JQPublix's side room

Many of you think that we were wrong to go into Iraq because we acted "unilaterally" without getting big brother UN to agree to the move.

One question for those of you that are that naive. Where was your outrage during the Fauklands war?  

So lets talk about change because both candidates promised it.

I am an IT Consultant. I help companies manage change. One thing that I have learned, and subsequently would be confirmed by any systems analyst is that you cannot force change without a progressive timetable.

A systems analyst would also tell you that if change is not managed correctly then there is a chance that the changes could break the system. I am sure only the most left wing embracing UNC professor wishes for that.

So I for one would like to see Obama's timetable for change. I would like to see how he plans on managing and financing those changes with the economy being as bad as it is.

On the brundt of what occured at Virginia Tech we have yet another tragedy.

Halloween is supposed to be for children. I was so sickened by the fact that a child was shot and killed in Columbia while trick or treating. Very sad indeed for their entire community and my prayers will be with them.

You may ask why I title the thread as I do. I will not sit still and let this lesson not be learned. The guy that shot the kid was almost a kid himself - 22 years old and a convicted felon. How exactly does a 22 year old get an AK 47? Was he saving up for it? Did it come out of his college fund? Maybe he stole enough money to get it at a pawn shop.

The answer is the guy obviously got this weapon on the streets. I would be surprised if he got it from a gun shop, but if he did we need to start managing how these kids on our streets are getting weapons from "Pawn shops", 

I think that is paramount to trying to manage how John Doe in Bumkinsville owns a gun. It has become painfully obvious that there is a difference.

I am so sick of this. My prayers are with the child's family and also of the family of the kid that shot him.

"This is a public service annoucement -with guitars! Know you're rights. These are your rights." - The Clash

First of all, I certainly hope this makes it to the front page because people need to be made aware of this. This has nothing to do with how the stock is doing. It has everything to do about how Congress wants to control your money. If Obama gets in office this will happen for sure.

"House Democrats Want to Eliminate Your 401K

Powerful House Democrats are eyeing proposals to overhaul the nation’s $3 trillion 401(k) system, including the elimination of most of the $80 billion in annual tax breaks that 401(k) investors receive.

House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-California, and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Washington, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee’s Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, are looking at redirecting those tax breaks to a new system of guaranteed retirement accounts to which all workers would be obliged to contribute.

A plan by Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic-policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, contains elements that are being considered. She testified last week before Miller’s Education and Labor Committee on her proposal.

At that hearing, the director of the Congressional Budget Office, Peter Orszag, testified that some $2 trillion in retirement savings has been lost over the past 15 months.

Under Ghilarducci’s plan, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government but would be required to invest 5 percent of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration. The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3 percent a year, adjusted for inflation.

The current system of providing tax breaks on 401(k) contributions and earnings would be eliminated.

“I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s,” Ghilarducci said in an interview. “401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won’t have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break.”

Under the current 401(k) system, investors are charged relatively high retail fees, Ghilarducci said.

“I want to spend our nation’s dollar for retirement security better. Everybody would now be covered” if the plan were adopted, Ghilarducci said.

She has been in contact with Miller and McDermott about her plan, and they are interested in pursuing it, she said.

“This [plan] certainly is intriguing,” said Mike DeCesare, press secretary for McDermott.

“That is part of the discussion,” he said.

While Miller stopped short of calling for Ghilarducci’s plan at the hearing last week, he was clearly against continuing tax breaks as they currently exist.

Workforce Management

A $600 a year contribution from the government?  Is this a joke???  My company matches every dollar I put in my 401k up to 4% of my pay.

“From where I sit that’s just crazy,” said John Belluardo, president of Stewardship Financial Services Inc. in Tarrytown, New York. “A lot of people contribute to their 401(k)s because of the match of the employer,” he said. Belluardo’s firm does not manage assets directly.

Higher-income employers provide matching funds to employee plans so that they can qualify for tax benefits for their own defined-contribution plans, he said.

“If the tax deferral goes away, the employers have no reason to do the matches, which primarily help people in the lower income brackets,” Belluardo said.

Well, that’s the whole point, you see.  The government doesn’t want you to be in charge of anything in your life.  They want you to depend on them and that is whole purpose behind this proposal, to eliminate the 401k altogether so that the vast majority of us will have to rely on this new government program that they will control and we won’t.  If we’re forced to pay 5% of our income into this new program most workers who have a 401k now won’t be able to continue contributing to them on the side, particularly if they repeal the tax breaks for them.  Most Americans will have no choice than to rely on the new government program and considering that Social Security is already heading towards insolvency, what are the odds that your money you will have spent 30 years contributing into this program will still be there when you are ready to retire? Do you really trust the government to be responsible with it?"

http://www.savethegop.com/2008/10/23/house-democrat
s-want-to-eliminate-your-401k/#comments

My assumption is that here is that elections everywhere are considered legitimate.

My SAT scores were not very good. I went through a period of time where my mind was more diminished than it is now. I pulled tobacco and picked strawberries amoung other things to help my family through our crises at times.

But I do know this:

It will be interesting to see what happens concerning votes in the states neighboring the great state of California after the mass evacuation concerning those people being pushed out of their houses with the inflated housing market out there.

Nevada, Oregon, Idaho, Arizona may all be swing states that are not being considered so.

Folks we are seeing our service members in Iraq starting to turn over control to Iraqi international forces within the past two weeks. First in Fallujah, now in Mosul. All of those nay-sayers must have a pucker factor of 10 at this point. If you want to daily track the progress of victory in Iraq here is the place to do it:

http://www.mnf-iraq.com/

A note to WGHP that there is no need to supress my stances on Islamic revolutionists any longer. I have had many Muslim friends and aquaitances in my life that I have worked with and we have accomplished the jobs we needed to do. I can call upon them to re-quiest those experiences if you like. Don't  take for granted those were projects that have ended successfully.

I am not aure how this band missed my radar. I think they were big back around 1998. At any rate these guys are fantastic. And they are from Carborro if I am not mistaken. Anyone else heard or seen them?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UShsk7A7Uz4

Here is some proof that he is:

"

Hat tip: Paulette and Cyberella

Obama’s most recent Freudian slip about his Islamic faith, and his 20 year membership in that racist Trinity United Church of Christ makes perfect sense given the legislation the “annointed one” has put forth in the Senate.

In 1997, Obama introduced an Islamic Community Day bill. (Via The Obama File)

Full Text Bill Status

Senate Sponsors:
OBAMA.

Short description:
11/1/97-ISLAMIC COMMUNITY DAY

Synopsis of Bill as introduced:
Declares November 1, 1997 to be South Shore Islamic Community
Center Day.

Last action on Bill: SESSION SINE DIE

Last action date: 99-01-12

Location: Senate

Amendments to Bill: AMENDMENTS ADOPTED: HOUSE - 0 SENATE - 0

END OF INQUIRY 

In 2001, Obama sponsored Illinois Senate Bill 750 creating the “Halal Food Act,” providing for inspections by the Department of Agriculture to ensure that all food labeled Halal is prepared according to Islamic law. "

http://www.theurbangrind.net/?cat=51

Just wondering what everyone thinks abpout this? I also wanted to show some of you people that say the Iraq war was uncalled for how wrong you are.

"

In response to shariah courts being legalized in the U.K., Congressman Tom Tancredo has proposed the following:

“Jihad Prevention Act” would deny U.S. visas to advocates of ‘Sharia’ law, expel Islamists already here.

WASHINGTON, DC – Amid disturbing revelations that the verdicts of Islamic Sharia courts are now legally binding in civil cases in the United Kingdom, U.S. Representative Tom Tancredo (R-Littleton) moved quickly today to introduce legislation designed to protect the United States from a similar fate.

According to recent news reports, a new network of Sharia courts in a half-dozen major cities in the U.K. have been empowered under British law to adjudicate a wide variety of legal cases ranging from divorces and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence.

“This is a case where truth is truly stranger than fiction,” said Tancredo. “Today the British people are learning a hard lesson about the consequences of massive, unrestricted immigration.”

Sharia law, favored by Muslim extremists around the world, often calls for brutal punishment – such as the stoning of women who are accused of adultery or have children out of wedlock, cutting off the hands of petty thieves and lashings for the casual consumption of alcohol. Under Sharia law, a woman is often required to provide numerous witnesses to prove rape allegations against an assailant – a near impossible task.

“When you have an immigration policy that allows for the importation of millions of radical Muslims, you are also importing their radical ideology – an ideology that is fundamentally hostile to the foundations of western democracy – such as gender equality, pluralism, and individual liberty,” said Tancredo. “The best way to safeguard America against the importation of the destructive effects of this poisonous ideology is to prevent its purveyors from coming here in the first place.”

Tancredo’s bill, dubbed the “Jihad Prevention Act,” would bar the entry of foreign nationals who advocate Sharia law. In addition, the legislation would make the advocacy of Sharia law by radical Muslims already in the United States a deportable offense.

Tancredo pointed to the results of a recent poll conducted by the Centre for Social Cohesion as evidence that the U.S. should act to prevent the situation in Great Britain from replicating itself here in the United States. The poll found that some 40 percent of Muslim students in the United Kingdom support the introduction of Sharia law there, and 33 percent support the imposition of an Islamic Sharia-based government worldwide.

“We need to send a clear message that the only law we recognize here in America is the U.S. Constitution and the laws passed by our democratically elected representatives,” concluded Tancredo. “If you aren’t comfortable with that concept, you aren’t welcome in the United States.” "

http://www.theurbangrind.net/?cat=51

I love showing the mindset that some of these people have.  :)

Perhaps this is going a little bit to far. I am not sure but maybe some of the anchors from WGHP have gone through something similar? 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26876388/?GT1=43001
 

You have to commend McCain for showing that his first stance is for the people of the US. Although I am completely against the bailout, I think it is spot on for him to suspend his campaign and go back to Washington. The fact that he probably would have gained valuable points in the debate coupled with the fact he was willing to give that up is stellar.

And I can understand why Obama is not willing to go back to DC to help get us out of this mess. Even he understands that voting straight line absentee on everything on the bailout, really isn't helping anybody. I loved his excuse for not going - "a president should be able to multitask" and "I am in touch with my people back in DC". So his people in DC are going to do his job for him and vote absentee. Just great. As far as multitasking goes, Obama should be aware that we are paying for him to do his CURRENT job - he's not president yet.

He is even not in office yet, but the "chosen one" is already politicking in in Iraq - possibly to the detriment of our soldiers. Here is what Neil Boortz reports on concerning Baracks visit to Iraq.

"OBAMA TRIED TO DO WHAT??

This story got pushed to the sidelines last week in light of all news on the economy. In private, Barack Obama tried to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay any agreements on troop withdrawals. That's right ... The Chosen One tried to keep American troops at risk for the benefit of his bid for the presidency. Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari says that while Obama visited Baghdad in July, "He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington." Obama said that an agreement should not be negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."

Well this one is a no-brainer to figure out. If there is a troop drawdown on President Bush's watch, then the Democrats (therefore Barack Obama) wouldn't get "credit." They wouldn't look like the "heroes." Just like Democrats would rather see energy legislation passed with a Democrat in the White House. It's pure political pandering – with a difference. This pandering could have cost American lives."

http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html

Take a look at Treasury Secretary Paulson's ties. And the democratic Congress is talking about giving control for this guy to dole out $700 billion to $1 trillion? This guy is talking about bailing out foreign banks also?

"Both parties in Washington are about to screw us over on an unprecedented scale. They are threatening us with fiscal apocalypse if we don’t fork over $700 billion to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and allow him to dole it out to whomever he chooses in whatever amount he chooses — without public input or recourse. They are rushing like mad to cram this Mother of All Bailouts down our throats in the next 72-96 hours. And right there in the text of the proposal is this naked power grab: “Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.”

More on the scary facts about this guy are here:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/22/why-henry-
paulson-must-be-contained/