Friday, December 25, 2015

Holiday Blues...... for next year.

Holidays like Christmas can be stressful. For the average American the reach of the American dream is boiling away .  Here’s the truth about Obama’s economic “recovery” summed up . The $1 trillion growth gap. This economic recovery is the slowest in 50 years. If we had had the same pace of improvement since June 2009 when the recession ended as in an average recovery, national output and incomes would be more than $1 trillion larger today. In other words, we would have about $10,000 more income per family than we do.The raiseless recovery. It’s been 10 years since Americans in the middle class got a pay raise that kept pace with inflation. Median income households today make $1,500 less than they did even since the recession officially ended. (1)>>The recession really hasn’t ended for half of all families. Inequality is worse. President Obama has made closing the gap between rich and poor his highest priority. Guess what? The Gini coefficient (as measured by the Census Bureau), the left’s favorite measure of income inequality, rose each of Mr. Obama’s first four years in office, breaking all-time highs in both 2011 and 2012, and it remains high. The American dream goes bust. Double dip is not a term that a government keen to extricate itself from the economic-crisis-management business likes to hear. A couple of weeks ago, the Obama Administration was poised to switch to growth mode. Then the ugly data started pouring in like the overflowing Mississippi. First-quarter GDP numbers showed a measly 1.8% increase, well short of the expectations of above 3%, and second-quarter estimates are not much better. Then came a report on housing-price declines that have not been seen since the Great Depression, followed by reports of consumer spending at six-month lows and weak manufacturing surveys. Obamacare might be hitting hard next year with the (**)>> mandatory penalties regarding non enrollees.  The only reason the “Affordable” Care Act is even remotely affordable to anyone is because of the tens of billions of dollars in subsidies it hands out to about 6.4 million enrollees.Obamacare’s backers are quick to point out that these rate requests aren’t final — and that states often dial them back.But what they don’t say is that these rates are based on hard, historical data — actual claims experience. As insurance industry expert Robert Laszewski said, A 35 percent rate increase is hardly going to be rolled back to 5 percent.”Spiraling premiums are precisely what critics said would happen once Obamacare’s benefit mandates, taxes, fees, and regulations took effect. This may seem redundant, given all of the attention to huge price spikes in the ObamaCare exchanges in states like Minnesota (between 34-50% for most plans) and Mississippi (over 60%). Even CBS News has begun to wake up to the rapidly escalating costs of insurance in the so-called Affordable Care Act exchanges. Yet ObamaCare advocates argue that these price explosions are localized and not indicative of the overall direction of premium prices in 2016. Social Security , no one is getting a raise . The lame excuse , For the third time this decade, Social Security recipients won’t be seeing an annual cost-of-living adjustment.Blame soft inflation, including the nearly 30% drop in gas prices over the past year. The official price measure used to calculate the annual living-cost adjustment was down 0.4% from last year’s level in the third quarter, the Labor Department said .The second biggest cost of home ownership — following the mortgage — is usually property taxes. In 2012, U.S. homeowners paid an average of about $2,800 in property taxes, according to a recent Zillow study. And if you live in New York, New Jersey, or Colorado your taxes were in some cases five times more than the national average. The numbers are based on an average of real estate taxes paid on single family housing since 2012.The middle class hasn’t experienced the recovery that the mathematical equations of economics says it has. Evidence of that includes high debt, low borrowing, and low wages as well as still-high unemployment and people dropping out of the labor force. US households are struggling with high debt. American households have $8.38tn of loans to pay back, including mortgages, which as much as they owed in 2007 just before the financial crisis. Mortgage loans are still hard to get, meaning that those with houses will have trouble moving for a new job; with mortgages hard to get, housing costs at near-record levels, and paychecks stagnant, the financial benefit of moving for a job is half what it was a few decades ago. Those economists could do more to acknowledge how far from a real recovery we are. Promising things will get better eventually doesn’t really work when Americans are thinking about how to pay the bills today. 

(**)>> mandatory penalties regarding non enrollees. The Affordable Care Act imposed penalties for those not having qualifying health care coverage. Those penalties started at $95 per adult, or 1% of income above the filing threshold in 2014, but they rose to $285 per adult, or 2% of income above the filing limit in 2015. For 2016, penalties will rise again, hitting $695 per adult, or 2.5% of income. A family maximum will apply to the per-person amount, but the $2,085 amount will be substantially higher than the $975 in 2015, and the $285 in 2014.  (1)>>The recession .The federal government took in a record of approximately $3,248,723,000,000 in taxes in fiscal 2015 (which ended on Sept. 30), it is also up about $212,927,100,000 in constant 2015 dollars from the $3,035,795,900,000 in revenue (in 2015 dollars) that the Treasury raked in during fiscal 2014.So even as the Treasury was hauling in a record $3,248,723,000,000 in tax revenues in fiscal 2015, the federal government was spending $3,687,622,000,000. The federal government ran a deficit of $438,899,000,000 for the fiscal year.

Saturday, December 19, 2015

Putin's Trumpet.

Putin's Trumpet.
Donald TRUMP just got his biggest endorsement : Russian President (**) Vladimir PutinPutin in fact was VERY diplomatic in his reply - he praised Trump's personality.Putin praised Donald Trump on Thursday for wanting deeper ties with Russia and described him as the “absolute front-runner in the presidential race.”“He is a very flamboyant man, very talented, no doubt about that... He is the absolute leader of the presidential race, as we see it today. He says that he wants to move to another level of relations, to a deeper level of relations with Russia. How can we not welcome that? Of course we welcome it,” Putin said during his traditional end-of-year Q&A session with journalists. However, the Russian president noted that he was ready to work with whoever becomes the next US head of state.  (1)>> Trump said in October that he and Putin "are very different" but suggested that the two men could move beyond the frigid relations that have come to define U.S.-Russia relations under President Barack  Obama."I think that I would at the same time get along very well with him. He does not like Obama at all. He doesn't respect Obama at all. And I'm sure that Obama doesn't like him very much," Trump said then. "But I think that I would probably get along with him very well. And I don't think you'd be having the kind of problems that you're having right now." Donald Trump basked in the praise of Russian President Vladimir Putin and returned the compliment by noting Putin's poll numbers "in the 80s" and calling him "powerful" during an interview Friday morning.In a  interview, on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," host  (3)>> Joe Scarborough asked Trump whether he'd considered the brutality of Putin's tactics. Scarborough pointed out that Putin "is also a person who kills journalists, political opponents, and invades countries. Obviously that would be a concern, would it not?" Trump responded, "He's running his country, and at least he's a leader, unlike what we have in this country." Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump responded to Vladimir Putin’s comment, in which the Russian president called Trump “the absolute front-runner,” stating that it was a “great honor” to receive praise from a “highly respected” leader like Putin.“It is always a great honor to be so nicely complimented by a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond,”Trump said at a rally in Columbus, Ohio. I understand hes the only one praising Putin. But, I would stay cool and support no one than a bad one like Trump, besides, one thing is for sure: It doesn't really mater who will be the next guy in DC, he or she will have to deal with Russia as partner anyway. The Americans know it, a good example is the Kerry visit this week> a true sign from Washington that there will be and there cant be any "world policy" without Russia. Did he want to fly to Moscow? No, Did he Must fly to Moscow? Yep.So my message to Mr. Putin: play your Trump cards close to your chest and wait, the next guy in DC will come to you, there is no choice anyway, as to undoing the foreign policy mess of Mr. Obama.
Trump's Trumpet.
He’s a billionaire. Many of his supporters are low-income victims of a shrinking middle class. Trump's populist rhetoric, including attacks on Islam and Washington insiders, hits home to a huge group of Americans who worry about immigration and the growing threat of terrorism, who are sick of what they see as political correctness run amok, who feel trapped by a changing economy, and who — most significantly — (2)>> have lost faith in a government they believe has let them down and left them behind. Does Mr. Trump ruin the Republican brand? That tends to be the eager question of those who hope he will ruin the Republican brand. But he’s his own brand. He doesn’t call his hotels “Republican Plaza.” He spends much of his time knocking Republicans, setting himself apart from the party and its contenders.In the past two presidential elections, the Republican Party tried to shove down on voters throat their choice candidate.  In the process they became their own worst enemies, and now again they are trying to alienate their best presidential candidate, Donald Trump.  Don't republicans ever learn?  With this attitude they are heading toward losing a presidential election against a week opponent for the third time in a row.  Trump is the best republican candidate, and with a solid Republican Party support he can easily win.  Listen to the voters.  Trump is in number one place. 

(**) Vladimir Putin. While the majority of Democrat and Republican candidates have been scoring points by criticizing  Russia, Trump has taken a different tone, saying he wants to work with Moscow if elected.“I have always felt that Russia and the United States should be able to work well with each other towards defeating terrorism and restoring world peace, not to mention trade and all of the other benefits derived from mutual respect,” he reiterated on Thursday.Trump has said in the past that he sees himself getting along with Putin. “I would get along with him,” Trump said in September. “I would get along with a lot of the world leaders that this country is not getting along with.”Trump has also expressed strong support for Russia’s bombing campaign against terrorist groups in Syria, which started on September 30 following a formal request from Damascus.“I like that Putin is bombing the hell out of IS,” Trump said in October. “I’ll tell you why. Putin has to get rid of IS ’cause Putin does not want IS coming into Russia,” he added.(1)>> Trump. Putin cements Trump's status as a world leader, not just the overlord of American Media. In just the past 48 hours, 18 million people watched him debate, 15,100 people attended the AZ Airplane Hanger Rally, Trump was the Headliner on O'Reilly, and Trump was the lead guest on Kimmel.Meanwhile, Obama is being ignored as he makes the same tired all is well speech almost every day now, Sanders only appears on milk cartons and the Cruz Rubio Feud has gotten as livelly as dos Prima Donas en una Telenovela! As the election season continues on and Trump becomes the nominee and gaining in popularity, you will see the liberals frothing, cursing, foaming, spewing and convulsing their vile hatred. It's gonna be great! They will then see and feel what it's been like having Obama. The difference coming is that the liberals will not accept the will of the people. My advice to you.... don't get to frisky with Trump as President... you won't like it. (2)>> have lost faith in a government. When I look at Hillary Clinton's achievements I can't name any substantial good accomplishment.  I am not alone.  On the other hand I can easily recall at least six substantially negative executions of her:  the HMO fiasco of the 1990's, the White Water lies on national television, her miserable performance as Secretary of State, her ill-fated war recommendations, her hand in creating the Russian uranium supplier monopoly, her incompetence in the Benghazi cover up. Do I want such a political harlot to run the United States?   (3)>> Joe Scarborough. Jack Scarborough claims that PUTIN WAS MURDERING JOURNALISTS????? I have never seen any CORROBORATION OF THOSE CLAIMS....and what I think is that the MEDIA is trying to start A SPIN STORM WITH THOSE COMMENTS SO THAT WE CAN ALL HATE PUTIN AS MUCH AS THEY DO!!!!

Saturday, December 12, 2015

The Slight Case of Islam- O- phobia ........

 (1)>>Donald Trump sometimes knows how to stir controversy . He's a guy that NEVER BACKS DOWN on what he says . So this week he blew a good one .He now faces  harsh criticism for his proposal to temporarily halt Muslim immigration to the U.S., Donald Trump on Wednesday said he was acting in the (2)>> Islamic community's best interests."I'm doing good for the Muslims," Trump told Don Lemon in an interview for "CNN Tonight." "Many Muslim friends of mine are in agreement with me. Well PERSONAL Mr. Trump may have "misspoken" . MAYBE he should of said : " We should be Cautious of any one coming to America with a Visa from the Middle-East ..... I THINK that I'am trying to analyze  what he is saying , but HONESTLY Trump can't ban Muslims , you can't persecute anyone who embraces a certain religion . There   (5)>>SERIOUS POINT  on  what the nation should is do ,and that is "profiling" of certain individuals who do come in from the Middle-East . I have friends who are Muslim, and they are American born , yet attend one of most Liberal Mosques . You can't beat every Muslim , and lump them up on one category .  There are as many good Muslims as there are "bad" ones , as well there are "bad" Christians  just as much as good Christians.
Our nation gripped with fear .
(3)>>Muslims across the United States are experiencing an unprecedented increase in hate crimes and bias incidents, community leaders say, amid a rise in anti-Islamic rhetoric by politicians following deadly attacks by extremists in Paris and CaliforniaLeaders in American Muslim communities say the rise in hate crimes and bias incidents began after Nov. 13, when gunmen belonging to the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) opened fire in Paris, killing 130 people. The number of reports spiked further after a Muslim couple, who reportedly pledged allegiance to IS,  killed 14 people a mass shooting in San Bernardino, California, on Dec. 2.The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim advocacy group, said reports of hate crimes and bias incidents are at an all-time high. (4)>> Islamophobia is not, however, a unique and growing American phenomenon. German Muslims fear the rise of Patriotische Europäer Gegen eine Islamisierung des Abendlandes (Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamicization of the West), or PEGIDA, which is active elsewhere as well. In France, Islamophobic fears revived when two gunmen affiliated with Al-Qaeda attacked Charlie Hebdo, a French satirical magazine, in January, killing 12 people, and intensified after the recent attacks. Elsewhere in Europe, anti-immigrant sentiments are often code for anti-Muslim. Islamophobia existed in America right after the 9 11 attacks not surprisingly since all the attackers and the terrorist group were muslims so there was fear of muslims in America which was a rational fear since we were just attacked by followers of this religion , but as muslims in America came out and condemned this terrorist attack and worked to communicate to people that they were not violent and as time has proven that muslim Americans are peaceful islamophobia when it comes to American muslims really no longer exists . There is still "islamophobia" when it comes to foreign muslims however since time has proven that muslims from certain areas are in fact violent and have a jihadi ideology . I do not recognize this movement as true islam but instead an islamic cult and i believe this from listening to muslim Americans and what they have said communication and understanding is always the cure for social phobias /prejudices . However terrorism acted out in the name of religion namely , has singled out all Muslims , that now can't be changed , you can't flush out images of beheading, suicide bombings . If Muslims seek western converts , they are going to have a difficult time.
Woman attacks Muslims praying in
California park (Facebook). Made
headlines .
 RECENTLY IN CALIFORNIAwoman hurled anti-Islam slurs and then hot coffee at a group of Muslims after she saw them praying in a California park. Rasheed Albeshari said he and some friends had just finished their prayers Sunday afternoon at Lake Chabot in Alameda County when the woman confronted them, reported Arab American NewsAlbeshari recorded cell phone video of the woman’s rant, beginning when she accused the men of being terrorists who tortured Christians.“The people you tortured, they’re going to spend eternity in heaven,” says the woman, who was carrying a cup of coffee, a folded umbrella and a fanny pack. “You are very deceived by Satan. Your mind has been taken over — brainwashed — and you have nothing but hate, nothing but hate.”A park ranger approaches at that point and asks the woman if her harangue of other park visitors is appropriate.“It is inappropriate, you’re right, for somebody to tape record me,” the woman says.The woman, identified as Denise Slader, encountered the men around 3 p.m. Sunday at the volleyball courts near the park’s entrance, according to parks spokeswoman Carolyn Jones. Slader is an employee of the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Jones said. On the video, Slader is heard saying, “The people you tortured, are going to be in eternity in heaven. You are very deceived by Satan. Your mind has been taken over, brainwashed, and you have nothing but hate. Nothing but hate.”“This woman came from nowhere,” Albeshari told KPIX Wednesday. “She was yelling, ‘Allah is Satan!’ ‘The Koran is evil!’ and ‘You are a bunch of brainwashed murderers!'” I find it MUCH more concerning that the yelling woman - who is identified in other reports by name - is a state correctional officer. Her public tantrum raises serious questions about her judgment while carrying a badge and probably a gun in a closed, locked facility where captive prisoners are subject to her 'authority'.
A Strange TWIST.  If you want a real statistic, there are over 1.3 billion Muslims in the world. Less
than .01% of them or terrorists.Another fact: Of all the Muslim immigrants in the US since 2001 who have entered due to refugee status, none (ZERO) of them have been so far as CHARGED with terrorism, much less convicted.Don't forget that the statistic, which is no doubt pulled out of some propaganda backside, is wholly dependent on one's definition of terrorism. Aurora, Colorado could easily been labeled terrorism had it been a dark guy inside of a white guy. BUT our government is too tight lipped on what to label as "terrorism". Under federal law, the term "terrorism" refers to any violent or dangerous crimes that "appear to be intended" to either (1) intimidate or coerce a civilian population, (2) influence government policy by intimidation or coercion, or (3) affect government conduct by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping. But we don't stop there. Even a mass shooting that does not intimidate or coerce a specific group of people may nonetheless be "terrorism" if it appears to be intended to change government policy or obstruct governmental functions.Did the killings in Colorado Springs appear to be intended to influence government policy as it relates to funding for Planned Parenthood or abortion rights? Whether it can be legally classified as an act of terrorism hinges on this.  With a disillusioned Oval Office , besieged on the national problem of gun violence . Obama is showing more and more just how delusional he is. It is out in the open every time he opens his mouth. The really scary thing is that, even though more and more people are waking up to this fact, there are still so many who believe and cling to every word he says. Pres. Obama injected As part of the solution to this type of terrorism, Obama called for more gun control in the United States.  “So far, we have no evidence that the killers were directed by a terrorist organization overseas, or that they were part of a broader conspiracy here at home,” Obama said. said that while the San Bernardino terrorists—who murdered 14 Americans—had embraced what he described as a “perverted interpretation of Islam” they had also adopted a form of violence that is “all too common” in America: (4)>> mass shootings. Many  Americans who responded called for changes to existing gun laws, especially to ban or regulate the sale of assault weapons. Others offered more creative solutions, including a proposal similar to one suggested by Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who died in 2003, and, in stronger terms, by the comedian Chris Rock. Some readers said that, though these attacks are both tragic and frightening, new regulations would not stop mass shootings. SOMETHING has to be done, since Columbine things have spun out of control in America . Seriously enough the United States is sinking into some kind of wild wild west .

For Muslims there is only 
unwarranted shame . Next there is also is another twist to this (6)>"victimization" process . First of all "fear" is a candle burning in both directions . Most Muslims will be come victims of bigotry because a few radicals have painted a black flag in their mist .  After searching why and how the middle east is exploding . I have found that since the 1960's the entire Arab world was somehow transformed into a chaotic mess locked between two superpowers : The United States and USSR . The oil was perhaps one of the leading causes for prosperity in the Arab world , in which the greed of the western powers shaped the region Just prior to the Iranian Revolution in 1979 , the Arab world was heading toward complete westernization , not only of cultural standards , but there was great sentiment for western values . The erosion came about with the overthrow of the Shah.  What’s happened, of course, is that the Middle East has begun what Richard Haass of the Council on Foreign Relations has called its 30 Years’ War — an overlapping series of clashes and proxy wars that could go on for decades and transform identities, maps and the political contours of the region. The Sunni-Shiite rivalry is at full boil. Torn by sectarian violence, the nation of Iraq no longer exists in its old formThe Sunni vs. Sunni rivalry is boiling, too. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and other nations are in the midst of an intra-Sunni cold war, sending out surrogates that distort every other tension in the region.The Saudi-Iranian rivalry is going strong, too, as those two powers maneuver for regional hegemony and contemplate a nuclear arms race.  With issues of Islamic extremism, For decades, the principal enemies of democracy had muddled the issue by conducting their assaults in the name of a higher, or at least different, form of democracy. Regimes that rested solely on violence, like the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen engaged in a sordid imposture of democracy, as did those under foreign subjugation, They deny that Islamism is the problem; they also implicitly question whether, indeed, there is a problem. If it appears to us that democracy is lagging in the Muslim Middle East, this may be because we define democracy "according to specific Western standards."  There is some truth to the argument that anger at foreign policy and the West’s engagement with the Arab world is at the heart of Muslim anger, as well as a driver of radicalisation among Muslim youthThe “war on terror” – a phrase first used by US President George W. Bush just after the September 11 attacks in 2001 – was arguably a dismal failure. This attitude relieves the West of any sense of responsibility for current conditions in the Islamic world or elsewhere , whether for imperialism, capitalism, short-sighted Western support for repressive regimes in the region or anything else. In his view, the disenfranchisement of the Palestinian people and destabilization of the Middle East result purely from the unwillingness of Arabs and Muslims to face facts and look beyond grievances. There are some optimistic developments which suggest that it may be possible for the Arab world to escape from its autocratic past. The region has undergone structural changes such as increasing levels of education, urbanization and industrialization over the past 60 years. U.N. report released late last year found that IS had killed thousands of Muslims -- both Sunni and Shia -- between July and September of that year. This includes the slayings of three nurses in Mosul, Iraq, because they refused to provide medical care to IS fighters. IS also killed numerous Sunni imams for refusing to swear allegiance to IS, and beheaded another Sunni leader for refusing to support the group. Sadly in the Arab world Muslims are exterminating themselves .

(1)>>Donald Trump.     Amid an outcry over Donald Trump’s proposed ban on Muslims entering the country, prominent evangelist Franklin Graham has come out in support of the Republican presidential candidate’s plan, saying that he has been advocating a similar stance for months.“For some time I have been saying that Muslim immigration into the United States should be stopped until we can properly vet them or until the war with Islam is over,” Graham wrote on Facebook on Wednesday. “Donald J. Trump has been criticized by some for saying something similar. The new Speaker of the House Paul Ryan said yesterday that he disagrees — saying that ‘such views are not what this party stands for and more importantly it’s not what this country stands for.’Even if Donald Trump's unconstitutional proposal to shut out all Muslims was to be implemented, HOW can you maintain that IS radicals get shut out, during the "temporary" infinity (many years until IS is defeated)? --- genius Trump's simpleton proposal: "An immigration officer would ask 'Are you Muslim?'". I fell out of my chair laughing. Do you for real expect that an terrorist would simply be honest and say "yes" so to be refused entry? Only honest law-abiding Muslims would say "yes" and be shut out, and the liars and terrorists that'd do anything and say anything to get in will still get in!!! The only effective ways is background screening/clearance with more vigilance! Use your god-blessed brain and some simple analytical skills to filter irrational nonsense coming out of your mouth, Mr. Trump!! Do you know how much energy and money you've cost the people of this country in debating your irresponsible droppings?  And please stop capping America with the "war with Islam" label, Mr. Graham, and, don't say anything to add to chaos if you don't have sound strategies to implement your plan to serve its intended purpose!! (2)>> Islamic community's best interests. The "Prophet" Muhammad once said in one of his 'sayings' that . " For every evil deed by the few  who profess to be Muslims , the many good Muslims suffer". There is a great deal of truth to this saying, the majority of evil acts buy Muslims come from those who are Sunni's . Americans only have seen one side of the coin . True Muslims are told in the Holy Quran to " do righteous deeds , give alms to the poor and orphans ."  That injunction should stick, however it all depends on what "sect" in Islam you belong  . (3)>>Muslims across the United States    A majority of Americans have a negative view of Islam after the terrorist attacks in Paris and California, including a majority of Democrats.Fifty-eight percent of Americans now have an unfavorable opinion of Islam, according to the latest YouGov/Huffpost poll of Americans. That number includes 45 percent of Democrats, 58 percent of Independents and 75 percent of Republicans. YES, you can't get SEPTEMBER 11th ,2001 out of mind .   (4)>> mass shootings. What is preposterous, though, is the ease in which a Muslim American is labeled a terrorist when good old white Christian mass murderers like Robert Lewis Dear (the Planned Parenthood shooter) and Dylann Roof (the Charleston church shooter) just don't draw the same designation from conservatives. ALSO "black on black" shootings , the quick availability of guns , There are black (African Americans males ) mass shooters below, along with victim count. If you look up mass shootings, it's actually pretty in line with the overall population. Most people can name Roof, Dear, Lanza, Holmes, and know about Columbine and Newtown, but the rest never really made the news. None of these shooters was labeled a terrorist either. I think it's a media issue. Why is it when 4 people are killed in a drive by, something that happens with frightening regularity, nothing is made of it. No major media frenzy, nothing hits nationally. But when a shooter hits a mall or school, it's all over the place? Is it location that dictates it? Namely not confined to race alone but it's a pandemic : Omar Thornton (shot and killed 8 people), Maurice Clemmons (shot and killed 4 cops), Nathan Dunlap (killed 4ppl), The DC sniper, John Muhammad, and Lee Boyd Malvo (shot and killed 10), Chris Dorner (killed 4), Aaaron Alexis (killed 12), Charles Lee Thornton (killed 5), Chris harper-Mercer (killed 9, although since he is half white, some people have called him a terrorist).(4)>> Islamophobia. Islamophobia is the irrational fear or hatred of Islam or Muslims. It is usually, though not always, connected with xenophobia in general. The term is also sometimes used as a snarl word to dismiss valid criticisms of Islamic doctrines and ideology.According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the first known use of the term was in 1976, though it has become more frequently used since the 1997 publication of Islamophobia: A Challenge For Us All by the Runnymede Trust,] and even more so to describe the backlash against Muslims following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. (5)>>SERIOUS POINT.  My “true god” is better then your “true god”. The Christian god does not have the power to stop anti-semitism something the Muslim god propagates. As people awaken they will see the foolishness of fundamentalist views and there may be a platform upon which all terrorists will be deprived of their justifying god belief. I also think that we should reach out to these small groups of Muslims who are against ISIL. Instead of condemning them we should make contact with them and work together. All people truly want is a check to feed, cloth and educate their family. (6)>"victimization"...Sadly, Islam has always been a breeding ground for radicalism and terrorism. Go back to the days of Alamut when so-called "fidels" were rented out for political assassinations. This is not a new concept. But, however, fashionable it may be to engage in general "Muslim bashing", most religions have, or have had, their bouts of violence. That's not anything new either. In the past, fatwas have been issued against figures like Salman Rushdi, a Muslim who 'strayed' from mainstream beliefs when he published 'Satanic Verses'.  It seems to me that most jihadist leaders are more than 'straying', according to  Islamic scholars.  They cause the death of multitudes, mostly Muslims.So why aren't we hearing formal 'fatwas' against these jihadists?  I realize that a 'fatwa' is not as binding as say excommunication in the Catholic religion, but it may give the potential recruits pause, if major clerics were issuing formal condemnations of their jihadist leaders.

    Wednesday, December 9, 2015

    2016 presidential campaign . TAXES .

    Tax policy is shaping up to be one of the major issues of the 2016 presidential campaign. I am always curious . The nation’s tax policy has been a divisive issue in recent elections and 2016 has been no exception. Democrats, including (1)>> Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, see the current tax code as the primary theater of battle over income inequality and reforming it as the best way to have the wealthiest pay more, while easing the burden on the middle class and less fortunate. Billionaire businessman (2)>> Donald Trump took to the lobby of his famed Trump Tower on Monday morning and pledged to slap himself with a huge tax hike."It’s going to cost me a fortune, which is actually true," the Republican presidential front-runner candidate told reporters, as he unveiled a bold — and fairly detailed — tax plan, under which half of Americans would pay no federal income tax and the rich would face closed loopholes and slashed deductions.The audacious statement, like many of Trump's proclamations, was hard to fact check. Not only has nearly everyone in the GOP field already detailed their position on taxes, their plans are surprisingly bold, some even featuring ideas previously taboo to the party.Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) are backing proposals for a European-style value-added tax, long a nonstarter in Republican circles, though both men are careful not to label it as such.Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) wants to greatly increase child tax credits, and retired surgeon Ben Carson supports scrapping the sacred mortgage-interest deduction.Most of the tax-cut plans would add to the deficit, but some, like Donald Trump's, are so large that even conservatives’ jaws drop. but what front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont have said indicates they would boost taxes for top earners.Clinton, for example, has talked about upping the capital gains tax and Sanders would raise the investment income surtax and establish a financial transaction tax for corporations, said Kyle Pomerleau, director of federal projects at the nonpartisan Tax Foundation in Washington. Hence, Democratic ideas on taxes will draw a sharp contrast with their GOP opponents' and, judging by the latest polls, could give them an edge in a general contest.Nearly two-thirds of voters favored "increasing taxes on wealthy Americans and large corporations in order to help reduce income inequality in the U.S.," according to a New York Times/CBS News survey that was  released
    On the Republican side, it is tax cuts, irrespective of level of income, that will get the economy going, as would a cut in the corporate tax rate. Jeb Bush’s tax plan does both. In order to lower the personal income tax, including for high-earners, the plan would reduce the number of tax brackets to three from the current seven. Bush’s plan would end certain tax breaks, such as carried interest, which allows some Wall Street fund managers to pay a lower tax rate. Donald Trump has also come out against the carried interest tax break. Others, including Mike HuckabeeTed Cruz and Rick Santorum are bringing back a version of the flat tax. Jeb Bush published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal on September 8, 2015 briefly outlining the tax plan he released on September 9, 2015. Bush laid out three main goals in his article: to make the tax code simpler and clearer with three tax brackets of 28, 25 and 10 percent and ditching the existing seven brackets, including the 39.6 percent top rate; to eliminate lobbyist-created loopholes in the tax code; to ensure the tax code does not hinder America’s international competitiveness.[45] [46] Bush argued in the article that his plan would "unleash increased investment, higher wages and sustained 4% economic growth, while reducing the deficit." Chris Christie discussed his position on taxes. He said, "And, let's be clear, if we do not change course, if we follow the President's lead, and that's exactly what Secretary Clinton will do, we're going to be in the same circumstance -- with government picking the winners and losers. So, let me be clear about what we'll do. First, make the tax code fairer, flatter, and simplier [sic]. Get rid of all the special interest deductions. You know, the American people feel like the tax code is rigged for the rich, and you know why they feel that way? Because it is. We'll get rid of all those special interest deductions except for the home mortgage interest deduction, and the charitable contribution deduction. Everyone will get lower rates, keep more of their own money, be able to file their tax returns in 15 minutes, and, by the way, the good thing, I'll be able to fire a whole bunch of IRS agents once we do that."  Ted Cruz unveiled his tax plan. He proposed a 10 percent flat tax on all individual income from wages. He also proposed elimination of the payroll tax and the corporate income tax, to be replaced by a 16 percent Business flat tax. Cruz said that social security and medicare will remain fully funded, despite elimination of the payroll tax, which funds those programs. Cruz's plan also included a Universal Savings Account, which would allow every American to save up to $25,000 annually on a tax-deferred basis for any purpose. Cruz also promised no estate tax, alternative minimum tax or ObamaCare taxes, and would do away with taxes on profits earned abroad.[64] An analysis by the Tax Foundation, a group that supports lower tax rates, said the senator's reforms would "represent a significant shift from the current tax code." The group estimated Cruz’s proposals would increase the deficit by as much as $3.6 trillion over the next 10 years, but that figure drops to a $768 billion deficit when including possible economic growth.[65] The libertarian Cato Institute said Cruz's corporate business activity tax is essentially a value-added tax. The proposal is similar to a sales tax, since it's assumed that businesses will pass the cost of paying it onto consumers. "He says he wants a 'business flat tax,' but what he’s really proposing is a value-added tax, Carly Fiorina’s campaign posted her comments about simplifying the tax code to three pages on her Facebook page and linked to an example of a three page tax plan. The post stated, “We need to radically simplify the tax code so that we can re-start the real engine of growth in our economy. That means our tax code needs to go from 73,000 pages down to about three pages. We also need to move from revenue-neutral to revenue-reducing tax reform, because the federal government spends far too much money. In order to do both of those things, we need to lower every rate and close every loophole. I will support a low, flat tax for businesses and individuals so that we fix the tax base and grow the economy. The Hoover Institution and Congressman Michael Burgess, M.D. both developed tax plans that do exactly this. Under their plans, both businesses and individuals can file their taxes on a simple form. They won’t need armies of accountants, lawyers, and lobbyists to figure out how to take advantage of loopholes and game the system because there will be no system to game.”--According to Carly Fiorina's 2010 "Economic Growth Plan," she supported extending the Bush tax cuts, eliminating the "capital gains tax on small-business investments" and eliminating the estate tax.
     Mike Huckabee said he opposed a one-cent increase to the federal gas tax to help fund military efforts against terrorism. “Why do we need to raise taxes? You always want to raise taxes. Why don't we have the exploration of our energy, sell it, take away the marketplaces [and] we've become the supplier to Europe, Asia and Africa,” Huckabee said. Rand Paul rejected the idea that his plan to create a “flat and fair tax” would increase income inequality. “It's a fallacious notion to say, 'Oh, rich people get more money back in a tax cut.’ If you cut taxes 10 percent, 10 percent of a million is more than 10 percent of a thousand dollars. So, obviously, people who pay more in taxes will get more back. We all end up working for people who are more successful than us and that's a good thing, that more money will be back in the economy,” Paul said. Marco Rubio responded to a report from the Tax Foundation, a think tank that advocates for lower taxes, that found his tax plan would “decrease government revenues by $6 trillion over 10 years.” Rubio said, "The argument about the debt, which is the question that he's raising, you cannot simply solve that through a tax plan alone. It has to be a combination of things. You have to have the spending discipline on the mandatory spending programs and you need to sustain significant economic growth. The tax plan is part of the economic growth part of that conjunction with that, we must deal with the mandatory spending programs. Medicare and Social Security must be reformed for future beneficiaries, people like me, who are 25 years away from retirement. You have to do both. And it's that combination of sustained growth and fiscal discipline that will bring the national debt to a responsible level as a percentage of the overall size of our economy. But without the growth you can't get there. You can't get there from cuts alone. But you need the growth component. And that's what the tax plan is designed to do."
    Bush cut taxes on the rich, thinking revenues would grow. They did not. The rich speculated with their cash, created bubbles and crashed the economy. By the end, we were hemoraging jobs at the rate of 800,000 a month.Reagan cut taxes on the rich, but he realized it wasn[t working and raised them. The economy expanded.Brownbeck in Kansas (Koch headquarters) slashed taxes on the wealthy and destroyed his economy. They are now gutting schools, because he is too chickensh*t to admit his mistake and make the Kochs pay.

    Can we learn anything from our past?

     (1)>> Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders.  Mrs. Clinton so far has said this :At the center of my campaign is how we're going to raise wages. Yes, of course, raise the minimum wage, but we have to do so much more. We have to figure out how we're going to make the tax system a fairer one. Right now, the wealthy pay too little and the middle class pays too much. So I have specific recommendations about how we're going to close those loopholes, make it clear that the wealthy will have to pay their fair share, and have tax cuts for middle-class families. Source: 2015 CNN Democratic primary debate in Las Vegas , Oct 13, 2015. Among the various policy ideas and position papers put out by Hillary Clinton so far in the Democratic primary, one stands out for its bumper-sticker simplicity: If your family makes less than $250,000 a year, your taxes won’t go up.The no-new-taxes pledge is emblematic of the broader concerns about a Clinton presidency raised by the progressive side of the party. Critics say it is a crafty political move that would limit the ambition of proposals on everything from expanding Social Security to healthcare reform. It reinforces a long-running Republican argument that some would prefer to defeat head on. And, to put it simply, it makes it hard to pay for things Democrats want. In July 2015, Sanders said that he would raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans and corporations if he were elected. Sanders said, "Yes, we have to raise individual tax rates substantially higher than they are today because almost all of the new income is going to the top 1%. And yes, those folks and large corporations will have to pay under a Sanders administration more in taxes so that we can use that revenue to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, create the jobs we need, make sure that every kid who has the ability is able to get a college education in America because public colleges and public universities will be tuition-free." (2)>> Donald Trump. Trump unveiled his tax policy on September 28, 2015. According
    The Wall Street Journal, Trump’s platform would remove the federal income tax for individuals earning less than $25,000 and couples earning less than $50,000, reduce the highest individual income tax rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent and cut corporate taxes to no higher than 15 percent. Trump's tax plan will significantly cut corporate tax, removing the incentive for US corporations like APPLE to keep their corporations outside the USA. and removed penalty for bringing their wealth back into America! That means more jobs and around $2 trillion coming back to USA.also Trump has removed the tremendous deduction loophole no one uses anymore except the special interest groups and lobyists. of course this will affect Rubio and all other puppet candidates who are running on special interest groups and lobyist money. a brilliant tax plan, just it alone will wipe out the lobbyist and special interest groups from swaying elections from the American people.