Saturday, September 1, 2012

TAKING OVER THE GOP ONE ELECTION AT A TIME

Posted by Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR/TV

Taking Over the GOP One Election at a Time

Political takeover
Trying to get elected as a third party candidate in American politics is extremely difficult if not impossible. Ballot access is an obstacle since third parties have to meet additional criteria not required of Republicans and Democrats.
Reform Party candidate Ross Perot was able to get on the ballot in all 50 states in 1992 as was Pat Buchanan in 1996. Perot was a nationally known figure who had lots of money to pour into the process. The Reform Party affected both elections but did nothing to advance itself as a genuine third-party player. While Perot received nearly 20 percent of the popular vote in 1992, he did not receive a single electoral vote.
Ron Paul, the perennial outsider, did not run as a third-party candidate. He worked within the system and energized a lot of people, but it wasn’t enough to win. Paul was not a newcomer to politics. He has represented Texas districts in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1976. He ran and won political offices on the local level before he ran for president in 1988 as a Libertarian (while still a Republican) and as a Republican in 2008 and 2012. He saw the reality of working within the system because he understood the inherent obstacles of a third party.
Many Christians supported Chuck Baldwin and the Constitution Party in 2008. Baldwin didn’t have a chance. Why would anyone vote for someone who had never won elected office at the local and state levels? I can’t see how anyone who has not won some political office somewhere has any business running for president no matter how right they might be on the issues.
So what’s to be done? At this point in time, we are stuck with a two-party system. Deal with it.
As I wrote in a previous article, conservatives give up too soon. That’s what liberals in both parties count on. When Ronald Reagan beat Jimmy Carter in 1980, conservatives were on a roll. The electoral slaughter of Walter Mondale in 1984 was additional evidence that a party could be taken over. So what happened? Conservatives thought that winning two big battles meant they had won the war. They slacked off. Their interest in politics waned because they believe the war was over. They didn’t understand that the election of Reagan was just the start of a long political war. The statists in both parties clawed their way back to control.
Keep in mind that the statists never left the Republican Party. There were a number of Keynesian holdovers who bided their time. They held on to power because there weren’t enough people from inside the GOP putting pressure on them to get out or there were not enough practiced replacements. The revival of the conservative wing of the GOP was mostly a protest movement. It didn’t understand that there was the need to move up the leadership ranks from inside the party in order to change the leadership. Ideology isn’t enough.
If radical leftists were able to take over the Democrat Party and a mini-Republican Revolution was started by Reagan in 1980, I can’t understand why we would not put our efforts into taking over the GOP. It’s vulnerable. If we can’t take over a party that consists of tens of millions of conservatives, what makes us think we can create a competing third party?
The old adage that you can’t change just one thing applies here. First, a two to six-year election process needs to begin now to capture the Senate and the House by picking the most vulnerable incumbents. Tea Party Republicans pulled it off in Indiana and Texas. Todd Akin is making a comeback in Missouri. A new poll shows that he’s even with Democrat Claire McCaskill. An article on the poll noted:
“Ultimately this race will be decided by conservative voters who have to decide if they’re so unhappy with Akin that they want to let Democrats keep control of the Senate. My guess is those folks will ultimately hold their noses and support their party’s candidate.”
This shows that conservatives have the upper hand. This is not the time to desert the GOP. It’s what the establishment hope’s you’ll do. They tested the mettle of the conservatives by last-minute rule changes at the convention. The establishment hoped conservatives would walk.
Second, begin to recruit and groom candidates who will run as reform candidates on a unified competing political platform within the GOP. It would help to find candidates who have political experience and some name recognition.
Third, bloggers and websites should be started immediately to lay out the specifics of the new platform. Use the web to get around the political establishment gatekeepers. There are email lists to rent to help get the message out on a candidate and raise money.
Fourth, build a giant email list of donors, bloggers, information gatherers, and propagators of the party-within-the-party takeover movement.
Fifth, keep the kooks from taking over the process. It doesn’t take long for wackos, true believers, ideological political perfectionists, and fringe politicos to ruin a campaign. The political purists are the worst. If they don’t get everything they want today, they’re walking. Let them walk and rant and rave on Facebook.
Sixth, the energy behind the effort will encourage other candidates to jump on board. We might even get the kind of presidential candidate that will truly be about reform. But a new president won’t be enough. There needs to be a national reform effort that affects local, county, and state offices. Politics is a bottom-up enterprise.
Will the malcontents follow this strategy? Probably not. They will bellyache about how bad the candidates and the two-party system are then tell those who don’t vote for one of their miracle candidates that they are not “principled” voters.
The Republicans and Democrats are in power because they worked at it. If you want to revamp the political system, it’s going to take a lot of work and very few miracles. Are you up to it?
email
Print Friendly

LET KIDS WORK AGAIN AND LEARN ABOUT LIFE

Posted by WP
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

Bring Back Child Labor

Bring Back Child Labor
It was time for our beach trip, the one I take with my wife and daughter every summer. On a beautiful early morning a month ago, we packed the family car (okay, my wife packed it) and headed from our home in Oxford, Miss., to Florida’s Gulf Coast for a week of fun and sun.
Some call it the Redneck Riviera. This Jersey transplant and his Mississippi girls call it paradise.
It’s the same Gulf Coast, by the way, that the media predicted — even seemed to hope — would be flooded with crude oil and destroyed as a result of the BP oil spill. That apocalypse never happened, but the region needed two years to recover from the really bad publicity spill, which the media never bothered to clean up.
We hit the road at 6 a.m. so as not to lose a day at the beach, and by 10 a.m. we were all getting hungry, so we stopped at a Subway shop in a small town somewhere in rural Alabama.
As we entered, we were greeted by an Indian-immigrant couple in their mid-30s and their daughter, who appeared to be no older than twelve. I didn’t ask.
While we were thinking about what to order, the young girl was busily making trip after trip from a prep area in the back of the family’s franchise to the counter, filling each of the bins with produce. First it was thinly sliced fresh tomatoes, then lettuce, then onions. Then it was olives, and jalapeño peppers.
When we ordered our lunch, she removed her plastic gloves and cheerfully switched roles. The prep girl was now the sandwich dresser.
“What would you like on your sandwiches?” she asked us, and then dutifully complied with our odd choices.
That’s the great thing about Subway. They’ve got all those toppings, and no matter how weird the request — and boy! have I heard some weird ones — they always comply.
The girl’s parents, probably without realizing this is what they were doing, were teaching their daughter that empowering customers to have the sandwich they want, and not the sandwich the store wants them to have, is good business.
The girl then switched roles again, going from sandwich dresser to cashier.
“Would you like some chips and a large drink with that?” she asked. I said yes. Who could say no to a cute twelve-year-old?
Her parents had also taught her the art of the upsell. And she was not yet a teenager!
The girl then rang up our order, took our cash, gave us our change quickly (and accurately), and did it all cheerfully and professionally. She was clearly having a good time. There was no sulking, no pouting, and no sense at all that she was mad at her parents for making her work on a beautiful summer Saturday.
And all the while, she was learning some important life lessons. Lessons that are not being taught in our nation’s schools. And are not being taught in far too many American homes. Lessons like these:
Serving a good fresh product at a fair price can lead to a profit, if you watch your expenses.
Customers like choices, and they like good service.
Kids can actually contribute to the GFP — the Gross Family Product.
The free market works.
It’s sad to say this, but that girl in the Subway shop knows more about what makes a small business hum than anyone in the Obama administration. And she has more knowledge of entrepreneurialism than many MBAs.
But she was also learning some other important life lessons. Lessons that build something few people like to talk about these days — character.
She was learning that work is good. That she is not entitled to anything. That money doesn’t grow on trees. That to have money, one must earn it.
She was learning that her parents are not an ATM, and that it takes a lot of work to pay for things like food and cable and a house.
You have to sell a whole lot of Subway sandwiches to pay for an iPhone, let alone a car.
The couple who own that Subway shop should get a parenting award, because they have dared to do something that many modern parents refuse to do: expose their kids early to the exigencies and realities of life. They heaped adult responsibility on their twelve-year-old daughter, and she ate it up. They gave her duties and responsibilities, and she owned them. They permitted her to be a part of the family business, and she was grateful.
Many parents I know do the opposite. Instead of making their kids work for what they want, they simply give them stuff. Instead of making them work for an Android or an iPad or a car, parents simply give their kids these goodies, and ask for nothing in return. Not a thing.
These are the same coddling parents who try to protect their children from all of life’s problems. Skinned knees? Let’s get our precious little ones some kneepads. A bad bump at the playground? Rubberize the place.
A bad grade from the teacher? Who needs grades? Let’s just give everyone a gold star.
Or worse, let’s appeal that bad grade.
In their endless desire to raise their children’s self-esteem, those parents are creating spoiled, entitled kids, and actually hurting their chances of succeeding in an ever more competitive work force.
That twelve-year-old in the Subway shop has real self-esteem. The kind you get only by earning it.
The kids who get what they want, when they want it, have the look of bored adults by the time they reach 18. They are insufferable before they’ve ever suffered. Indeed, that’s why they are insufferable. They get everything they want, and nothing seems to satisfy them.
I was reading the Ole Miss newspaper the other day (Oxford is home to the state’s flagship university campus), and there was a full-page ad for what appeared to be a beautiful retirement condo complex. Upon closer inspection, I learned it wasn’t for seniors at all, but rather for students.
The complex was called “The Retreat.” As if college kids need a “retreat” from their tough grind of 15 hours of classes a week.
Then came the list of amenities: “Fitness center. Movie theater. Sand volleyball court. Basketball court. Golf simulator. Fire pit. Green space. Swimming pool. Tanning domes. Computer lounge.”
Golf simulators? Sand volleyball courts? Is this a college dorm parents are paying for, or a Club Med?
When did a bed, a desk, a chair, a lamp, good study tools (today a laptop is actually essential), and a hot plate stop being a sufficient starting place for learning?
This is the great culture war no one is talking about right now in America. It’s the battle of the parents with common sense who want to raise responsible kids against the parents who give their kids what they want, when they want it.
Time after time in this bucolic town, my wife and I see college students — some of them all of 18 — walk out of gyms or restaurants in the middle of the day and step into Range Rovers or Mercedes-Benzes. We always do one of those double-takes you see in movies.
What the heck?” we say to ourselves. Because it shocks us to see young people casually strut into $70,000 vehicles and act as if those cars are theirs.
We make a very good living, and we don’t own cars like that.
I can’t tell you the number of times we’ve been at a fancy steakhouse in town, and there next to us are eight college kids laughing it up, well dressed and having a good ole time. And when the bill arrives, out comes mom and dad’s credit card.
I didn’t take a girl to a fancy restaurant until I was 25. Until then, my dates got the Denny’s special.
And when I talk to these students and ask them if they have a job, they look at me as if I had just sprung a second head. “A job? Are you kidding me?” is the look I get. They don’t even bother to respond verbally.
And our little girl, Reagan — who is seven years old — sees all of this. She sees the stuff other kids have, and she will soon be asking us why we don’t give her the stuff those other parents give their kids.
We will tell Reagan, once she’s old enough, that if she wants that stuff, she’ll have to work to get it. That we’ll help, but she has to have some skin in the game, so that she’ll appreciate the work it takes.
She won’t like it at first. What kid does? But this I know: If more of us parents who think this way will simply stick to our guns, we can beat back those crazy parents who give their kids everything.
We need to fight back against the coddling culture and ask of our kids what our parents asked of us, and what their parents asked of them: Do your part. Work hard. And help pay your own way. Just a bit.
So on this Labor Day, I have an idea that I hope will soon spread around the country like a virus: Let’s extol the virtues of work, and of working children.
Not the sweatshop, indentured-servitude kind of child labor. I’m talking about the kind we all experienced when we were kids: the paper route, the job at McDonald’s or 7-Eleven, which was my first job. Or a lawn-mowing service in the neighborhood.
Labor Day as it is celebrated is really Union Day. And unions in the past 30 years have been all about slowing down work and pitting worker against owner.
I say we parents — we Americans — who care about work must make Labor Day a celebration of all work.
And while we’re at it, bring back child labor once and for all.

5 LESSONS FROM THE 2012 GOP CONVENTION

Posted by Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

5 Things We Learned from the 2012 Republican National Convention

1] The GOP has a deep bench.Proving yet again that its first principles and ideas that drive people to become Republicans, almost in spite of itself the GOP has an emerging generation of leaders that seem dramatically superior to the current one. It seems not even the “surrender now before it’s too late” Republican Party establishment have been able to stifle the development of a cache of rising stars that really make the Bushes, McCains, and Boehners of the world seem like the mammary glands on a bull they’re about as useful as. Speaking of which…
2. Paul Ryan worries the Left more than Mitt Romney does.
The Leftists literally had a cow over Ryan’s dynamite speech, which on a scale of 1-to-10 I would rate a 12.5. However, they were surprisingly muted about Romney’s convention effort one night later. Again, this is the power of ideas. Even though Ryan has voted for too much big government in the U.S. Congress, his budget plan is a substantive threat to the welfare state because it at least starts a long-overdue conversation about the country’s insolvency. Even Ryan dipping a toe in the waters of fiscal sanity is enough to give the statists hissy fits. Romney doesn’t provoke that sort of reaction from them, because they don’t believe he’s really a threat to their long term plans even if he wins.
3. Romney’s Bush-era buddies are worried about a primary in 2016.
The brouhaha at the start of the convention over the Romulans’ Draconian rules changes wasn’t about the militant faction of the Ron Paul contingent. That was a mere ruse used by the Republican Party establishment to justify their attempted power grab. The real motivation was heading off at the pass the recent tidal wave of Tea Party candidates primarying big government incumbent Republicans from reaching a potential Romney White House in 2016. In the 2010 and 2012 primary cycles, almost 90 incumbent Republicans across the country have lost their jobs. Several in Romney’s inner circle are old Bush family loyalists, including John Sununu who chaired the rules committee at the convention. They remember what happened when George H.W. Bush earned the scorn of conservatives by violating his “no new taxes” pledge, which resulted in a damaging primary campaign by Pat Buchanan in 1992. This power grab was an attempt to insulate Romney from similar Tea Party scrutiny in 2016 if he were to govern left-of-center in the White House, similar to how he governed in Massachusetts.
4. Chris Christie is the establishment’s man in 2016 if Romney loses.
The establishment preferred Christie to Romney this time around, but the first term governor elected not to run. However, he was given the prime keynote speaking slot, and took almost 20 minutes in his speech before mentioning Romney by name. The speech was more Christie’s vision for America and the GOP than rah-rah for Romney. If he wins re-election in New Jersey and Romney loses this fall, Christie will be the establishment’s presidential candidate in 2016.
5. The Democrats “War on Women” meme hit the mark.
The convention went out of its way to feature women, and just about every American cliché about mom and apple pie was uttered from the podium. The pandering was so thick even Jen and Rebekah in our show’s “Amen Corner” were starting to get nauseous. Romney wasted precious moments of his convention speech essentially doing the political equivalent of “I didn’t beat my wife last night” by trying to persuade Americans he wasn’t a misogynist. Why accept the phony premise of the Left’s diversity psychobabble in the first place? Why play along with the balkanization of America? Should Nikki Haley be celebrated because she’s a woman, or because she’s an effective governor of South Carolina? Republicans are at their best when urging Americans to rise above cynical identity gutter politics and embrace and defend the values and institutions that made this the greatest country on earth. Don’t try and out-pander the Democrats, because all it demonstrates is your own defensiveness. Romney should have said this instead:
Shame on this president who promised to unite us but instead has polarized this country even more along racial and gender lines. Just another broken promise from a failed president. The American dream is that no matter who you are and where you're from, the opportunity exists for you to maximize your God-given potential and leave a better future ahead for your children. When I’m president, if you want to contribute to American Exceptionalism you’re going to get that opportunity, no matter who you are. As one of the most famous Democrat presidents of all time once said, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”
If Romney wants to win he’ll let Obama pander his Leftist drivel to his own echo chamber while he takes the case for American Exceptionalism directly to the American people. One of my 10 Commandments of Political Warfare: never, ever, accept the premise of your opponent. If this election is a competency hearing, Romney can win. If it’s diversity training you’ll get four more years of Obama.

FREEDOM IS THE ONLY ISSUE FACING AMERICANS

Posted by Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

Freedom is the Only Issue Facing Americans

Freedom is the Only Issue Facing Americans

The political parties throw a lot of glitz at us with their made-for-TV spectaculars, which we call conventions.
But the bottom line defining the choice facing Americans this year is stark and clear, and these conventions provide no new insights or information.
If you think we're struggling because we don't have enough government, then the Democrats are the party for you. If you think the point of government is to protect individual freedom, and the problem is it has gone way beyond that, then Republicans are the party for you.
No visual dominates the landscape of our nation's capital like the Washington Monument. Today, however, other than memorializing our first president, it also provides a message about the role and efficacy of government.
Last year on Aug. 23, a 5.8-magnitude earthquake hit Washington, D.C. The earthquake caused cracks in the monument, which stands at a height of almost two football fields, so the National Park Service shut it down.
Now, one year later, the monument remains in disrepair, closed to the 600,000 annual visitors it usually receives.
The Washington Post reported in January that the monument would be closed until sometime in 2013. According to that report, the contract to do the repairs would "probably not be awarded until late summer, with work starting sometime after that."
Now the latest report in The Washington Post indicates that repair of the monument may not be complete until sometime in 2014.
In January 1994, Los Angeles was hit with a massive 6.7-magnitude earthquake, knocking down two sections of the Santa Monica Freeway.
An initial estimate from the California Department of Transportation was that it would take 12 to 18 months for repairs.
Considering the massive potential costs to the local economy of shutting down sections of the world's busiest freeway, Caltrans officials decided to turn loose the time-tested formula for American success: market incentives and individual ingenuity.
They opened bidding to contractors who would accelerate the repair process, offering incentive bonuses for early completion.
The result: The repairs were completed in less than three months, with the contractor collecting a $14.5 million bonus for finishing 74 days ahead of schedule.
A rule of life is that we can always expect the unexpected.
Natural disasters deliver this truth in graphic and shocking ways. But the unexpected is with us constantly, natural disasters or not.
It's why an enduring society must be a free society. Only when free can individuals deal with life's endless surprises in creative and resilient ways.
Bureaucracy and government control are guarantees for failure.
Now, sadly, we watch those on Louisiana's Gulf Coast bear the brunt again of a brutal hurricane.
Think of the despair that followed Katrina. There was no shortage of opinions that New Orleans was done forever, that it could never recover.
But, human resilience, will, creativity and freedom have revived this city.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate in the New Orleans region is below the national average.
The Wall Street Journal recently reported on the surge of entrepreneurial activity that has occurred there. Tax incentives have given birth to a growing, nationally competitive film industry, with music and software design following suit.
A failed public school system has been revitalized, with 80 percent of the schools now charter schools.
Shouldn't it tell us something that Apple, the icon for innovation, once on the brink of failure, is now the most valuable company in history?
And that all the major areas where we are having problems are areas controlled or dominated by government?
Americans don't need to watch fancily produced political conventions to know that one question faces us this year: Do we want to be free?

WHY I MAY CARRY A GUN

Posted by Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

I don't carry a gun to kill people.
I carry a gun to keep from being killed.
I don't carry a gun to scare people.
I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.
I don't carry a gun because I'm paranoid.
I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world..
I don't carry a gun because I'm evil.
I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.
I don't carry a gun because I hate the government.
I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government..
I don't carry a gun because I'm angry.
I carry a gun so that I don't have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.
I don't carry a gun because I want to shoot someone.
I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.
I don't carry a gun because I'm a cowboy.
I carry a gun because, when I die and go to heaven, I want to be a cowboy.
I don't carry a gun to make me feel like a man.
I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.
I don't carry a gun because I feel inadequate.
I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.
I don't carry a gun because I love it.
I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.
Free citizens must protect themselves.
Police do not protect you from crime, they usually just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.

 I carry a gun because The Constitution gives me the right to do so even over the governments objections.   by wp


 

image

SOLDIERS KNOW OBAMA'S LIES

Posted by Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV


By Neil Munro


US President Barack Obama addresses troops inside the 1st Aviation Support Battalion Hangar August 31, 2012 at Fort Bliss, Texas. (Photo: MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images)
President Barack Obama was greeted with fleeting applause and extended periods of silence as he offered profuse praise to soldiers and their families during an Aug. 31 speech in Fort Bliss, Texas.
His praise for the soldiers — and for his own national-security policies — won cheers from only a small proportion of the soldiers and families in the cavernous aircraft-hanger.
The audience remains quiet even when the commander-in-chief thanked the soldiers’ families, and cited the 198 deaths of their comrades in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The audience’s reaction was so flat that the president tried twice to elicit a reaction from the crowd.
“Hey, I hear you,” he said amid silence.
The selected soldiers who were arrayed behind the president sat quietly throughout the speech.
CNN and MSNBC ended their coverage of the speech before it was half-over.



The president’s speech to the soldiers is part of his constitutional duties as commander-in-chief.
But Obama and his wife are also trying to reach out to military families in several critical swing-states, including Virginia and Florida. (RELATED: Obama warm to scientists, cold to soldiers)
That outreach, however, has been damaged by repeated flubs from the White House, including its public emphasis on soldiers’ wounds rather than on their accomplishments, and Obama’s effort to distance himself from the anti-jihad campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan.
For example, Obama gave Vice President Joe Biden the task of developing a post-war agreement with Iraq’s government in 2009. The effort failed, reducing U.S. gains from the campaign that killed almost 4,500 troops, and as well as thousands of jihadis and Sunni insurgents seeking to regain power. The subsequent withdrawal of nearly all U..S. troops has allowed Iran to increase its influence in Iraq. In turn, that influence helps it support Syria’s dictatorship against Sunni insurgents.
White House officials are trying to avoid additional flubs. On Friday, for example, White House officials rushed to debunk a report that the president had used an autopen to sign condolence letters to soldiers’ families.
Throughout Friday’s speech, the loudest reactions came when the president name-checked the nicknames of the soldiers’ brigades. Major military units have their own rival cheers, and those could be heard from portions of the audience when he referred to individual units.
The troops’ silence continued through several obvious applause-lines.
There was isolated cheers when Obama said his withdrawal policy would ensure “fewer deployments … more time to prepare for the future, and it means more time on the home front, with your families, your home and kids.”
The silence deepened when the president lauded his strategy of withdrawal from the war. “Make no mistake, ending the wars responsibly makes us safer and our military even stronger, and ending these wars is letting us do something else; restoring American leadership,” he said amid complete silence.
When he said demobilized soldiers would find jobs because “all of you have the skills America needs,” he got little reaction.
There was no reaction when he promised stepped-up recruitment of soldiers for police jobs.
He won some applause when he announced his support for soldiers injured in combat.
The most enthusiastic applause came when he lauded the soldiers’ military mission, and promised continued support for that professional task.
An anecdote about his meeting with a wounded soldier was met with a tepid response, until he described the soldier’s determination to recover and return to his unit. “He’s where every soldier wants to be – back with his unit,” Obama said, generating applause.
Similarly, his declaration that “around the world there’s a new attitude toward America, a new confidence in our leadership” yielded only silence, while his next sentence — “When people are asked ‘Which country do you admire most?’ one nation always comes out on top, the United States of America” — prompted relative enthusiasm.
The White House’s video-feed cut off 10 seconds after the president finished his speech, before the audience’s reaction overall could be gauged by viewers.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/31/obama-speech-to-soldiers-met-with-silence/#ixzz25EnTvCCb

FEDS ANYTHING BUT TRANSPARENT ON NUDE BODY SCANNERS

Posted by Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV


READ THIS AND VOTE..LIKE YOU MEANT IT...

Posted by bh
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR FZTV



This ought to concern anyone and everyone who uses a bank for any transactions! ON JANUARY 1, 2013, THE US GOVERNMENT WILL BE REQUIRING EVERYONE TO HAVE DIRECT DEPOSIT FOR SS CHECKS.

WONDER WHY?

Subject: HR 4646

Be sure to read entire explanation

Watch for this AFTER November elections; remember this BEFORE you VOTE, in case you think Obama is looking out for your best interest.


A 1% tax on all bank transactions is what HR 4646 calls for.


Do you receive a paycheck, or a retirement check from Social Security or a pension fund and have it direct deposit??

Well guess what ... It looks as if Obama wants to tax it 1% !!!


This bill was put forth by Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-PA).

YES, that is 1% tax on all bank transactions - HR 4646, every time it goes in and every time money goes out.

Ask your congressperson to vote NO.

FORWARD THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW!

1% tax on all bank transactions ~ HR 4646 - ANOTHER NEW OBAMA TAX SLIPPED IN WHILE WE WERE ASLEEP. Checked this on snopes, it's true! Check it out yourself ~ HR 4646.

President Obama's finance team is recommending a one percent (1%) transaction fee (TAX). Obama's plan is to sneak it in after the November elections to keep it under the radar.

This is a 1% tax on all transactions at any financial institution - banks, credit unions, savings and loans, etc. Any deposit you make, or even a transfer within your own bank from one account to another, will have a 1% tax charged.

If your paycheck or your Social Security or whatever is direct deposit, it will get a 1% tax charged for the transaction.

If your paycheck is $1000, then you will pay Obama $10 just for the privilege of depositing your paycheck in your bank. Even if you hand carry your paycheck or any check in to your bank for a deposit, 1% tax will be charged.

You receive a $5,000 stock dividend from your broker,Obama takes $50 just to allow you to deposit that check in the bank.

If you take $1,000 cash to deposit at your bank, 1% tax will be charged.

Mind you, this is from the man who promised that, if you make under $250,000 per year, you will not see one penny of new tax.

Keep your eyes and ears open, you will be amazed at what you learn about this guy's under-the-table moves to increase the number of ways you are taxed.

Oh, and by the way, if you receive a refund from the IRS next year and you have it direct deposited or you walk in to deposit that check, you guessed it. You will pay a 1% charge of that money just for putting it in your bank.

Remember, any money, cash, check or whatever, no matter where it came from, you will pay a 1% fee if you put it in the bank.

Some will say, oh well, it's just 1%. Are you kidding me? It's a 1% tax increase across the board. Remember, once the tax is there, they can also raise it at will. And if anyone protests, they will just say, "Oh,that's not really a tax, it's a user fee"!

Think this is no big deal? Go back and look at the transactions you made from last year's banking statements. Then add the total of all those transactions and deduct 1%. Still think it's no big deal?


The following is copied from Snopes:


1.
snopes.com: Debt Free America Act•••
Is the U.S.government proposing a 1% tax on debit card usage and/or banking transactions?

.....It is true. The bill is HR-4646introduced by US Rep Peter deFazio D-Oregon and US Senator Tom Harkin D-Iowa. Their plan is to sneak it in after the...
...moved beyond proposing studies and submitted the Debt Free America Act (H.R. 4646), a bill calling for the implementation of a scheme to pay down the...
...[2010] by Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-Pa.). His "Debt Free America Act" (H.R. 4646) would impose a 1 percent "transaction tax" on every financial transaction...
Wed, 02 Nov 201111:27:37 GMThttp://
www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/debtfree.asp
This e-mail, including any attached files, is CONFIDENTIAL and intended for the EXCLUSIVE use of the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Advanced Flexible Composites, Inc. ("AFC") cannot accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of AFC. Any technical information provided is accurate to the best of our knowledge and experience, but is no guarantee of specific performance. Nor shall it be construed as creating any express or implied warranty or any kind of description as to quality of performance of product or process.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...