate for the bottom 40 percent of earners will be negative and that their cash subsidy will equal 10 percent of the total amount the income tax brings in, thanks to the Earned Income Tax Credit and President Obama's "Making Work Pay" program.

The view from the top also shows the lopsidedness of the tax system. The top 20 percent of earners makes about 53 percent of the income in America but pays 91 percent of the income tax. The top 1 percent pays 36 percent. The IRS says the bottom half of earners pays less than 3 percent.
This presents a serious problem because government has such vast powers to dispense favors. As Shaw suggested, people who pay no tax will not hesitate to vote for politicians who promise big spending. Why not? They will get stuff without having to pay for it. Source:PatriotPost.com


And to the  insult of the tax payers. The City of Chicago was visited today by the U.S.  Attorney General and the Secretary of Education to meet with officials of the Chicago leadership. The meeting was held because of the national outrage from the TV pictures of an honor high school student being beaten to death with large boards.Why did they not visit Los Angeles or New York where crime is rampant?
Why now? I believe that the Obama administration lost the bid to bring the Olympics to Chicago which would have brought millions to Chicago politicians. So now they are going to get money from Obama that will be handed over in the name of reducing the killing of teens, but will in fact be used to buy continued support for Democrats and Obama.
The amount is unspecified as is what they will use it for. Clinton when he was president sent millions to major cities including Chicago to establish midnight basket ball. But the plan failed to stop the killing!

Not one of the participants in the "meeting" mentioned increasing law enforcement and severe punishment for offenders. This is a dirty thought for Liberals who believe, as they have for decades, if you throw money at problems they will fade away. As Thomas Sowell says; ".the problem with the political left is that they seem to have no sense of the tragedy of the human condition. All problems seem to them to be due to other people not being as wise or as noble as they are".
So unknown millions will go to Chicago and it will still have a crime rate among the youth unless the law enforcement people begin a war against the gangs!.

Don't hold your breath until that happens, as long as the Daley machine and the Obama machine believe in spending other peoples money will stop crime and solve all of societies problems!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

OBAMA CAN'T BLAME BUSH FOR THE IOC DECISION

Saturday, October 03, 2009



Joined by his wife Michelle, Mr Obama gave an impassioned presentation to the IOC committee, the first by a US president on behalf of a city bidding for the games, in which he hailed Chicago as "the most American of American cities".

But the speeches by both the Obamas were like a they were on he campaign trail to the White House. Apparently what the IOC wanted to hear was how Chicago and the Obamas were going to handle the "nuts and blots" of pulling off the Olympics in Chicago. Obama nor Michelle talke about how the mechanics of running a successful Olympics would be acomplished.
I guess they thought BHO's star power and Michelle's charm would bring home the Olympics just as their pitch on the campaign trail of Hope and Change fooled Americans. But they were eliminated on the first ballot!!

After spending the last nine months traveling around the World apologizing for Americas faults and past misdeads. How could any right thinking man belive that all he.,Michelle and Oprah had to do was show up in Copenhagen, and the IOC would swoon like too many voters did last Novemeber, and give them the prize?!
Rio de Janeiro got the prize! They will  host the 2016 Olympic Games There had been widespread expectations in the US that the president's star power would prove all-conquering, so there was shockin the leftist media and Chicago, when Chicago was the first city to be eliminated.

Instead of being able to celebrate another Obama success, the White House was forced to fend off accusations that the president had taken a political body blow.
Obamas' appearance in Copenhagen was the culmination of several weeks of campaigning on Chicago's behalf.

As well as personally calling heads of state or lobbying them at the United Nations and G20 summits, the president recorded five pro-Chicago video messages, set up a special office at the White House and hosted Olympic athletes on the lawn, even fencing with a toy light sabre.

Civil rights leader Reverend Jesse Jackson, who has long been based in Chicago, said he surprised by the city's loss.

"I'm shocked and saddened. We were emotionally prepared for it," he said, noting that the United States had sent its "A team" of President Obama and his wife Michelle, whose home base is Chicago, to push the city's bid. I guess the "A" team struck out!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

CHICAGO SMOKE FILLED ROOM POITICS COMES TO WASHINGTON

Monday, November 10, 2008

 


Despite the fact that President elect Obama vowed to carry out an open and transparent Campaign. Now that he has been elected he appears to have reverted to the back room deals of Chicago politics!
Lost amid all of the jubilation of the Obama victory was the announcement by the Obama transition team that it had set up a separate transition program beyond the one that is paid for by the American taxpayer. Called the "Obama/Biden Transition Project," it is a 501(c)4 tax-exempt organization, with no limits on the contributions it can receive and no requirements to divulge the names of individuals or organizations that give it money. source: The American Spectator

It is believed in expert political circles that this is the first time in Our history that an incoming President has employed such deception in fund raising after he is elected.
Many believe that the nonprofit may also serve as a haven for Obama supporters and campaign loyalists who for one reason or another can't be employed by the Administration or in the federal government. "There are some people who have been with the Obama campaign from the beginning who are clearly political liabilities or who won't be able to qualify for a job,apparently because they can't get a security clearance". source: unidentified member of the Transition Team
At any rate, Obama campaign officials say there is no intention of shutting down the 501(c) 4 Project after the transition is over. I guess this is part of Obama's "Spreading The Wealth Around"!

It appears to this blogger that Obama and company are establishing a slush fund that can be freely and anonymously contributed to by people or groups who get favors from the new President. Not unlike some notorious foreign countries!
When Chicago elected Harold Washington as Mayor of Chicago in 1983.What ensued was called "Beirut on the Lake or Council Wars". By 1989 Richard M Daley was elected mayor. He is now destined to supplant his father, Richard J Daley (1955-1976) as the longest serving mayor in Chicago's history. Simply put, Chicago is Daley's town and has been for over 50 years. There have been eleven presidents elected in that span, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 43 and now Obama. Presidents come and go, the Machine lives on.

Do not believe it when democrats tell you Obama is a Hyde Park Liberal politician. He is cut from whole cloth of Chicago politics, as eveidenced by his slection of "pit bull" Ram Emanuel as Chief of Staff.A Mayor Daly operative for years.

Since the Democrats have been out of power for eight years, with the last Democratic President having left office in an ethical cloud of Biblical proportions (Monica Lewinsky, the perjury conviction, the last minute pardons for assorted lowlifes etc. etc.). Not so good for a city yearning for federal handouts. Even worse, during the Clinton administration various Clintonistas had been absorbed into the Daley Machine and vice versa. Some common names are Bill Daley and Rahm Emanuel.

So much for OPEN GOVERNMENT!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

RADICALS HOPE TO WRECK REPUBLICANS AS THEY DID DEMS. IN 1968

Tuesday, September 02, 2008




Forty years ago in Chicago the anti-war protesters ruined the Democratic convention with their anarchist riots, and with it went any chance to win the Presidential election the following November.
The radical left, unlike the Obfuscating Lame Stream Media has a good memory about this event.
So good that were their efforts, they are trying to wreak havoc on the Republicans in Minnesota, as they did in Chicago, with hopes of the same results!

At least 250 people were arrested outside the Republican Convention last night as police used tear gas and pepper spray to disperse rioters attacking property and blocking roads in protest at the war in Iraq. They had come in their thousands – grandmothers, veterans, young families and even disgruntled Republicans bearing banners and peace flags. And for the most part, the demonstrations passed off peacefully. But once the main antiwar march had finished, splinter groups embarked on a violent rampage, smashing windows, slashing car tyres, throwing bottles and even attacking Republican delegates attending the nearby Xcel Centre. Many of those involved identified themselves to reporters as anarchists. These protesters, some clad in black, wreaked havoc by damaging property and starting at least one fire. The Minnesota National Guard sent 150 soldiers to help police tackle the riots, which flared as delegates were assembling in St. Paul for the four-day meeting

Terry Butts, a former Alabama Supreme Court justice who is a convention delegate, was on a bus taking delegates to the arena when a brick thrown through a window sprayed glass on him and two others. Mr Butts said he wasn’t hurt. “It just left us a little shaken,” he said. “It was sort of a frightening moment because it could have been a bomb or a Molotov cocktail." Five people were arrested for lighting a rubbish bin on fire and pushing it into a police car, St. Paul police spokesman Tom Walsh said. Of those arrested, 119 faced possible felony charges. At least four journalists were among those detained, including Associated Press photographer Matt Rourke and Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now!, a nationally syndicated public radio and TV news program. source: Hannah Strange's article and London Times

Chicago ‘68 doomed the candidacy of Hubert Humphrey and set off shock waves of reform. For the Left, Chicago ‘68 hastened the demise of SDS and intensified the revolutionary fervor that would spawn street violence and bombings. For the media, Chicago ‘68 created a deep suspicion of the state and its minions. For Chicago, Chicago ‘68 weakened support for the last of the big-city bosses and fanned the flames of political reform.
This blog is to remind those who forgot that Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn, both friends and associates of Barrack Obama,founded the Weathermen.
Weatherman, known colloquially as the Weathermen and later the Weather Underground Organization, was an American radical left organization founded in 1969 by leaders and members who split from the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). The group organized a riot in Chicago in 1969 and bombed buildings in the 1970s.

They took their name from the lyric "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows," from the Bob Dylan song Subterranean Homesick Blues. They also used this lyric as the title of a position paper they distributed at an SDS convention in Chicago on June 18, 1969, as part of a special edition of New Left Notes. The Weathermen were initially part of the Revolutionary Youth Movement (RYM) within the SDS, splitting from the RYM's Maoists by claiming there was no time to build a vanguard party and that revolutionary war against the United States government and the capitalist system should begin immediately. Their founding document called for the establishment of a "white fighting force" to be allied with the "Black Liberation Movement" and other "anti-colonial" movements[1] to achieve "the destruction of US imperialism and achieve a classless world: world communism."source:Wikapedia

The Weathermen are responsible for multiple terrorist acts, including the bombings of the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon, Ft. Dix and office buildings in various U.S. cities. In fact, the group claimed credit for 12 terrorist bombings between 1970 and 1974 alone; and while no innocent civilians were killed:


But I doubt their protest and resort to violence will help elect their "savior". Too many people are tired of violence in the streets by people who preach Peace and Love, but resort to violence outside the boundaries of Democratic reform!!

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

WHEN DOES A CHANGED POSITION REVEAL A PREVIOUS LIE?

Obama is a Ward Politician Masked as Presidential Caliber








Today's media-driven politics has eclipsed machine-driven politics, such as were prevalent in Chicago, Boston and New York in the 60's. This was obvious because It became increasingly difficult to get into homes and apartments to talk about candidates. High-rises were tough if not impossible to campaign, and other parts of cities had become too dangerous to walk around in for hours at a time.
Because people didn’t want to answer their doors, political candidate became increasing dependent on TV, radio, direct mail, phone-banking,and robocalls.

These new campaign methods cost a lot more money than patronage workers, who were themselves in decline,because of anti-patronage court rulings. Instead of a large army of ward heelers dragging people to the polls, candidates need a small army of donors to pay for commercials. Money replaced bodies as the currency of big city politics. This new system became known as “pinstripe patronage,” because the key to winning was not rewarding voters with jobs but rewarding donors with government contracts.All the more reason why this Country needs term limits for all elected positions. If it is good for the President. Why not for Senators and Congress persons?


E. J. Dionne, Jr., of the Washington Post, wrote about Obama's Change(aka), transition in a 1999 column after Daley was reelected. Dionne wrote about a young Barack Obama, who artfully explained how the new pinstripe patronage worked: a politician rewards the law firms, developers, and brokerage houses with contracts, and in return they pay for the new ad campaigns necessary for reelection. “They do well, and you get a $5 million to $10 million war chest,” Obama told Dionne. It was a classic Obamaism: superficially critical of some unseemly aspect of the political process without necessarily forswearing the practice itself. Obama was learning that one of the greatest skills a politician can possess is candor about the dirty work it takes to get and stay elected.

In a perfect example of the "Change" Obama's willing to make in his own positions to satisfy his thirst for power. During his U.S.Senate campaign, Mr. Obama joined in a “Walk for Israel” rally along Lake Michigan on Israel Solidarity Day. The Crowns and other Jewish leaders raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for him. Several days before the primary in 2004, some of his Jewish supporters took offense that Mr. Obama had not taken the opportunity on a campaign questionnaire to denounce Yasir Arafat, the leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization, or to strongly support Israel’s building of a security fence.
But in a sign of how far Mr. Obama had come in his coalition-building, friends from the American Israel Political Action Committee, the national pro-Israel lobbying group, helped him rush out a response to smooth over the flap.
In an e-mail message, Mr. Obama blamed a staff member for the oversight, and expressed the hope that “none of this has raised any questions on your part regarding my fundamental commitment to Israel’s security.” Mr.Ali Abunimah has written of running into the candidate around that time and has said that Mr. Obama told him: “I’m sorry I haven’t said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race. I’m hoping that when things calm down I can be more upfront.”

Abunimah emphasizes that no partition is ever going to be acceptable to a majority of Israelis and Palestinians (e.g., few Palestinians in the occupied territories would accept Israeli annexation of even the largest Israeli settlement villages
The Obama camp has denied Mr. Abunimah’s account. Mr. Khalidi, who is now the director of the Middle East Institute at Columbia University, said, “I’m unhappy about the positions he’s taken, but I can’t say I’m terribly disappointed.” He added: “People think he’s a saint. He’s not. He’s a politician.”


In another example of Obama tepid patriotism, was his reaction to the dastardly attack 9/11/01. It was luke warm at best. He conclude with words that betray his internationalist philosophy as apposed to a true patriot like McCain.
"We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.
We will have to make sure, despite our rage, that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad. We will have to be unwavering in opposing bigotry or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle Eastern descent. Finally, we will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered children across the globe—children not just in the Middle East, but also in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and within our own shores".source: The New Yorker

You will notice that there is not one word about religious zealotry or fanaticism in his explanation of why this attack happened!

Like many politicians, Obama is paradoxical. He is by nature an incrementalist, yet he has laid out an ambitious first-term agenda (energy independence, universal health care, withdrawal from Iraq). He campaigns on reforming a broken political process, yet he has always played politics by the rules as they exist, not as he would like them to exist. He runs as an outsider, but he has succeeded by mastering the inside game. He is ideologically a man of the left, but at times he has been genuinely deferential to core philosophical insights of the Right!

Another sign of Obama's deceptiveness is the way he has had a unwillingness to condemn the corruption scandals in Illinois, ensnaring Daley and Blagojevich, both of whom he supported for reelection. Do people want this man to be our president?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »