BestOfBid.com

How do I find federal/state agencies that offer preschool-3rd grade/early childhood options for employees? Trying to locate employment opportunities for teachers with federal/state agencies (contract or direct hire with reasonable salary/benefits) for early childhood/preschool through 3rd grade teachers in the Washington, DC - Maryland suburbs.

Help with two job offers: Accenture (federal sector) or for state government? Each job would take my career in a different career path one more toward contracting and the other towards budgeting. Both of the jobs appear to be pretty stable but both provide opportunities. Just not sure if working for the state would provide with the same network and opportunities as the contracting firm. I guess what I am asking is what is it like working for Accenture in the Federal non consulting sector? Does anyone have any experience with this company and its culture?

As a small business, how can I have the opportunity to compete with larger companies on Federal projects? I manage a small business in Wisconsin. With all of the federal stimulus money that is going into construction projects across the state, I was wondering if there was some certification process that can help us get an edge in bidding for contracts. I have read that the Federal government needs to have 23% of its contracts go to small business. We are not minority or women owned, just small. Are there any programs that we can get certified for the help us gain an edge?

Which is false about relations between federal government and private contractors? a. outside contractors work with fewer rules than gov employees b. gov often uses contractors because it does not have enough employees to get its work done c. private contracting prevents cost overrun d. all contractors who work for gov must be equal opportunity employers

Can I stay in or near Los Angeles for cheap? I have a good feeling that I may have the career opportunity to participate in a professional music workshop in Los Angeles for 4 weeks come July this year. I can't pass this up, but the problem is that I live in NJ and I work a 9 to 5. Although the 9 to 5 is a contracting job, not permanent. I don't know anyone off hand in Los Angeles or the Orange County area that I could stay with. I would fly out there, and take public transportation to and from the workshop everyday. I'm wondering if anyone might have any ideas of what type of temporary living options are there to live in LA for 4 weeks, for as cheap as possible? Just have to eat, sleep, and stay safe. And by the way, I'm not rich by any means, so if anyone might know of any type of public or federal stipend I might be able to apply for something like this, it would be a HUGE help!!!!! Thanks for your answers

Digi filed a suit in a federal district court against Sull.Did Sull breach his fiduciary duty to Digi? Digi Ltd designed software to enable its clients to sell their products or services over the internet. Sull served as a Digi vice president until 2000, when he became president. Sull was dissatisfied that his compensation did not include stock in Digi, but he was unable to negotiate a deal that included equity that is, shares of ownership in the company. In May, Sull solicited ASR Corp.’s business for Digi while he investigated employment opportunities with ASR for himself. When ASR would not include an “equity component” in a job offer, Sull refused to negotiate further on Digi.s behalf. A few months later, Sull began to form his own firm to compete with Digi, conducting organizational and marketing activities on Digi’s time, including soliciting ASR’s business. Sull had all e-mail pertaining to the new firm deleted from Digi’s computers in August, and the resigned. ASR signed a contract with Sull’s new firm and paid it $400k for work through Oct 01. Pls. Explain?

Liberals are followers and Bush is a leader. Its better to be right than popular? President Bush's Accomplishments Abortion & Traditional Values 1. Banned Partial Birth Abortion — by far the most significant roll-back of abortion on demand since Roe v. Wade. 2. Reversed Clinton's move to strike Reagan's anti-abortion Mexico Policy. 3. By Executive Order (EO), reversed Clinton's policy of not requiring parental consent for abortions under the Medical Privacy Act. 4. By EO, prohibited federal funds for international family planning groups that provide abortions and related services. 5. Upheld the ban on abortions at military hospitals. 6. Made $33 million available for abstinence education programs in 2004. 7. Supports the Defense of Marriage Act — and a Constitutional amendment saying marriage is between one man and one woman. 8. Requires states to conduct criminal background checks on prospective foster and adoptive parents. 9. Requires districts to let students transfer out of dangerous schools. 10. Requires schools to have a zero-tolerance policy for classroom disruption (reintroducing discipline into classrooms). 11. Signed the Teacher Protection Act, which protects teachers from lawsuits related to student discipline. 12. Expanded the role of faith-based and community organizations in after-school programs. Budget, Taxes & Economy 1. Signed two income tax cuts, one of which was the largest dollar-value tax cut in world history. 2. Supports permanent elimination of the death tax. 3. Turned around an inherited economy that was in recession, and deeply shocked as a result of the 9/11 attacks. 4. Is seeking legislation to amend the Constitution to give the president line-item veto authority. 5. In process of permanently eliminating IRS marriage penalty. 6. Increased small business incentives to expand and to hire new people. 7. Initiated discussion on privatizing Social Security and individual investment accounts. 8. Killed Clinton's "ergonomic" rules that OSHA was about to implement; rules would have shut down every home business in America. 9. Passed tough new laws to hold corporate criminals to account as a result of corporate scandals. 10. Reduced taxes on dividends and capital gains. 11. Signed trade promotion authority. 12. Reduced and is working to ultimately eliminate the estate tax for family farms and ranches. 13. Fight Europe's ban on importing biotech crops from the United States. 14. Exempt food from unilateral trade sanctions and embargoes. 15. Provided $20 million to states to help people with disabilities work from home. 16. Created a fund to encourage technologies that help the disabled. 17. Increased the annual contribution limit on Education IRA's from $500 to $2,000 per child. 18. Make permanent the $5,000 adoption tax credit and provide $1 billion over five years to increase the credit to $10,000. 19. Grant a complete tax exemption for prepaid or college tuition savings plans. 20. Reduced H1B visas from a high of 195,000 per year to 66,000 per year. Character & Conduct as President 1. Changed the tone in the White House, restoring HONOR and DIGNITY to the presidency. 2. Has reintroduced the mention of God and faith into public discourse. 3. Handled himself with enormous courage, dignity, grace, determination, and leadership in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 hijackings and anthrax attacks. He almost single-handedly held this country together during those searing days: Just three days after the attacks, in his address at the National Cathedral, the President reassured the nation when he said: "War has been waged against us by stealth and deceit and murder. This nation is peaceful, but fierce when stirred to anger. This conflict was begun on the timing and terms of others. It will end in a way, and at an hour, of our choosing." On Friday, September 14, 2001, President Bush visited Ground Zero. Standing on a crushed and burned fire engine atop the smoldering pile at Ground Zero, he put his arm around a retired firefighter who had volunteered to help, and began speaking to the crowd. Rescue workers shouted that they could not hear him. Someone handed him a small American flag and bullhorn. The President spontaneously shouted: "I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon." The crowd roared with cheers and chants of "USA! USA! USA!" Then he raised that American flag and rallied a nation. Education & Employment Training 1. Signed the No Child Left Behind Act, delivering the most dramatic education reforms in a generation (challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations). The very liberal California Teachers union is currently running radio ads against the accountability provisions of this Act. 2. Announced "Jobs for the 21st Century," a comprehensive plan to better prepare workers for jobs in the new millennium by strengthening post-secondary education and job training, and by improving high school education. 3. Is working to provide vouchers to low-income students in persistently failing schools to help with costs of attending private schools. (Blocked in the Senate.) 4. Requires annual reading and math tests in grades three through eight. 5. Requires states to participate in the National Assessment of Education Progress, or an equivalent program, to establish a national benchmark for academic performance. 6. Requires school-by-school accountability report cards. 7. Established a $2.4 billion fund to help states implement teacher accountability systems. 8. Increased funding for the Troops-to-Teachers program, which recruits former military personnel to become teachers. Environment & Energy 1. Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty. 2. Submitted a comprehensive Energy Plan (awaits Congressional action). The plan works to develop cleaner technology, produce more natural gas here at home, make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy, improve national grid, etc. 3. Established a $10 million grant program to promote private conservation initiatives. 4. Significantly eased field-testing controls of genetically engineered crops. 5. Changed parts of the Forestry Management Act to allow necessary cleanup of the national forests in order to reduce fire danger. 6. Part of national forests cleanup: Restricted judicial challenges (based on the Endangered Species Act and other challenges), and removed the need for an Environmental Impact Statement before removing fuels/logging to reduce fire danger. 7. Killed Clinton's CO2 rules that were choking off all of the electricity surplus to California. 8. Provided matching grants for state programs that help private landowners protect rare species. Defense & Foreign Policy 1. Successfully executed two wars in the aftermath of 9/11/01: Afghanistan and Iraq. 50 million people who had lived under tyrannical regimes now live in freedom. 2. Saddam Hussein is now in prison. His two murderous sons are dead. All but a handful of the regime's senior members were killed or captured. 3. Leader by leader and member by member, al Maida is being hunted down in dozens of countries around the world. Of the senior al Qaeda leaders, operational managers, and key facilitators the U.S. Government has been tracking, nearly two-thirds have been taken into custody or killed. The detentions or deaths of senior al Qaeda leaders, including Khalid Shaykh Muhammad, the mastermind of 9/11, and Muhammad Atef, Osama bin Laden's second-in-command until his death in late 2001, have been important in the War on Terror. 4. Disarmed Libya of its chemical, nuclear and biological WMD's without bribes or bloodshed. 5. Continues to execute the War On Terror, getting worldwide cooperation to track funds/terrorists. Has cut off much of the terrorists' funding, and captured or killed many key leaders of the al Qaeda network. 6. Initiated a comprehensive review of our military, which was completed just prior to 9/11/01, and which accurately reported that ASYMMETRICAL WARFARE capabilities were critical in the 21st Century. 7. Killed the old US/Soviet Union ABM Treaty that was preventing the U.S. from deploying our ABM defenses. 8. Has been one of the strongest, if not THE strongest friend Israel has ever hand in the U.S. presidency. 9. Part of the coalition for an Israeli/Palestinian "Roadmap to Peace," along with Great Britain, Russia and the EU. 10. Pushed through THREE raises for our military. Increased military pay by more than $1 billion a year. 11. Signed the LARGEST nuclear arms reduction in world history with Russia. 12. Started withdrawing our troops from Bosnia, and has announced withdrawal of our troops from Germany and the Korean DMZ. 13. Prohibited putting U.S. troops under U.N. command. 14. Paid back UN dues only in return for reforms and reduction of U.S. share of the costs. 15. Earmarked at least 20 percent of the Defense procurement budget for next-generation weaponry. 16. Increased defense research and development spending by at least $20 billion from fiscal 2002 to 2006. 17. Ordered a comprehensive review of military weapons and strategy. 18. Ordered a review of overseas deployments. 19. Ordered renovation of military housing. The military has already upgraded about 10 percent of its inventory and expects to modernize 76,000 additional homes this year. 20. Is working to tighten restrictions on military-technology exports. 21. Brought back our EP-3 intel plane and crew from China without any bribes or bloodshed. Globalization & Internationalism 1. Challenged the United Nations to live up to their responsibilities and not become another League of Nations (in other words, showed the UN to be completely irrelevant). 2. Killed U.S. involvement in the International Criminal Court. 3. Told the United Nations we weren't interested in their plans for gun control (i.e., the International Ban on Small Arms Trafficking Treaty).* 4. The only President since the founding of the UN to essentially tell that organization it is irrelevant. He said: "The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the authority of the United Nations, and a threat to peace. Iraq has answered a decade of UN demands with a decade of defiance. All the world now faces a test, and the United Nations a difficult and defining moment. Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced, or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding, or will it be irrelevant?" We all know the outcome and the answer. 5. Told the Congress and the world, "America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country." Government Reform 1. Improved government efficiency by putting hundreds of thousands of jobs put up for bid. This weakens public-sector unions and cuts undeserved pay raises. 2. Initiated review of all federal agencies with the goal of eliminating federal jobs (completed September 2003) in an effort to reduce the size of the federal government while increasing private sector jobs. 3. Led the most extensive reorganization the Federal bureaucracy in over 50 years: After 9/11, condensed 20+ overlapping agencies and their intelligence sectors into one agency, the Department of Homeland Security.* 4. Ordered each agency to draft a five-year plan to restructure itself, with fewer managers. 5. Converted federal service contracts to performance-based contracts wherever possible so that the contractor has measurable performance goals. Health 1. Strengthen the National Health Service Corps to put more physicians in the neediest areas, and make its scholarship funds tax-free. 2. Double the research budget of the National Institutes of Health. 3. Signed Medicare Reform, which includes: A 10-year privatization option. Prescription drug benefits: Prior to this reform, Medicare paid for extended hospital stays for ulcer surgery, for example, at a cost of about $28,000 per patient. Yet Medicare would not pay for the drugs that eliminate the cause of most ulcers, drugs that cost about $500 a year. Now, drug coverage under Medicare will allow seniors to replace more expensive surgeries and hospitalizations with less expensive prescription medicine. More health care choices: As President Bush stated, "…when seniors have the ability to make choices, health care plans within Medicare will have to compete for their business by offering higher quality service [at lower cost]. For the seniors of America, more choices and more control will mean better health care. These are the kinds of health care options we give to the members of Congress and federal employees. What's good for members of Congress is also good for seniors. New Health Savings Accounts: Effective January 1, 2004, Americans can set aside up to $4,500 every year, tax free, to save for medical expenses. Depending on your tax bracket, that means you'll save between 10 to 35 percent on any costs covered by money in your account. Every year, the money not spent would stay in the account and gain interest tax-free, just like an IRA. These accounts will be good for small business owners, and employees. More businesses can focus on covering workers for major medical problems, such as hospitalization for an injury or illness. At the same time, employees and their families will use these accounts to cover doctors visits, or lab tests, or other smaller costs. Some employers will contribute to employee health accounts. This will help more American families get the health care they need at the price they can afford. Homeland Security, Border Enforcement & Immigration 1. *See Government Reform above. Under President Bush's leadership, America has made an unprecedented commitment to homeland security. 2. Has CONSTRUCTION in process on the first 10 ABM silos in Alaska so that America will have a defense against North Korean nukes. Has ordered national and theater ballistic missile defenses to be deployed by 2004. 3. Announced a 9.7% increase in government-wide homeland security funding in his FY 2005 budget, nearly tripling the FY 2001 levels (excluding the Department of Defense and Project BioShield). 4. Before DHS was created, there were inspectors from three different agencies of the Federal Government and Border Patrol officers protecting our borders. Through DHS, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) now consolidates all border activities into a single agency to create "one face at the border." This not only better secures the borders of the United States, but it also eliminates many of the inefficiencies that occurred under the old system. With over 18,000 CBP inspectors and 11,000 Border Patrol agents, CBP has 29,000 uniformed officers on our borders. 5. The Border Patrol is continuing installation of monitoring devices along the borders to detect illegal activity. 6. Launched Operation Tarmac to investigate businesses and workers in the secure areas of domestic airports and ensure immigration law compliance. Since 9/11, DHS has audited 3,640 businesses, examined 259,037 employee records, arrested 1,030 unauthorized workers, and participated in the criminal indictment of 774 individuals. 7. Since September 11, 2001, the Coast Guard has conducted more than 124,000 port security patrols, 13,000 air patrols, boarded more than 92,000 vessels, interdicted over 14,000 individuals attempting to enter the United States illegally, and created and maintained more than 90 Maritime Security Zones. 8. Announced the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), an internet-based system that is improving America's ability to track and monitor foreign students and exchange visitors. Over 870,000 students are registered in SEVIS. Of 285 completed field investigations, 71 aliens were arrested. 9. This week, the US-VISIT program began to digitally collect biometric identifiers to record the entry and exit of aliens who travel into the U.S on a visa. Together with the standard information, this new program will confirm compliance with visa and immigration policies. 10. Eliminated INS bureaucratic redundancies and lack of accountability. 11. Split the Immigration and Naturalization Service into two agencies: one to protect the border and interior, the other to deal with naturalization. 12. Signed the workplace verification bill to prevent hiring of illegal aliens. 13. Established a six-month deadline for processing immigration applications. 14. Information regarding nearly 100% of all containerized cargo is carefully screened by DHS before it arrives in the United States. Higher risk shipments are physically inspected for terrorist weapons and contraband prior to being released from the port of entry. Advanced technologies are being deployed to identify warning signs of chemical, biological, or radiological attacks. Since September 11, 2001, hundreds of thousands of first responders across America have been trained to recognize and respond to the effects of a WMD attack. Judiciary & Tort Reform 1. Is urging federal liability reform to eliminate frivolous lawsuits. 2. Killed the liberal ABA's unconstitutional role in vetting federal judges. The Senate is supposed to advise and consent, not the ABA. 3. Is nominating strong, conservative judges to the judiciary. 4. Supports class action reform bill which limits lawyer fees so that more settlement money goes to victims. Politics 1. His leadership resulted in Republican gains in the House and Senate, solidifying Republican control of both houses of Congress and the presidency. 2. Signed an EO enforcing the Supreme Court's Beck decision regarding union dues being used for political campaigns against individual's wishes. Second Amendment 1. Ordered Attorney General Ashcroft to formally notify the Supreme Court that the OFFICIAL U.S. government position on the 2nd Amendment is that it supports INDIVIDUAL rights to own firearms, and is NOT a Leftist-imagined "collective" right. 2. Signed TWO bills into law that arm our pilots with handguns in the cockpit. 3. Currently pushing for full immunity from lawsuits for our national gun manufacturers. 4. *See Globalization & Internationalism. Traditional Values, Compassion & Volunteerism 1. Endorses and promotes "The Responsibility Era." President Bush often speaks of the necessity of personal responsibility and civic volunteerism. He said, "In a compassionate society, people respect one another and take responsibility for the decisions they make in life. My hope is to change the culture from one that has said, if it feels good, do it; if you've got a problem, blame somebody else — to one in which every single American understands that he or she is responsible for the decisions that you make; you're responsible for loving your children with all your heart and all your soul; you're responsible for being involved with the quality of the education of your children; you're responsible for making sure the community in which you live is safe; you're responsible for loving your neighbor, just like you would like to be loved yourself." 2. Started the USA Freedom Corps, the most comprehensive clearinghouse of volunteer opportunities ever offered. For the first time in history, Americans can enter geographic information about where they want to get involved, such as state or zip code, as well as areas of interest ranging from education to the environment, and they can access volunteer opportunities offered by more than 50,000 organizations across the country and around the world. 3. Established the The White House Office and the Centers for the Faith-Based and Community Initiative — located in seven Federal agencies. The faith-based initiative supports the essential work of these important organizations. The goal is to make sure that grassroots leaders can compete on an equal footing for federal dollars, receive greater private support, and face fewer bureaucratic barriers. Work focuses on at-risk youth, ex-offenders, the homeless and hungry, substance abusers, those with HIV/AIDS, and welfare-to-work families. 4. The White House released a guidebook fully describing the Administration's belief that faith-based groups have a Constitutionally-protected right to maintain their religious identity through hiring — even when Federal funds are involved. 5. Issued an EO implementing the Supreme Court's Olmstead ruling, which requires moving disabled people from institutions to community-based facilities when possible. 6. Increased funding for low-interest loan programs to help people with disabilities purchase devices to assist them. 7. Revised the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Section 8 rent subsidies to disabled people, permitting them to use up to a year's worth of vouchers to finance down payments on homes. HUD has started pilot programs in 11 states. 8. Committed US funds to purchase medicine for millions of men, women and children now suffering with AIDS in Africa. 9. Heeding the words of our own Declaration of Independence, the president laid out the non-negotiable demands of human dignity for all people everywhere. On January 29, 2002, he said, "No nation owns these aspirations, and no nation is exempt from them. We have no intention of imposing our culture. But America will always stand firm for the non-negotiable demands of human dignity." As stated by the President, they are a virtual manifesto of conservative principles: Equal Justice Freedom of Speech Limited Government Power Private Property Rights Religious Tolerance Respect for Women Rule of Law

Is this why the libs hate BUSH?

Please Read. What does it mean to you with the current state of the union and world? Were we warned? Farewell Address Farewell Radio and Television Address to the American People by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, January 17, 1961. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My fellow Americans: Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor. This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen. Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all. Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation. My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years. In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together. II We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment. III Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad. Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology-global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle-with liberty at stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment. Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small,there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research-these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel. But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs-balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage-balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between action of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration. The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only. IV A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peace time, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea. Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations. This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence-economic, political, even spiritual-is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades. In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government. Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been over shadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers. The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite. It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system-ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society. V Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we-you and I, and our government-must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow. VI Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect. Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield. Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose difference, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war-as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years-I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight. Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road. VII So-in this my last good night to you as your President-I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find somethings worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future. You and I-my fellow citizens-need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great goals. To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing aspiration: We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.

Who owns your cell phone data, you or the phone carrier?

What do you think of THIS???? Print view Billions at stake in border contract By Dave Montgomery McClatchy Newspapers PREV 1 of 3 NEXT Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff sees a mix of technology and manpower. WASHINGTON — The Bush administration is expected next month to choose an industry consortium to erect a high-tech security shield along the U.S. borders, launching one of the federal government's most ambitious public-works projects in years. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) calls the proposed Secure Border Initiative Net (SBInet) the "most comprehensive effort in the nation's history" to gain control of more than 6,000 miles of border with Mexico and Canada, and 2,000 miles of coastline. SBInet is a centerpiece of President Bush's efforts to fortify the U.S.-Mexico border at a time Congress is locked in a struggle to revise the nation's immigration laws. Administration officials say they intend to proceed with the security net regardless of the outcome of the debate over immigration legislation. The multibillion-dollar undertaking has ignited a contract battle among industry teams headed by four leading defense companies — Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon — and Ericsson, the Swedish-based telecommunications giant with U.S. headquarters in Plano, Texas. Competitors diverse Collectively, the teams are composed of nearly 40 companies in more than 15 states, a diverse lineup that includes global engineering firms, niche industries adept at biometric identification or surveillance, and aerospace corporations better known for churning out warplanes, tanks and missiles. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, a branch of the DHS, is expected to announce a winner by Sept. 30. As envisioned by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, SBInet would marry industry expertise with the 42,000-employee Customs and Border Protection to create a wall of technology, manpower and infrastructure in the next six years. The initial cost is projected at $2.5 billion, but the price could be much higher. The shield is a dominant component of the Secure Border Initiative that Chertoff announced in November to stem the flow of illegal immigrants. More than 1.2 million illegal immigrants were arrested in 2005, nearly all on the southern border. Although Deputy Homeland Security Secretary Michael Jackson told industry officials the project is "not about simply buying gizmos," much of the attention has focused on the potential mix of technology. Most of the proposals include state-of-the-art sensors, mounted cameras, unmanned aerial vehicles, radar and other surveillance hardware. Calls for toughening the border have intensified with the approach of the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the recent alleged terrorist bomb plot in Britain. But the project has come under heightened scrutiny on Capitol Hill after a congressional report last month blasted DHS procurement polices. The bipartisan report, released by the House Committee on Government Reform, identified $34.3 billion worth of DHS contracts marred by significant overcharges, wasteful spending or mismanagement. The troubled projects include a largely ineffective camera-surveillance system along the Mexican and Canadian borders. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., complained that SBInet could be exposed to the same problems, contending the DHS is giving industry too much latitude in determining how the system should be tailored. "That's not governing," he said. "It's utter incompetence, and it's going to cost the taxpayers billions." From the bidders' vantage point, SBInet could create thousands of jobs and illustrate the defense industry's expanding transition into homeland security. Tools of war — such as radar and satellite surveillance — easily can be redirected into the campaign to guard the home front, industry officials say. "We see it as an increasing market," said John Douglass, president and chief executive officer of the Aerospace Industries Association. "Many of the technologies that make you a successful aerospace contractor would also make you a successful homeland-security contractor." Several of the team members started preparing for the project more than two years ago, when the DHS was considering a since-abandoned border initiative called America's Shield. Team representatives spent months on the border, and several bidders set up remote border-area test sites to evaluate equipment. Nearly 60 potential bidders expressed interest in the project before the DHS winnowed the field to the five rival teams. Universities in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona are aligned with several of the teams, reflecting academia's growing expertise in homeland security and border demographics. Bidders made oral presentations in the past two weeks and have until Monday to update their proposals. While SBInet bristles with opportunity, the winning team will face immense obstacles in trying to create a leakproof "virtual wall" traversing rugged desert terrain in the south and mountainous, wooded landscape in the north. The challenges probably will include property-rights disputes and environmental issues. Sensors and cameras have been operating along the borders for years; the SBInet team will be charged with building a system tying all the pieces together. In addition to technology, the industry team will provide contract personnel for non-law-enforcement jobs and train government agents to adapt to the new system. Sensors popular item In January, Jackson urged industry officials to be innovative without straying "onto the wacky edge of creativity." Most proposals call for a network of thousands of sensors that would detect movement, sound and, in some cases, odor. The sensor then would flash an alarm on a computerized map in a command-and-control center, where an operator would train a long-range mounted camera on the site to determine whether an animal or a human intruder tripped the alarm. If necessary, agents would be dispatched. Several, if not all, of the teams would augment the protection with unmanned surveillance aircraft and, in some cases, high-altitude surveillance balloons 'alberto" this is a REALITY that IS going to happen!!!! Get USED TO IT!!!!!! DEPORT ALL ILLEGALS>>>>>>>>>> SUPPORT HR 4437!!!!!!!!! Hasta la bye bye!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why wont the news media tell you the rest of the story on HR 6? Taxing "Big Oil" isnt the only part.. section 2, title II, section 204 and we actually page 10 under section 204, item C. And I will read this, will find this stunning that it is actually in print. That transfers item C, line 4, page 10: A lessee shall not be eligible to obtain any economic benefit of any covered lease or any other lease. So President Clinton's team had negotiated bad leases, and now our friends are saying that those bad leases must be stopped. We simply need to stop them. We don't need to unravel them. We don't need to go through the thorny process of making it right for both sides as we unravel. We simply are going to punish you by not allowing you to derive any economic benefit from this type of installation. I will tell you, that undermines the full faith and credit of the United States. If we cannot depend on the word of the United States, then what do we have? I would draw parallels to things that other countries have done. In Venezuela, Hugo Chavez in 2001 raised the royalty rates from 1 percent to 16 percent just like that. Now, I will tell you as a business guy, if you know that a cost is going to be 1 percent or 16 percent, it is sort of irrelevant, but you must know that the cost is steady. When he raised those rates just at a single point with no ability to redesign these types of infrastructures, then he severely limited the interest of people to invest in that country, and certainly [Page: H782] GPO's PDFthat is exactly what is happening. Foreign firms are already curtailing their investments in that country. So in Venezuela we see that there is an attempt to change existing contracts, very similar to the way that we changed yesterday on the floor of this House of Representatives, and it has affected the desire of people to invest in Venezuela. In Bolivia we have the same thing. The Bolivian government threatened to expel oil companies from that country in 2006 if they did not agree to new government terms on existing contracts. What has happened? I think you could forecast what has happened. What is done is that foreign investors are now beginning to reconsider whether or not they will actually be a part of the Bolivian economy or not. This is the thing that all shareholders, they will live with any certainty in life, but they will not live with uncertainty. And when we begin to change the contracts, they begin to pull their investments out and go to places where certainty is more of a potential. In Russia we have seen the same thing. Companies such as Shell, Exxon, BP have had valid oil and gas leases in Russia for years. President Putin had a number of government agencies threaten to pull these leases for a number of suspect reasons. By threatening to pull these leases, Shell was forced to give up assets that were worth billions of dollars. So we see in Russia this attempt to maneuver contracts, to manipulate contracts much as what we did yesterday, and the effects are very bad. Long term, Russia will not have people who are willing to come and invest in that country. In 2001, I had the opportunity to go as a company; my wife and I had a small company that dealt in oil and gas, repairs of oil wells. Russia was looking for such capability. So in 2001, I went with a team of people who did various different projects. We were the ones who did down hole repairs on oil wells. They took me, they showed me files of maybe 6,000 or 8,000 wells that were simple to correct, yet they in their technology in 2001 did not have access to even the basics that my father had seen here in the United States in the early 1950s when he was working in the same industry. My father retired from Exxon; his whole life was work. So when I went back, I showed him the videos of the equipment that was in Russia in 2001. He said, ``Son, in 1950 we were more advanced than what we are seeing here.'' When countries are unwilling to allow people to have stable returns, it doesn't have to be high returns, low returns, but there must be stability and there must be predictability. When countries do not allow that, there will be no investments. And so here Russia was with over 6,000 wells asking me in 2001 to come and fix because they did not have anyone that was capable of fixing them. I determined that the environment was very, very unsettling in Russia, so we actually opted not to become a part of the team that went there. There was a company that was about 10 times our size located in Abilene, Texas. They did go. That was about maybe a $50 million company, maybe a $100 million company. Within 2 years, they were selling everything at bankruptcy because the Russians, as you can predict, said, ``No. These assets are going to belong to us.'' So this contracting problem that was attempted to be cured yesterday in legislation I think is going to be, instead of a fix, is going to cause prices to be higher at the pump, investments to be less, and at the end of the day we are going to wonder if maybe we did not empower a bunch of enthusiastic amateurs to go around and make commitments on behalf of the Federal Government. We shall see. I wish my friends well. I would say that I am not the only one who wonder about the contracts. Just day before yesterday the Washington Post had an editorial which declared that these elements that are included in the bill, the ones that begin to undo the contracts that we voted on yesterday and pushed by the majority in this House, the Washington Post declared those solutions to be ones that Russia and Bolivia would be proud of.

What are the top 5 promises Obama has broken already? Obama’s Top Five Broken Promises By Phil Kerpen Director of Policy, Americans for Prosperity Promise #5: Sunlight Before Signing What he said: “Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.” (BarackObama.com campaign Web site) What he did: Obama signed the Lily Ledbetter bill, the SCHIP/cigarette tax hike, and the stimulus bill all with far less than a five-day waiting period that he promised–and continues to promise–on his campaign Web site. Promise #4: Lobbyist Revolving Door What he said: “No political appointees in an Obama-Biden administration will be permitted to work on regulations or contracts directly and substantially related to their prior employer for two years. And no political appointee will be able to lobby the executive branch after leaving government service during the remainder of the administration.” (BarackObama.com campaign Web site) What he did: Obama appointed Goldman Sachs lobbyists Mark Patterson chief of staff at the Treasury Department, where he directly oversees his former employer, a recipient of $10 billion of taxpayer funds from the TARP. Obama also appointed Raytheon lobbyist William Lynn to be an undersecretary of Defense. Promise #3: No Tax Hikes on the Poor What he said first: “I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.” (September 12, 2008, Dover, N.H.) What he did first: By signing H.R. 2 into law, Obama happily signed onto the idea that smokers should pay for a $35 billion expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Plan (SCHIP). Cigarette taxes are going up 61 cents a pack starting April 1. Obama signed this bill knowing that the majority of smokers in the United States are working poor, and one in four lives below the federal poverty line. What he said next: “If your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.” (February 24th, 2009, Address to a Joint Session of Congress) What he did next: Ignored the already-hiked cigarette tax at the time of the statement and then this restated promise was broken just two days later, when the Obama’s budget proposal was released. His new budget raises 45 percent of its revenue from energy taxes that will be paid by everyone who fills a gas tank, pays an electric bill, or buys anything that was grown, shipped, or manufactured. Promise #2: Pork Barrel Earmark Reform What he said: “The system is broken. We can no longer accept a process that doles out earmarks based on a member of Congress’ seniority, rather than the merit of the project. We can no longer accept an earmarks process that has become so complicated to navigate that a municipality or non-profit group has to hire high-priced D.C. lobbyists to do it. And we can no longer accept an earmarks process in which many of the projects being funded fail to address the real needs of our country.” (Statement on Earmarks, March 10, 2008) What he is expected to do: The White House has signaled that it intends to sign the $410 billion Omnibus Appropriations bill, which according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, contains 8,570 earmarks totaling $7.7 billion, including dozens of wasteful pork-barrel projects. These earmarks were awarded based on seniority, not on merit, and were mostly the result of high-priced lobbying, precisely the process that Obama promised to end. When the omnibus reaches his desk later this week or next week, we’ll find out if this is one more broken promise. Promise #1: Big Government OK, so this one is more of a statement than a promise, but it’s the biggest whopper of all. What he said: “Not because I believe in bigger government — I don’t.” (February 24, 2009, Joint Address to Congress) What he did: Obama proposed a budget that is breathtaking in scope, a blueprint for the biggest permanent expansion of government in history right on the heels of a sweeping trillion dollar stimulus plan. The budget lays the foundation for a government takeover of the health care and energy sectors and dramatically increasing spending across the board, other than defense weapons programs. Spending as a percentage of the economy under this budget will reach the historic level of 27.7 percent this year. The deficit as a percent of the economy, at 12.3 percent, is set to be the biggest in the entire history of the country outside of the four peak years of World War II. Anyone who offers such a budget can only fairly be described as a believer in bigger government.

Do you agree that Wal mart wants the people to pay their taxes do you agree with these statements against WM? Wal-Mart's Business Plan "Let the American taxpayer fund our expenses" Wal-Mart is the second coming of the 1920 Robber Barons Wal-Mart Is The Ultimate Predator It has destroyed 100,000 small businesses, is breaking the union movement, has shipped massive amounts of jobs overseas, and has the news media in it's pocket. They are a version of the Pullman Company, but much more dangerous. Wal-Mart's Lives On It's Facade The image of "Sam Walton was just a good old boy" and "Wal-Mart is just a warehouse" is total propaganda. Wal-Mart is peddling the same nonsense the Bolsheviks/Communists used in talking the Russians into destroying their country. Wal-Mart wants you to believe that the company's efficiency, and size, are responsible for the low prices, but that is total BS. Wal-Mart's price advantage Third World Countries This girl makes $1.20 an hour. She replaced a Tennessee housewife that made $14.40 an hour, plus health insurance benefits. The housewife paid taxes which paid for local schools. You may be buying a $25 item for $20, but it is slowly wrecking your economy, and eventually you will be paying full price. Nike shoes pulled the identical scam, when it gave you $22 sneakers for $12, but as soon as they bankrupted their competitors, you were paying full price. A Look At Wal-Mart's Costs Wal-Mart does $260 billion in annual sales, and $180 billion of it is the cost of merchandise, and the rest is land, buildings, advertising, etc. Wal-Mart employs a staff of attorneys and accountants, whose sole function is to shift expenses to the Federal, State and local governments aka the tax payer. States pick up health insurance, unemployment taxes, real estate taxes, electrical, bond financing,etc. They will negotiate a special fee from their electric power supplier, and guess who picks up the tab. Outsourcing To The Third World Is A Giant Swindle Income Taxes Most of Wal-Mart's $180 billion in merchandise is not made in America. 60% is from out of the country. Their suppliers may be in America, but the merchandise, or major components, are made offshore. Not only does a supplier get cheaper labor, but there are income tax considerations and lax accounting practices. When you trans-ship a product through a 'No income tax country', you inflate the bill and pay less income tax in the US. The trans-shipping swindle Made in China Inc Tax Made in America Inc Tax Pair of sneakers' cost $ 6.00 Pair of sneakers' cost $25.00 Sold to Cayman Corp $40.00 Sold to US Store $50.00 $3.50 Sold to an US store $50.00 Sold to customer $75.00 $1.50 Sold to customer $75.00 $1.50 ======= ======= $1.50 $5.00 Their Federal Income tax on the sneakers is $1.50 instead of $5.00. Nike, which could be considered to be a "baby Wal-Mart", with it's Chinese factories, should show a profit of $9 billion on sales of $13 billion, but strangely it only shows a profit of $1.5 billion. China not only provides cheap prices, but enormous opportunities for scamming thanks to trans-shipping and no accounting regulations. The Consumer Swindle When the pair of sneakers leave China, it costs $4.00, but once it enters the 'Sea of Trans-Shipping', and the 'Land of Mystery Expenses', the cost skyrockets to $50.00. Employee Taxes Chinese worker American worker Base Wage $ 1.20 Base Wage $14.60 = $ 30,300 F.I.C.A. $ .91 = $ 1,800 Medicare $ .18 = $ 363 Fed Unemployment tax $ .73 = $ 350 State Unemployment tax $ .92 = $ 800 Paid Vacation $ $ 1,680 State Income tax $ 1,500 Health Ins $ $ 8,000 Annual cost $ 2,500 Annual cost $ 42,000 By outsourcing the production to China, you have avoided $5,250 in taxes that pay for schools, unemployment, Social Security, Medicare and public services. Typical Mayor Typical incentives Wal-Mart gets States and political hacks prostrate themselves to get Wal-Mart stores in their areas. They will forego 10 years of state income taxes, five years of property taxes, build the infrastructure (roads and power). Why will local politicians go along? A super center can cost $20,000,000, and the average skim is 10%. Whose family owns the land Wal-Mart builds on? You have the general contractor who hires favored subcontractors, and there is lots of room for ghost employees and service contracts. There is the always the next election. The same newspapers, that overlook Wal-Mart's predatory practices, can quickly destroy a political career. Governors Agree...... "What's good for Wal-Mart is good for my state". Wal-M

A new kind of politics? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0704060020apr06,1,1855420.story?coll=chi-news-hed&?track=sto-topstory MEXICANS IN CHICAGO: A NEW KIND OF POLITICS Influence on both sides of the border Activists' political power is rising in Chicago and their homeland, as they seek reforms through marches and money Advertisement By Antonio Olivo and Oscar Avila Tribune staff reporters April 6, 2007 To outsiders, the men and women gathered inside a sleepy West Side restaurant may have seemed unlikely power brokers: a janitor, a real estate agent and others hardly known outside their circuit of neighborhood dances and back-yard barbecues. Jose Luis Gutierrez, who plotted strategy with the group as a soccer match flickered on a nearby TV, was himself a wholesale grocer until last year. But Gutierrez is now a top aide to Gov. Rod Blagojevich, and he was joined at the table by leaders of Chicago-area Mexican immigrant clubs, the engines behind a new political movement that is making itself felt from Illinois to Michoacan. Gutierrez received smiling nods when he likened the political muscle of the region's 563,000 Mexican immigrants to the power of Irish-Americans in the 19th and 20th Centuries, who came to control the Chicago machine. In May, the strength of Mexicans will be on display when many of the region's 300 immigrant clubs -- known as "hometown associations" -- will help organize a march in downtown Chicago a year after their political coming-out party, demonstrations that flooded the Loop last spring and charged the national immigration debate. For decades Mexican hometown associations have functioned as social networks whose members pooled their money earned here to help build new schools or churches back in Mexico. But leaders in Chicago's largest immigrant group have a more ambitious worldview than their predecessors, even more than the ethnic blocs that preceded them decades ago. Some, like Gutierrez, wield growing influence in both countries. One morning, he's unveiling a blueprint for more immigrant services in Illinois as director of the state's Office of New Americans Policy and Advocacy. The next night, he's brainstorming with activists in his home state of Michoacan about a slate of candidates for Mexico's congress. An active role in Mexican politics might seem at odds with building political influence here. But Gutierrez and others say they form a budding new political consciousness among Mexican immigrants -- a "third nation" of sorts that transcends the border, advancing the community's cause on both sides. "The nation-state concept is changing," said Gutierrez, 46, who came to Chicago in 1986 and led one of the Midwest's largest federations of hometown associations. "You don't have to say, `I am Mexican,' or, `I am American.' You can be a good Mexican citizen and a good American citizen and not have that be a conflict of interest. Sovereignty is flexible." That concept worries some U.S. officials and scholars who see the dual loyalty as undermining the assimilation of Mexican immigrants. Irish, German and Polish immigrants eventually melded into Chicago's landscape, their ties to their native soil largely sentimental. But Mexican immigrants today are linked to their homeland like no group before, scholars say, connected by NAFTA, satellite TV, the Internet, cell phones and cheap non-stop flights. In Mexico, their power stems from the nearly $25 billion these immigrants send home every year, the country's second-highest source of income behind oil. Their political influence surfaces in places like Teloloapan, far up in the cactus-filled hills of the state of Guerrero, where a Chicago restaurateur helped build new roads and business. Grateful townspeople elected him mayor in a landslide. In the U.S., immigrants' power is driven by numbers and a growing deftness at the levers of this country's political machinery. That recently manifested itself in a fledgling political action committee called Mexicans for Political Progress, which raised $23,000 for Blagojevich's re-election and rallied volunteers to walk precincts during November's election. An unfolding movement Fabian Morales, a soft-spoken Realtor with a well-clipped mustache, stands at the center of the unfolding movement. He handled logistics for three massive immigration marches in Chicago last year -- including a four-day walk to suburban Batavia -- and co-founded Mexicans for Political Progress. After coming to Chicago in 1970, Morales helped launch one of the city's then-few hometown clubs, devoted to his tiny native village of Xonacatla, Guerrero. Back then, Xonacatla was without roads, potable water or electricity. It was a slow journey from other towns by foot or horseback, Morales said. The club members in Chicago resolved to change that. Collecting $50 to $100 at a time, Morales and others raised enough through barbecues and door-to-door soliciting to replace a house used for worship services with a towering marble church that rises from the green hillside. Morales has since helped develop CONFEMEX, an umbrella organization for most of the hometown clubs in the Midwest. Among other things, the group is a central voice in economic development in Mexico, representing an estimated $340 million in projects generated by U.S.-based hometown associations in the last five years, according to Mexican federal officials. "We want to focus on creating more jobs there so they don't have to think about emigrating," Morales said. The rising activity of hometown associations caught the eye of the Mexican government, which eventually created a "3-for-1" matching project, where federal, state and local governments split the cost of a new bridge or computer center with the U.S.-based groups. Those projects have given Mexican immigrants "a great moral authority" in their homeland, as well as political cachet, said Carlos Gonzalez, executive director of the Institute for Mexicans in the Exterior, or IME, a Mexican federal government agency that fosters stronger ties with expatriates. "During the 1970s, [Mexicans] called the people who left Mexico and acclimated to the U.S. 'pocho,' which, if you look in the dictionary, means 'spoiled fruit,' " Gonzalez said. "The change we've seen in the public perception of Mexicans in the exterior has been 180 degrees." In 2006, citizens abroad were allowed to vote in Mexican presidential elections for the first time. Leaders are also pushing for changes that would allow expatriates to vote in local elections and even hold elective offices while residing abroad. Recently, Gutierrez and others persuaded Michoacan to become the first state in Mexico to extend voting rights to expatriates. Their rationale: Almost half of those born in Michoacan, Zacatecas and several other Mexican states now live in the U.S. Timoteo "Alex" Manjarrez, 44, is among a small but growing number of Mexican immigrants making a bolder claim in their motherland. Arriving from his native town of Teloloapan, Guerrero, in 1980, Manjarrez spent 19 years in Chicago. The stocky, boyish-looking immigrant worked for years as a dishwasher at the Columbia Yacht Club and, eventually, became owner of three Mexican restaurants in the city. Fulfilling a desire shared by many immigrants, Manjarrez moved back to his native town in 1999 with enough money for his family to live comfortably. But the place he had longed for all those years was still frustratingly poor, despite the investments Manjarrez's hometown club made in new roads and other improvements. Manjarrez, who holds both Mexican and U.S. citizenship, settled in and quickly built a new health club and a hacienda-style restaurant named La Condesa, after the three he still owns in Chicago. In 2004, he ran for mayor of Teloloapan. With long-distance backing from his hometown club friends in Chicago, who sent money and telephoned friends and local officials on his behalf, Manjarrez won handily. 'The city that works' Since taking office, the man who sees Mayor Richard M. Daley as a political role model has pushed to remake Teloloapan into a Mexican version of "the city that works." The effort includes newly paved streets, a recreation center that replaces a local swamp known as "black waters," and a towering hotel being built privately by Manjarrez's family. Next to a new medical clinic, a donated Chicago ambulance sits in the parking lot. Its emblem has been painted over, but it serves as a reminder of the continued links Manjarrez has to his former city, where he maintains a home near Midway Airport, votes in U.S. elections and checks in on his businesses. Aurelio Santamaria Bahena, mayor of a town near Manjarrez's called Tlapehuala, labeled such changes "a blessing" for an area of Mexico dominated by crumbling lean-to houses and children in bare feet pulling bone-thin donkeys. But, as with other parts of the country where the immigrant handprint is deepening, the introduction of U.S.-style governance has also bred resentment. Local leaders of Manjarrez's own Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) are trying to drum him out of office, arguing he is too brash and condescending. The mayor counters the fight is about his efforts to take away "a plate of corruption that they've been able to eat from for years." The conflict was an uncomfortable backdrop during a recent PRD strategy meeting at a restaurant in Chilpancingo, Guerrero's capital. Headlines that morning featured a march against Manjarrez, orchestrated by his opponents. "People see you as an outsider," a worried Santamaria cautioned Manjarrez. "People don't think you see things as they are here." Manjarrez, wearing a black "La Condesa" windbreaker, patted his friend on the back and smiled. He had a media plan, one that might have made Daley proud. "We'll publish photos of the streets of Teloloapan before and after I came into office," Manjarrez said. "And, we'll ask the people: `Which would you prefer?' " That same week, Mexican immigrants from the U.S. and Canada met in Mexico City, as members of an advisory council created by the Mexican government. With a brash American style, they soon escalated their advice to demands, the members' voices echoing through the meeting hall. Morales, the Chicago Realtor, and about 100 other council members pushed Mexico to lobby the U.S. harder on immigration reform. They chastised their hosts for not creating more jobs. Buttonholing federal legislators in hallways, they reminded elected officials how much their districts relied on money sent from the U.S. They want 'results now' Gregorio Luke, a blond member of the council from Los Angeles partial to designer suits, observed that this kind of behavior wouldn't exist in a purely Mexican forum, where deference toward authority guides nearly all dialogue. "These people come here speaking Spanish, but they're negotiating as Americans," said Luke, a museum director who once oversaw cultural affairs at the Los Angeles Mexican Consulate. "They want to see results now." The meeting of the advisory council also illustrated the provocative overlap of Mexican and American political action. In addition to all-day strategy sessions on how to improve Mexico, council members brainstormed over late-night drinks on next moves in the fight for U.S. immigration reform. Many members had used their existing e-mail network to coordinate simultaneous demonstrations in Chicago, Los Angeles and other cities. Though not active participants in the U.S. immigrant movement, Mexican officials urged their compatriots to keep on fighting. "Let there be no barriers or walls between Mexicans here on the inside and the outside," former Mexican President Vicente Fox told the group, referring to a 2006 U.S. law that allows for a 700-mile fence to be built at the border. The audience stood and cheered. The idea that the Mexican government might be helping its nationals shape U.S. politics has raised red flags, both in the halls of academia and in the more volatile world of talk radio and the Internet. Robert Leiken, director of the immigration and national security program at the right-leaning Nixon Center in Washington, argued that binational activism among Mexican immigrants is bad for both countries. In the U.S., the meetings in Spanish and the often-passionate interest in Mexico's future hinder assimilation, he said. In Mexico, the relationship to hometown associations fosters an unhealthy economic dependence on U.S. remittances. "If I went out to Pilsen and spent some time with people from a hometown association, I'd think these are really cool people," Leiken said. But, "Standing back and looking at this from a social policy standpoint, I see some real problems." James McCann, a Purdue University political science professor, found that immigrants interested in Mexican affairs were more likely to participate in U.S. politics. He helped interview about 1,100 Mexican immigrants and found that hometown clubs promoted activism. "The conventional wisdom is that any transnational engagement is going to suck the oxygen out of your civic life in the States," McCann said. "But it seems that if you open a new avenue of expression in Mexico, that new avenue might pay some other dividends in the U.S." Some of those dividends went directly to the Blagojevich campaign last fall, when the governor found himself being serenaded by a trumpet-playing mariachi band inside the Hacienda Tecalitlan restaurant on the Near Northwest Side. Near a trickling courtyard fountain, Morales praised the governor in Spanish at the kickoff dinner for the Mexicans for Political Progress PAC. While Morales once raised money for his hometown with $1 tamales, the price here was as much as $500 a plate. "Let us demonstrate our political power by voting in the election, by voting for our friends interested in the prosperity of Mexicans. Friends like Gov. Rod Blagojevich!" Morales told the crowd. Blagojevich, who speaks a hint of Spanish, took the microphone and shouted: "Viva Chivas!" a reference to a popular Mexican soccer team. When the laughter and applause subsided, he switched to English and added: "By organizing, you are empowering a community. Your voice will be heard." The mood is darker in northwest suburban Carpentersville, where a growing Mexican community has rallied in large numbers in the face of a local backlash against undocumented immigrants. Last fall, about 3,000 Mexican immigrants and their supporters turned up outside Carpentersville's City Hall in an unexpected show of opposition to a proposed ordinance that would penalize landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and employers who hire them. The crowd was so riled a vote on the ordinance was postponed and has yet to be taken. The quick response came largely due to the hometown association representing the village of La Purisima, Michoacan, local activists said. The club turned to its telephone list of 400 families, said Salvador Balleno, the group's president. The turnout was a victory, but it has not deterred Carpentersville trustees from other proposals that would allow local police to trigger deportation proceedings against illegal immigrants and make English the village's official language. And as Balleno has struggled to register voters and rally volunteers for this month's village elections, even sympathetic politicians have seemed hesitant to link themselves too closely with the hometown association. Balleno now fears the village's hard-liners have the upper hand, intimidating some of the immigrants who protested last fall. "The [club] members know that if these people stay [in office] it is going to affect their kids," Balleno said, sounding anxious that an opportunity was slipping through his fingers. Jose Artemio Arreola, a key organizer of next month's march in Chicago, has been actively monitoring the battle in Carpentersville. He sees the activity there as part of a plan to create a political empire for Mexican immigrants, one linking hometown associations in Chicago and other cities to labor unions and Mexico's congress. His strategy includes moving back to his native state of Michoacan to run for congress there, something Arreola never imagined doing when he left a town overrun by poverty and ruled by local drug kingpins. He got his start in Chicago working in a plastics factory. Frustrated by the union representation there, he ran for shop steward and won. Unable to speak English, he relied on his bilingual co-workers to help him negotiate union contracts. He has since become a school janitor in Oak Park. The position pays little, but it has allowed Arreola to climb the ranks of the Service Employees International Union, where he has become key in that union's national efforts to tap further into the country's exploding Mexican immigrant workforce. All the while, Arreola has used the sharp elbows and old-school union tactics acquired in Chicago to become a power broker in his hometown of Acuitzio del Canje. He started in 2004 when the local mayor refused to back projects proposed by his hometown association. Arreola, a burly backslapper partial to gold neck chains, recalled thinking: "I need to take them out." He recruited a teacher to run for mayor in the Mexican town. Arreola then brought back a town phone book and, with others in Chicago, called voters one by one, promising a stream of U.S. investment if his candidate won. The incumbent opted for traditional rallies and car tours through town with a bullhorn. More than two years later, sitting in a Pilsen restaurant, Arreola opened a laptop computer and showed off the fruits of what proved to be an easy victory. Pictures of a new retirement home popped onto the screen, one featuring a grinning Arreola at a groundbreaking ceremony. Another showed a new computer lab with 40 computers for local schoolchildren, an investment in the future of Acuitzio del Canje. The town's name comes from an 1865 decision to make it the site for a "canje," or exchange of prisoners between warring Mexican and French troops. Sitting deep in the dusty mountains of Michoacan, it was neutral ground back then, Arreola explained, territory that didn't fully belong to either country but, in some ways, belonged to both. ---------- aolivo@tribune.com oavila@tribune.com - - - IN THE WEB EDITION Jose Artemio Arreola is one of several Mexican hometown association leaders in Chicago with multiple connections in Mexico and the U.S. From helping organize last year's massive immigration marches to slating political candidates in his home state, he wields influence on both sides of the border. To learn more about Arreola, watch videos and see photo galleries, go to chicagotribune.com/mexicansinchicago. Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune

please answer my question about the constitutional convention? TeachingAmericanHistory.org Homepage Register Online About Us Search Site Seminars & Institutes Historical Documents Library Audio Lectures & Discussions Constitutional Convention Home > Constitutional Convention > Introduction to the Constitutional Convention by Gordon Lloyd Introduction to the Constitutional Convention by Gordon Lloyd See Also: Convention: Introduction to this Site | Introduction to the Convention | Four Act Drama | Day by Day Summary | Major Themes | Madison's Notes | Selected Correspondence Delegates: Age of Framers in 1787 | Educational Backgrounds | Continental Experiences | Delegates by State | Alphabetical List | Interactive Scene at the Signing of the Constitution | Interactive Map of Philadelphia | Entertainment of George Washington at the City Tavern The Call for a Grand Convention On May 15, 1776, the Second Continental Congress, meeting in Independence Hall, Philadelphia, is so can you answer my question?

tariff and trade restrictions at Greatest colas? answer :- Thank you for the opportunity to present my views on tariff and trade restrictions before you. As you all know that Greatest colas is one of the World’s largest producers of aerated beverages in the world, being the industry leader and having a major presence around the world, our company has to follow a number of rules and regulations to comply with many international trade laws. As said by Jeffry Sachs the Director of Center for International Trade at Harvard University. ”Fifteen percent of world population provides all world’s technology innovation one half follows it, rest is not aware of these things”, Today when globalization has become a rapid phenomena bringing forth that paradigm shift thus knitting the world to form a global village there is no survival if cutoff from the rest of the world as no nation is self-sufficient, be it in terms of technology or resources. Trading augments this growing relationship liquidating the herculean task of meeting needs exponentially increasing availability when coming to choosing things. The whole world has become a well connected market threaded by supply chain management engaged in mutually beneficial exchanges. Tariffs and Trade restrictions play an active role in controlling the industries and also pacing the world economy. Tariff is a tax on goods when they move from one country to another. Tariff is for the revenue purpose and protecting industries. Tariffs are two types protective and revenue tariffs. A tariff is paid for by the buyers of the foreign goods and the buyers of domestic goods who pay higher prices. The Tariff commission sets the tariff. The HTS of the United States was enacted by congress and made effective on 1 Jan 1989, replacing the former Tariff Schedules of the US. Tariff helps to raise the price of the imported product and helps the domestic products of similar nature to be sold at higher costs but they reduce exports. The various models for acquisition and reaching Global market for global business expansion are multinational enterprise, foreign representation, licensing, franchising, joint ventures, strategic alliance, foreign direct investment, subsidiary and contract manufacturing. In a franchise agreement, the franchisee pays the franchisor for a license to use trademarks, formulas and other trade secrets. There is a freedom to adapt their products to meet the needs of the market. Contract manufacturing is when a foreign countries production of a private label good to which a domestic country attaches its trade mark. Joint ventures is a mode of expansion involving two or more parties. They share technologies, market management expertise allows a foreign market where normally they would not be allowed but for the risk of breaking of agreement by any of the partner and the inflexibility involved due to vastness of spheres involved. International trade has a lot of benefits but still many nations have their own reasons in putting restrictions on trade. A Quota is a restriction on the quality of importing goods. It actually creates a shortage which leads to the cost of the goods going up and allowing the domestic producers to increase their prices and production. A Quota on watches, might limit foreign made watches to 50000000 pairs a year. If American buy 100000000 each year, this would leave most of the market to American producers. Embargo is another trade restriction. Trade restrictions thus shift production from more effective exporting producers to less effective domestic producers. World trade is limited but industries get protected within countries. For the world economy to strengthen free trade is very essential and for the national economy to strengthen there must be enough import only then there will be export. The WTO created on 1Jan 1995.It was to replace the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade or GATT.WTO is a forum with 153 nations as members where trade agreements are negotiated between governments. Its rules support maintain trade barriers ,as an independent entity it oversees the cross border issues. The WTO with Dispute Settlement Body, a significant forum resolves the international trade disputes between WTO members. USITC, OFAC, FTC helps to keep up the comity in the international trade front lively and healthy. Notes 1.Valorem Tariff- is a value percentage set on goods on import. 2.Specific Tariff - is a tariff of specific amount of money that does not vary with price of goods. 3.Protective Tariff- to artificially inflate prices of imports and protect domestic industries from foreign competition. 4.Prohibitive tariff -protects local producers also raises revenue. 5.USITC- United States International Trade Commission responsible for conducting global safeguard and market disruption investigation under Trade Act of 1974. 6.OFAC- Office of Foreign Asset Control administers sanctions preventing trade. 7. FTC-Federal Trade Commission has quasi- legislative a

Newspapers..... JOke? Indian News Papers reported the following headings in today’s News papers: Hindu: “Terrorists attack Sri Lankan Cricket team in Lahore” ToI: “Neighborhood Just Got Scarier” Indian Express: “Terror Hits Lanka Team; Wounds Pakistan & Cricket” Deccan Herald: “Six Sri Lankan Cricketers hurt in Lahore terror attack” Their counter parts across the border ran the following news articles on their front pages: Pakistan Express: “Falling standards in Terrorists Training???” Lahore 03 March 2009: In the worst ever performance by their home grown and trained terrorists, all the visiting Sri Lankan cricket team members left Pakistan shore alive. Govt officials expressed concerns about this as it would tarnish the image of Pakistan as a breeding ground of terrorism and their credibility to produce world class terrorists has taken a beating. Govt asked the PSU (Public Sector Units) terrorists groups to improve the training standards and urged the terrorists to take their training and careers seriously. Prime Minister later during dinner with the participating terrorists chided them mildly that they cannot waste tax payers/US federal Aid money like this. He was particularly harsh on the terrorist who threw under the bus (carrying cricketers), the grenade which did not detonate. Prime Minister worried that this did not do any good to his plans of changing Pakistan National game from Cricket (which anyway is having its natural death) to Hand Grenade Throwing. He felt that this was the best bet for Pakistan’s aspiration for an Olympic Gold Medal. He urged erstwhile Pakistan cricket bowlers – Shoaib Akhtar and others, who are famous for throwing instead of bowling, to take up coaching terrorists on grenade throwing as their cricket careers are finished now…. Pakistan Killer Times: “Chinese imports are no longer reliable??” Pakistan Government ordered a high level delegation consisting of all ammunition experts under the leadership of A Q Khan (father of the Nuclear Plans), to study the unexploded grenade for the reasons why it did not perform expected duties. The hand grenade clearly had visible ‘Made in China’ logo on it, which embarrassed Chinese Government. Chinese Premier issued a public apology to Pakistan People for failing to live up to their expectations and vowed to strengthen their R&D and manufacturing facilities to re-instill the confidence in consumers. Pakistan Prime Minister in a later press release mentioned that he would re-consider renewing Chinese contract for annual supply of ammunition, which is due for renewal in April. Unless China proves that they have taken stringent measures to ensure that the reliability of their ammunition is certified by their government, Pakistan would consider approaching other sources for their annual staple supply of ammunition… Dawn: “Visiting Sri Lankan cricketers return to their country, Alive:(” There was all round disappointment reported across Pakistan that all the members of the visiting Sri Lankan cricket team returned alive, denting the image of Pakistan as most the happening country in the world (for wrong reasons). People staged protests on streets and demanded government for the “falling return on Investment of ammunition.” They are also worried that this would set a bad precedence and foreigners may choose to visit Pakistan without any fears. The betting racket reportedly lost a billion Pakistan Rupees as everyone expected all the visiting team members to be killed. This also had tax collection implications for government. Government later issued a public apology to people and assured them that they would take sufficient measures to ensure that they are accountable for every Pakistan rupee being spent on training terrorists. They also urged more youngsters to take to guns as this would make the career as terrorists much more competitive and Pakistan can continue producing abundant supply of world class terrorists. When the initial news of attack was shown live on their national news channels, all the people came to street and started bursting crackers. Their joy was short lived when the attack stopped in 25 minutes and they took the crackers back to their homes so that they can use it for next opportunity, which anyway should not be too far away. Some of those Pakistanis who still have a job and left for offices in the morning and hence missed the ‘Live action’ on TVs, rued their luck for having to work while majority of their brethren enjoy these live actions on TV idling at homes. The working class in Pakistan demanded that henceforth they be informed before hand about terrorists attacks so that they can stay back home and enjoy the live action on TV. Government assured them that they will publish “Annual Terrorism Ca

Is Obama Disigenuous? http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23643866-5013948,00.html The illusion that is Barack Obama * Font Size: Decrease Increase * Print Page: Print Fred Siegel | May 05, 2008 POLITICAL campaigning necessarily produces a wide gap between words and deeds. This is the price of bringing together a broad coalition with disparate interests. All effective politicians are at times authentically insincere or sincerely inauthentic. Exaggeration, embellishment, overstatement, doubletalk, deception and lies presented as metaphorical truths are the order of the day. So, of course, Barack Obama is no different. He exaggerates the credit he deserves for a limited piece of ethics-reform legislation. He embellishes when he presents himself as having had a consistent record on the Iraq war when in fact he's done a fair amount of zigzagging. He engages in doubletalk when, on free trade and Iraq, he tells the yokels one thing and the policy people another. He overstates when he presents his minimal accomplishments in the Illinois Senate as proof of his stature. He engages in systematic deception when he says he doesn't take money from lobbyists. He presents a lie as metaphorical truth when he says it was the 1965 bloody Sunday attacks on peaceful civil rights protesters in Selma, Alabama, that inspired his parents to marry. (They had been married for years already.) All of this is unappealing, but also unexceptional. What makes it different is that there's not just a gap but a chasm between his actions and his professed principles, which would normally kill a candidacy. And because his deeds are so few, the disparity is all the more salient. Obama, far more than the others, is the "judge me by what I say and not what I do" candidate. He wants to be the conscience of the country without necessarily having one himself. The disparity between Obama's rhetoric of transcendence and his conventional Chicago racial and patronage politics is a leitmotiv of his political career. In New York, politicians (Al Sharpton excepted) are usually forced to pay at least passing tribute to universal principles and the ideal of clean government. But Chicago, until recently a city of Lithuanians, blacks and Poles governed by Irishmen on the patronage model of the Italian Christian Democrats, is the city of political and cultural tribalism. Blacks adapted to the tribalism and the corrupt patronage politics that accompanied it. Historically, one of the ironies of Chicago politics is that the clean-government candidates have been the most racist, while those most open to black aspirations have been the most corrupt. When the young Jesse Jackson received his first audience with then mayor Richard Daley Sr - impervious to the universalism of the civil rights movement in its glory - offered him a job as a toll-taker. Jackson thought the offer demeaning but in time adapted. In Chicago, racial reform has meant that the incumbent mayor, Richard M. Daley, has been cutting blacks in on the loot. Louis Farrakhan, Jackson, Jeremiah Wright and Obama are all, in part, the expression of that politics. It hasn't always worked for Chicago, which, under the pressure of increasing taxes to pay for bloated government, is losing its middle class. But it has served the city's political class admirably. For all his Camelot-like rhetoric, Obama is a product, in significant measure, of the political culture that Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass described: "We've had our chief of detectives sent to prison for running the Outfit's (the mob's) jewellery-heist ring. And we've had white guys with Outfit connections get $100 million in affirmative action contracts from their drinking buddy, Mayor Richard Daley ... That's the Chicago way." At no point did Obama, the would-be saviour of US politics, challenge this corruption, except for face-saving gestures as a legislator. He was, in his own Harvard law way, a product of it. Why, you may ask, did the operators of Chicago's political machine support Obama? Part of the answer was given long ago by the then boss of Chicago, Jake Arvey. When asked why he made Adlai Stevenson - a man, as with Obama, more famous for speeches than for accomplishments - his party's gubernatorial candidate in 1948, Arvey is said to have replied that he needed to "perfume the ticket". Obama first played a perfuming role as a state senator. His mentor, Emil Jones, the machine-made president of the Senate, allowed him to sponsor a minor ethics bill. In return, Obama made sure to send plenty of pork to Jones's district. When asked about pork-barrel spending, Jones famously replied: "Some call it pork; I call it steak." Obama repaid the generosity. When he had a chance to back clean Democratic candidates for president of the Cook County board of supervisors and Illinois governor, he stayed with the allies of the Outfit. The gubernatorial candidate he backed, Rod Blagojevich, is under federal investigation, in part because of his relationship with Tony Rezko, the man who helped Obama buy his house. The Chicago way has delivered politically for Obama even this year. Ninety per cent of his popular-vote lead over Hillary Clinton comes from Illinois, and two-thirds of that 90 per cent comes just from Cook County. Some of this advantage came from the efforts of Obama's political ally, the flame-throwing reverend James Meeks, a political force in his own right. Meeks, who mocks black moderates as "niggers", is an Illinois state senator, the pastor of a mega-church and a strong supporter of Jackson's powerful political operation, which has put its vote-pulling muscle squarely behind the Obama campaign. It was only with Obama's remark about bitter, white, working-class, small-town voters that we saw his difficulties appealing beyond the machine's reach. He won his US Senate race in 2004 not only because his opponents self-destructed but also because of the machine's ability to deliver votes. In Pennsylvania, he has lacked such assistance and the campaigning has not gone nearly so well. First, Obama pretended to be a tenpin bowler and scored a 37. Then, appearing before a supposedly closed San Francisco audience, he complained that small-town Pennsylvanians "cling to guns or religion or antipathy towards people who aren't like them, or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment, as a way to explain their frustrations". This is the man who belongs to a church built on bitterness, rancour and conspiratorial fear. During the Wright affair, Obama not only repeatedly lied about what he knew and when but violated the spirit of the civil rights movement in its mid-1960s glory. When, as a young man, I was on the periphery of the movement, there was an unwritten rule that if people told racist jokes or speakers engaged in defamatory rhetoric, you needed to register your immediate disapproval by confronting the speaker or ostentatiously walking out. Wright's "black theology" is essentially a Christianised version of Malcolm X's ideology of hate. But for 20 years, Obama, who had planned to run for mayor of Chicago, kept silent about the close, if at times competitive, relationship between Wright, whose 8000-member mega-church gave him his political base, and Farrakhan. His ambition overrode his moral integrity. As part of his "black value system", Wright attacked whites for their "middle classism", materialism, and "greed in a world of need". Obama sounded similar notes in his recent address at the Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art in New York, in which he laid the blame for the sub-prime mortgage crisis on those who had "embraced an ethic of greed, corner cutting and inside dealing". But that's exactly what Obama did in buying his luxurious house. Given the choice of purchasing a less expensive home or getting into bed with his fundraiser-cum-slumlord-cum-fixer Rezko, Obama chose the latter. Then again, the oppressed of Trinity United Church of Christ are building Wright a $US1.6 million ($1.7million), 960sqm home complete with four-car garage, whirlpool and butler's pantry. This house, which backs on to a golf course, is to sit in Tinley Park, a gated community in southwest Chicago that is 93 per cent white. The Obamas' charitable giving is consistent with Wright's talking Left while living Right. Obama and his wife are quite well off. They had an estimated income of $US1.2 million from 2000 to 2004. But the man who preaches compassion and mutuality gave all of 1 per cent of that income to charity during those years. Most of that went to Wright's church. There is a similar chasm when it comes to Obama's claim to post-partisanship. His achievements in reaching out to moderate voters are largely proleptic. But words are not deeds and, although Obama has few concrete achievements to his name, his voting record hardly suggests an ability to rise above Left v Right. In the Illinois Senate, he made a specialty of voting present, but after his first two years in the US Senate, National Journal's analysis of rollcall votes found that he was more liberal than 86 per cent of his colleagues. His voting record has only moved further Left since then. The liberal Americans for Democratic Action gives him a 97.5 per cent rating, while National Journal ranks him the most liberal member of the Senate. By comparison, Clinton, who occasionally votes with the Republicans, ranks 16th. Obama is such a down-the-line partisan that, according to Congressional Quarterly, in the past two years he has voted with the Democrats more often than did the party's majority leader, Harry Reid. Likewise, for all his talk of post-racialism, Obama has played, with the contrivance of the press, traditional South Side Chicago racial politics. The day after his surprise loss in New Hampshire, and in anticipation of the South Carolina primary, with its heavily black electorate, South Side congressman Jesse Jackson Jr - Obama's national co-chairman - appeared on MSNBC to argue, in a prepared statement, that Clinton's teary moment on the campaign trail reflected her deep-seated racism. "Those tears," said Jackson, "have to be analysed ... They have to be looked at very, very carefully in light of Katrina, in light of other things that Mrs Clinton did not cry for, particularly as we head to South Carolina, where 45 per cent of African-Americans will participate in the Democratic contest ... We saw tears in response to her appearance, so that her appearance brought her to tears, but not hurricane Katrina, not other issues." In other words, whites who are at odds with, or who haven't delivered for, Chicago politicians can be obliquely accused of racism on the flimsiest basis, but pillars of local black politics such as Wright, with his exclusivist racial theology, are beyond criticism. Liberals love Obama's talk of taking on powerful financial interests. But here , too, he is rather slippery. In his Cooper Union speech, he denounced in no uncertain terms the "special interests" of people on Wall Street (who are well represented among his campaign donors). He, of course, had an opportunity to push for repealing the privileged tax treatment of private equity firms when that question was before Charles Grassley's Senate subcommittee - but he simply made a pro-forma statement in favour of doing so and disappeared. Nationally, as in Chicago, Obama the self-styled reformer never crosses swords with any of his putative foes. To pick another example, he has attacked "predatory" sub-prime lenders while taking roughly $US1.3 million in contributions from companies in that line of business. Obama is the internationalist opposed to free trade. He is the friend of race-baiters who thinks Don Imus deserved to be fired. He is the proponent of courage in the face of powerful interests who lacked the courage to break with Wright (until Wednesday). He is the man who would lead our efforts against terrorism yet was friendly with Bill Ayers, the unrepentant 1960s terrorist. He is the post-racialist supporter of affirmative action. He is the enemy of Big Oil who takes money from executives at Exxon-Mobil, Shell and British Petroleum. Obama has, in a sense, represented a new version of the invisible man, a candidate whose colour obscures his failings. But so far, the wild discrepancy between Obama's words and his deeds, and between his enormous ambitions and his minimal accomplishments, doesn't seem to have fazed his core supporters, who apparently suffer from a severe case of cognitive dissonance. Like cultists who rededicate themselves when the cult's prophecies have been falsified, his fans redouble their delusions in the face of his obvious hypocrisy. That is because Obama, in the imagination of many of his fans in the public and the press, is both a deduction from what was - the failures of the Bush administration and the scandals of the Clintons - and an expression of what should be. The ideal, the aspiration, is so rhetorically appealing that it has been assumed to be true. They remind one of Woodrow Wilson's answer when asked if his plan for a League of Nations was practicable: "If it won't work, it must be made to work." Fred Siegel is a contributing editor of City Journal. He teaches at the Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art.

Tea Parties: GOP once again manipulating the average joe? During the eight miserable, ineffective and wasteful years of the Bush administration, Karl "Turd Blossom" Rove, the president's chief political advisor, deftly crafted a successful strategy of turning the "little guy" on himself. That being, to divert and distract these Average Joes away from the real issues that effect them--unemployment, wages, health care, education--and instead drive them to the polls through hot-button issues including abortion, gay-marriage and life-support (Terri Schiavo). For a long while, it worked. The little guy consistently voted against his own self-interests. But the little guy's not completely stupid, and the inevitable backlash began with the 2006 midterm elections where Democrats won a small Congressional majority, and kicked into high gear last November, with Barack Obama's presidential victory and the Democratic landslide in the House and Senate. Dejected, the GOP crawled away a broken, dysfunctional family. A tarnished brand. But as this year's tax season rolled around, conservatives issued a rallying cry in the form of "tea parties," those ill-founded, embarrassing, scantly attended protests that were held Wednesday across the nation. Though touted by organizers (most likely GOP funded and supported) as being attended by "Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and Independents," judging from the crowds and the signs they waved, it was pretty clear this was a decidedly anti-Obama movement. And that's the insane part. What the demonstrators are protesting is what they believe to be higher taxes and wasteful government spending, in particular the $787-billion stimulus plan and the $3-trillion bailouts of banks, Wall Street and the auto industry. But the not-so-comic irony here is that the Obama administration has yet to impose one single tax increase on anyone. To the contrary, it's giving income tax cuts to 95% of Americans, and gives additional tax cuts and credits for small businesses, tuition payers and home buyers. The only individuals that could be hit with an actual tax increase are those whose annual incomes exceed $250,000. An increase, mind you, that's still a full 10 points less than the rates during the Reagan presidency. But I didn't see any seemingly rich dudes in NY, Chicago, DC and elsewhere parking their Benz's and raising any protest signs at these rallies. The crowds, though small, were filled with the same types who've been used and abused before: low and middle-income taxpayers who ironically stand to gain the most from Obama's tax policies. And once again, they've somehow been manipulated by the GOP through lies, misinformation and perhaps even racial bias. I nearly cringed when I saw on Neil Cavuto's Fox News show a few people in the crowd jeering one of the guests being interviewed, a woman from a progressive/green organization, who supports taxing the rich. It was as if the poor and middle class in the crowd had been brainwashed into defending those mistreated rich folk at the hands of the elitist Obama. In case anyone hasn't noticed, there are many recent signs that the economy may finally be turning around. There's been several positive indicators in the banking, home, retail and auto sectors. The credit markets are opening up. The stock market's had the best rally since the Great Depression. And, there hasn't been one bank/Wall Street failure since the bailouts. Maybe, just maybe, the government's fiscal policies which began in the Fall under George Bush and then expanded under Obama are working? And maybe those misguided protesters--the ones out across America yakking about Obama as if he was the biggest socialist since Karl Marx--should realize that these same policies are the ones that will help create jobs; protect savings; make home-buying more affordable; make tuition easier to pay; create universal health care; make the US more energy efficient; and, overall, resuscitate this ailing economy. But the GOP sees opportunity here to revive its heretofore comatose, dispirited base. What a better, time-tested, tried-and-true conservative cause-celebre than taxes? It's the Republicans trying to create something out of nothing. But will this populist approach work? Will the newly-energized "Contract with America" folks like Newt Gingrich succeed in creating a groundswell of support over this issue and thus breathe new life into the near-dead Republican Party? A new Gallup poll released this week shows that 53%of Americans approve of big government spending to fix the economy, and 48% think that the federal income taxes they pay are "about right," indicating the lowest anti-tax sentiment in 50 years. And President Obama enjoys impressive overall approval ratings. Judging from yesterday's meager turnouts, it appears these tea-baggers are nothing more than a fringe minority

i got a offer letter from uk? is it genuine?????? Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 10:28:28 +0530 (IST) Printer Friendly Version From: neco_recruitments@yahoo.com <rzmails@indiatimes.com> Subject: CLIENT/EMPLOYER: O.O G (OCEAN OIL AND GAS) LONDON Language Mail Full Headers JOB REF: OOGL 07/01446 CLIENT/EMPLOYER: O.O G (OCEAN OIL AND GAS) LONDON LABOUR CONSULTANT: TIMESJOB.COM DATE: 19/02/2008 Attn: EMPLOYEE This is to inform you that OCEAN OIL AND GAS in London is presently recruiting new qualified expert rates into the under listed departments; Interestingly most of our clients are not actively looking for a new job, but are keen to consider the right opportunity based on the current accreditation in their individual careers. We listen carefully to what is important to you with regard to career, family and lifestyle. We then use our connections and investigative skills to identify interesting opportunities that meet your criteria. Some of the moves we engineer are in-country, but the vast majorities are international placements (world wide) with some of the best firms in the country DETAILS: NECO RECRUITMENT ; with the mandate to recruit qualified professionals in the Engineering sector for the fulfillment of the requirements of (Ocean Oil and Gas) in London as contained in the gazette on the oil states monitory accommodation and absorbed by the federal Monitory allotment of the GREAT BRITAIN, LONDON ,we seek to write your consent after recommendation from our labour consultants based on recent Engineer consolidations and increased Engineering system in GREAT BRITAIN LONDON.(OCEAN OIL AND GAS) intends to invite prime experienced Professionals, capable of rendering expertise assistance in the categories alphabetically listed below: 1) Architect Engineering 2) Marine Engineering 3) Mechanical Engineering 4) Electrical Engineering 5) Electronics-Telecommunication Engineering 6) Construction Engineering 7) Aerospace Engineering 8) Computer engineering 9) Accountant 10) Production Engineering 11) Drilling Services 12) Civil Engineering 13) Petroleum Engineer And others. Requirement: Job openings shall require a thorough exercise of dedication and commitments to duty in individual specialty. Entitlement, Compensation and Benefits packages include; A very attractive net salary paid in Pounds Sterling or Dollar equivalent depending on employee home country and currency preference. . Quality single or family housing accommodation in secured environment. . Free medical care and attention in London for employee and family. . Excellent educational assistance benefits with family status employment. . Paid airfares allowing full flexibility on holiday travel. . Personal effects shipment and excess baggage allowances. . Full access to most of the finest and social recreational facilities in LONDON on duty free days. CONTRACT DURATION: Level 1: 24 Months, (Two Years) and renewable only on satisfactory performance by employee. Level 2: Full time Interested candidates must have not less than 4 years experience in their relevant areas of specialization and should forward their resumes/CV with verifiable reference(s) as word attached document: neco_recruitments@yahoo.com Interested candidates are also required to contact our London Local Office strictly for the purpose of this project. NOTE; As soon as we receive your cv / resume we shall send it to our international screening department for proper screening and verifications. And only the successful screened employees shall be contacted after the international screening. CONTACT: Dr John Gray Head Of Recruitment Services. Neco Recruitment inc, London +447031873546

Stay in the military or get out? (current and former military replies only, please)? I'm currently in the military deployed to Iraq. When I get back, I will have one year remaining on my contract. I will soon be faced with the decision on whether to stay in or get out. By the time I get out, I will have served six years and will be at the pay grade of E-5. I have no college under my belt. After getting out, I will not be able to attend college, because I have a family to support. Since I only have experience in combat arms, the best paying job that I can get is with Federal, State, or Local Law Enforcement. Would it be more beneficial to retire from law enforcement or the military? If I stay in the Army I will have to continue to miss out on my four year old daughter growing up, and miss another countless amount of occasions with my wife. However, I don't ever have to worry about them going homeless or hungry. If I get out, I still have a chance at being successful and would be alot happier having the opportunity to come home every day and have a higher earning potential. However, I have to gamble with living on the economy. And that's even if I actually secure a job with some department. From my comparisons, it would seem that getting out would be a good option for me, but for some reason, deep down inside I couldn't imagine getting out of the military, even with the deployments (currently on #2), and putting up with the other BS about being in the military. I don't even know if I love the military or hate it, my mind changes twenty times a day. Am I just afraid to take chance in the outside world? Has my six years in the military given me a security blanket that I don't want to let go of? Or is it a sense of patriotism keeping me in? It's gotta be something. I'm seriously about to go nuts trying to make my mind up. I know that there's alot of you out there that has been through this. What did you decide to do and do you regret your decision? Thanks in advance for the replies.

Why would purdue not allow Dr. David Kanecki on the High Content Screening list with this resume? DR. DAVID KANECKI > P.O. Box 866  Kenosha, WI 53141  262.327-2605  da...@kanecki.com > EXECUTIVE PROFILE > CEO  COO > Dynamic and accomplished leader with a track history of exceptional > success in the medical, software, and emergency management arenas. > Outstanding business communications strategist with expertise in > negotiating and developing profitable partnerships / coalitions and > securing new business funding / R&D financing from private and federal > investors worldwide. Visionary organizational leader, adept at > change / operations / project management, product and business > development, and manufacturing oversight. World-class professional > with extensive experience collaborating with government, regulatory, > medical, and multi-national organizations. > Selected Highlights > * Negotiated multi-million-dollar discount contracts with various > biomedical companies. > * Broke 24-year standoff by achieving coalition with Russia Emergency > Management in 1995 as Chairman of Emergency Management and Planning. > [Society for Computer Simulation] > * Successfully managed a $2M per year project to rebuild and recertify > FACS (Fluorescent Activated Cell Sorter) Laboratory. [Milwaukee > Medical Research Park] > * Forged a long-term software joint venture with a European Union > Medical Company (similar to GE Medical) worth a projected $121M. > [Nucletron] > * Negotiated a pending software Joint Venture with a US company worth > a potential of $41M over 18 years. [Kanecki Associates, Inc.] > * Secured $8M in long-term research contracts within one year. > [Milwaukee Medical Research Park] > * Produced a software portfolio worth $281M (2006) with first five > being marketed.-- [Kanecki Associates] > * Generated multi-millions in funding for organization by applying > improved practices, and enhanced quality, and results orientation. > [Society for Computer Simulation] > * Drove a potential $162M in joint venture sales with a five-member > team. [Kanecki Associates, Inc.] > Areas of Expertise > Medical Research Human Relations Marketing > Accounting / Finance Operations Management Organizational Behavior > Business Communications Business Legal Operations Statistics / > Research Methods > PROFESSIONAL SUMMARY > KANECKI ASSOCIATES, INC. > Provider and developer of security, medical, and government products > and services (primarily software) > President 1993 to Present > * Drove a potential $162M in joint venture sales with a five-member > team > * Effectively liaised with both domestic and European Union companies > to cooperate on joint ventures. > * Steered communications with FDA and EU to gain approval of medical > analysis product. > * Developed, managed, and delivered multiple products and services to > develop new business opportunities. > SOCIETY FOR COMPUTER SIMULATION | SIMULATION COUNCIL, INC. > Provider of professional and consulting services to multinational > government and military organizations and agencies, including FEMA, > DOD, Navy, Air Force, and Army > Chairman | AVP of Emergency Management 1992 to 1999 > * Broke 24-year standoff by achieving coalition with Russia Emergency > Management in 1995. > * Devised and implemented multinational cooperative activities to > share and implement new ideas and strategies; result: improved > operations and practices for the United States, European Emergency > Management, and others from the EU, Russia, South Korea, Japan, > Canada, United State, Finland, and China. > * Initiated and developed liaison with the President G.H.W. Bush and > President Clinton Administrations regarding Natural Emergency > Management and Non Natural Emergency Management (including terrorism > and Presidential Directive 63). > * Improved the operations of Emergency Management and Planning. How > did you do it? > MILWAUKEE MEDICAL RESEARCH PARK > Provider of medical services and research with focus on patient > application products > Researcher 1989 to 1993 > * Negotiated multi-million-dollar discount contracts with various > biomedical companies. > * Successfully managed a $2M / year project to rebuild and recertified > FACS (Fluorescent Activated Cell Sorter) Laboratory. > * Secured $8M in long-term research contracts within one year. > * Effectively created coalitions with Executive Board to develop and > formulate strategies to create optimal laboratory conditions. > * Provided military medical laboratory support during Operations > "Desert Shield" and "Desert Storm," > * Directed project that created a 10-mile WAN link between two > research sites to facilitate communication of research information. > EDUCATION & PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT > Hon.PhD Intelligent Thinking Systems > BS, Applied Computer Science  University of Wisconsin, Parkside > BS, Biological Science (Pre-Med)  University of Wisconsin > Certificate, Flow Cytometry  Becton Dickinson > Certificate, Cellular Biology and Immunology / National Flow Cytometry > Resource  Los Alamos National Laboratory > MBA, Masters of Business Administration  University of Phoenix > Not on the PURDUE CYTOMETRY MAIL LIST > APPLIED FOR THE PURDUE CYTOMETRY HIGH CONTENT SCREENING > BUY NO REPLY AT ALL. > HMMMM > MISTER? > YACH YORSCH? > ZWIE TACH PRAVDA? > HNEITZ SCAMMERS! > Purdue Cytometry Mail List Rules and Regulations did they BREAK > the ... > Using Purdue University mailing lists for organized political > activity ... DOES IT SAY TO NOTIFY CORPORATIONS THAT THEIR EMAIL IS > JUNK MAIL FOR. NO REASON? ...

Ontario Taxes: Contract or Permanent? Hi there, I am considering a job opportunity that could allow me to be a contractor or permanent. I've been given the impression over the years, that it's more lucrative to go the contractor route. First question: which is more lucrative? Second question: Would you be able to provide me with the details of the taxes that I should take into consideration when I'm negotiating my compensation (i.e. GST, federal taxes, provincial taxes, etc.). Thanks a bunch!

What about this idea on Criminals and Prison Reform? Issue: Prisons and Criminals Problem: Prisons house convicts and produce nothing except negative results such as: •Better trained criminals to release on our society •Larger state and federal spending to house criminals •Continual increases in facility sizes and no way to keep up with the need for more and larger facilities •Continual increases in prison staffing requirements and no way to keep up with the need for more staff •A criminal population that our society and prison systems are exponentially increasing the numbers on As we understand it: •Criminals are in prison because they have been convicted of violating the Law •It costs the government (state and federal) a lot of money to house these criminals and this cost is growing beyond control with no relief in sight •Criminals produce relatively nothing except burden •Criminals are not rehabilitated for the most part •There is no incentive for criminals to change into law abiding citizens Ideas: •Establish a pilot program with first time offenders •Segregate first time offenders from second and third (repeat) time offenders and deal with each based upon different end goals •First time offender goals oPay their debt to society (cost of their crime, incarceration and training) oActively participate in all aspects of the first offender program oComplete all aspects of the program and probation •First time offenders 1.Will be indoctrinated upon assignment to the program and trained in the procedures and rules to be successful and graduate from the program. After the completion of indoctrination and signing the contract of understanding, the offender will be enrolled in the program 2.This is not a free ride. The offender must actively and continuously produce positive results in all aspects of the program to be returned to society. Resistance to any aspects of the program (including passive resistance) may result in disciplinary action and possible removal from the program. Any violation of rules of the program will be thoroughly reviewed and appropriately dealt with. Violence will not be tolerated and if repeated may cause the offender to be removed from the program 3.The end goal is to return an individual to society that will not reenter the criminal justice system 4.Analyze and develop a psychological profile for the offender 5.Create an incarceration plan. Develop the end goal and work backwards through the plan. NOTES: (1) The plan must be reevaluated annually and any time the offender does not meet a milestone or goal in the plan on or ahead of schedule. (2) The plan must also be reevaluated any time the offender meets a milestone or goal ahead of schedule 6.Create an incarceration cost estimate based upon the above plan (incarceration budget). This cost estimate must be based upon cost of all support required to return them to society. This cost then becomes the debt they will be required to pay back to the system before they can be returned to society. NOTES: (1) The incarceration cost estimate must be reevaluated annually and any time the offender does not meet a milestone or goal in the plan on or ahead of schedule. (2) The incarceration cost estimate must also be reevaluated any time the offender meets a milestone or goal ahead of schedule 7.Analyze the offender’s personality profile (Myers-Briggs) and potential occupational specialties that they are compatible with and interested in 8.Provide the offender the opportunity for training necessary to reenter the work force and be successful. This training can be taught during their incarceration and while on probation after release 9.Evaluate the offender’s performance and based upon this, establish a risk assessment on returning the offender to society. If the offender displays they are not making significant progress on their incarceration plan or the risk assessment is too high that they will not succeed and remain a productive member of society, consider moving them into the second offender program 10.Assign the offender to productive work and pay them a fair wage to allow them to repay their debt to society and have money in savings when they return to society so that they can be successful 11.Assure they are placed in a position when they are returned to society and that they remain in the position during their probation unless there is a problem with the employer or the position in eliminated by the employer. Part of the probation requirements is that the offender must take responsibility for their own success or failure 12.Upon successful completion of probation, all history of their arrest and conviction (including what the police have access to) will be sealed. It may only be unsealed and access made available by the court system based upon a subsequent arrest. NOTE: (1) This will protect an individual from unnecessary police harassment •Second time offender goals 1.Pay their debt to society

I want to sue someone for fraud? In 2006 I was scammed by a fake agency. Long story short, they close shop and left NY (where it happen and where I live). But they are still in operation and I found on that they are NOW being sued by another individual in IL over the same photo mill fraud. Coduto v. Prima-Facia, Inc. et al [url=http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-ilndce/case_no-1:2008cv07163/case_id-226626/]Coduto v. Prima-Facia, Inc. et al - 1:2008cv07163 - Justia Federal District Court Filings and Dockets[/url] They go under that name plus Glamour Model Talent and Group Images Enterprises. The fake photo studio is prima facia and prestige studios. The reason I never sued is because I was told by Consumer Affairs that I had no case and BBB was useless. I have no contract because they refuse to give me the copy promising two jobs at 500ea. What I have are letters from Guess, and Target saying they do not work with this agency by either names. But I cannot prove the agency claim to provide work to these agencies. I have the who.is information that says prestige studio regestered the agency's (now defunct) domain groupimageenterprises.com And all receipts (except for one) that I paid money to prestige studios. Problem is two reciepts were not signed. and two had unreadable signatures. Do I have any grounds to sue? I was told by a consumer affairs rep no, but she also said she did not know what i meant when i said the agency was running a photo mil. But can I sue if John Vuolo is in IL???????? He is being sued right now for the same thing there. They kept and refused to give me my contract. First day the copier was broken second it was missing? How long would small claims take? Where can I find legal console? Is my window of opportunity closed? If they are in chicago being sued for the same thing, can I sue them as well? If judge ruled in my favor and i still do not get paid what can i do? how do i find other people scammed by the company? That would be most helpful. Thank you for replying. I'm very angry over this matter and seeing him being sued made me hopeful again. I do not understand why obtaining a judgment is difficult. Forgive me if I sound arrogant. But I thought they would be hound by debt collectors and have all money assets garnished. Obviously if he had no money at all I can understand that but he must have some property or money for food and other necessities. If I contact the BBB can they contact the other people that complained to them about this agency? If I can find someone to collaborate surely that can provide some authenticity? How would I contact that lawyer? What can I provide that may be useful? What can result by providing my information? Regardless I'll do it if it would help there case.

So, is Barack still the greatest ever? Even at lying? Promise #5: Sunlight Before Signing What he said: “Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.” (BarackObama.com campaign Web site) What he did: Obama signed the Lily Ledbetter bill, the SCHIP/cigarette tax hike, and the stimulus bill all with far less than a five-day waiting period that he promised–and continues to promise–on his campaign Web site. Promise #4: Lobbyist Revolving Door What he said: “No political appointees in an Obama-Biden administration will be permitted to work on regulations or contracts directly and substantially related to their prior employer for two years. And no political appointee will be able to lobby the executive branch after leaving government service during the remainder of the administration.” (BarackObama.com campaign Web site) What he did: Obama appointed Goldman Sachs lobbyists Mark Patterson chief of staff at the Treasury Department, where he directly oversees his former employer, a recipient of $10 billion of taxpayer funds from the TARP. Obama also appointed Raytheon lobbyist William Lynn to be an undersecretary of Defense. Promise #3: No Tax Hikes on the Poor What he said first: “I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.” (September 12, 2008, Dover, N.H.) What he did first: By signing H.R. 2 into law, Obama happily signed onto the idea that smokers should pay for a $35 billion expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Plan (SCHIP). Cigarette taxes are going up 61 cents a pack starting April 1. Obama signed this bill knowing that the majority of smokers in the United States are working poor, and one in four lives below the federal poverty line. What he said next: “If your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.” (February 24th, 2009, Address to a Joint Session of Congress) What he did next: Ignored the already-hiked cigarette tax at the time of the statement and then this restated promise was broken just two days later, when the Obama’s budget proposal was released. His new budget raises 45 percent of its revenue from energy taxes that will be paid by everyone who fills a gas tank, pays an electric bill, or buys anything that was grown, shipped, or manufactured. Promise #2: Pork Barrel Earmark Reform What he said: “The system is broken. We can no longer accept a process that doles out earmarks based on a member of Congress’ seniority, rather than the merit of the project. We can no longer accept an earmarks process that has become so complicated to navigate that a municipality or non-profit group has to hire high-priced D.C. lobbyists to do it. And we can no longer accept an earmarks process in which many of the projects being funded fail to address the real needs of our country.” (Statement on Earmarks, March 10, 2008) What he is expected to do: The White House has signaled that it intends to sign the $410 billion Omnibus Appropriations bill, which according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, contains 8,570 earmarks totaling $7.7 billion, including dozens of wasteful pork-barrel projects. These earmarks were awarded based on seniority, not on merit, and were mostly the result of high-priced lobbying, precisely the process that Obama promised to end. When the omnibus reaches his desk later this week or next week, we’ll find out if this is one more broken promise. Promise #1: Big Government OK, so this one is more of a statement than a promise, but it’s the biggest whopper of all. What he said: “Not because I believe in bigger government — I don’t.” (February 24, 2009, Joint Address to Congress) What he did: Obama proposed a budget that is breathtaking in scope, a blueprint for the biggest permanent expansion of government in history right on the heels of a sweeping trillion dollar stimulus plan. The budget lays the foundation for a government takeover of the health care and energy sectors and dramatically increasing spending across the board, other than defense weapons programs. Spending as a percentage of the economy under this budget will reach the historic level of 27.7 percent this year. The deficit as a percent of the economy, at 12.3 percent, is set to be the biggest in the entire history of the country outside of the four peak years of World War II. Anyone who offers such a budget can only fairly be described as a believer in bigger government.