The Republican's are socialists/fascists just like Democrats are socialists/fascists. They really should merge and become one party. It would make things easier and neither would have to change their true policies/goals much. To call either Liberal is far from the truth. The term liberal comes from the term Libertarian which is the opposite of socialism. Our founding fathers were freemasons as they were Libertarian. If you want to get an idea of what out founding father's might think of current trends, go to your local Masonic Temple and visit. They will be more than willing to tell you a lot about Freemasonry personally. I will give you a quick run through of what I think as a libertarian while I go through the Republican 2007 platform.

FAMILY:

I. Marriage, Children, and Family

I am appalled for two reasons. The choice of how to deal with unions like marriage is up to the states and not federal government. Secondly, they clearly are suggesting that anything other than a Christian marriage is ungodly. Finally, how parents raise their child is up to them and not society. It is flat out wrong for a government agency to interfere with the raising of a child if they can not prove that the child is in physical or mental harm before they interfere.

II. Right To Life And Medical Ethics

The choice of how to define life is up to the states and not the federal government. Furthermore, the morals and ethics regarding life differ in various religions and in various cultures. Freedom of Religion in our Bill of Rights should severely retard any law based on morals and ethics. Finally, it is a mother's choice on how to deal with her own body. Until the baby is born society has no right to tell a woman what to do with her own body. Again, this is largely a moral and ethical debate and as such our Bill of Rights makes the answer obvious.

III. Healthcare

This is one of the more humorous ones. They say they are against Hillary-Care but when push comes to shove they are not that much different. They still want the government to control the healthcare companies. The media need to do a lot better job informing the American public how much research and development costs the healthcare companies. All the public hears about is the successful drugs and equipment. They don't hear about the multitude of failures that paved the way for the successful drugs to work. Europe and Canada all benefit from our new drugs but they refuse to pay for the research and development costs. THAT is why drugs cost so much and it is not the Healthcare companies. Finally, they support the privatization of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid programs. This sounds liberal but it is not. It is still the government taking your money and doing what it wants with it. It is still the mentality that the government knows how to spend your money better than you do.

IV. Elderly

Providing tax incentives for those who care for their elders sounds good. Yet someone will have to pay the bill. TANSTAAFL

V. Religious Freedom

This is the greatest lie. The Republicans could care less about any religion other than Christianity. They prove this with their stance on euthanasia, abortion, and many more moral and ethical laws.

VI. General

This is a great list of reasons they are socialists in training. They are for religious freedom unless it's homosexual; it favors sodomy, favors pornography, falls under what Christians feel is indecent, and/or supports a special life style. They believe in Welfare which is another instance of the government taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor. It is another instance of penalizing rich people for having the audacity to be successful and be rich. Also, it is just to bad if your religion and culture use drugs that the government doesn't like. The Republicans believe that people are not intelligent or responsible enough to make their own decisions about drugs. Finally, the Republicans are fascist because they believe that anyone who disagrees with their ideas and principles should not receive government money or even be apart of the government.

EDUCATION:

I. Philosophy

The Republicans are for Freedom of Religion but only Christian religions should be taught in public schools and only the Ten Commandments get placed in public schools. Furthermore, Public Schools shall promote the Christian worldview that our country was founded upon and prohibit promoting any other religion's worldview. Finally, we are fine with imposing strict educational standards on public schools; except for the schools in Oklahoma. Some how Oklahoma’s representatives and senators provided sexual favors to the right person to get that absurd line into the platform.

II. Curriculum

The Republican Party also feels the need to dictate to schools what they can and cannot teach. Including Evolution but not limited to portraying Homosexuality or promiscuous behavior as acceptable behavior, and other safe sex practices that are not supported by Christianity. They also support Unions because we can't have teachers that are not in unions and thinking outside the box.

III. Higher Education

They support meaningful reform of the higher education system so long as it gives the government more control over it. We can't have Colleges and Universities acting on their own autonomy.

STATE:

I. Crime and Punishment

First off I want to say that all moral and ethical laws should be removed from all law books. We should focus on rehabilitating our criminals instead of punishing them. Furthermore, we should kill those who are not rehabilitatable and have committed a felony. A criminal should automatically be killed if they have killed more than 4 people at any given time. However, all of this is up to the states and NOT the Federal Government.

III. State Agencies, Departments, Legislature

The Republican Party wants the Federal Government to assume control of the State's Retirement System. Furthermore, they want the Federal government to intercede in any affairs the state have with Tribal Territories. They also oppose the use of eminent domain unless it’s the government doing it. Then it is ok for the government to just come in and forcibly TAKE your property from you because they have a bigger stick.

IV. Insurance

The Republican Party believes the Federal Government should interfere with insurance agencies and outlaw no-fault insurance. They oppose State governments from being able to interfere with insurance premium markets.

V. Transportation

The Republican Party supports the elimination of Toll Roads even though private citizens and companies were they ones who built them and not the government. The state government shall maintain control over ALL transportation infrastructures. I do not know how more clearly they can be. I also do not know how someone can see this as anything other than socialism.

FEDERAL:

I. Military

The Republicans oppose women in combat, co-ed training, homosexuality being able to serve, and other gender-norming training and promotion. This is just wrong on so many levels. Women should be encouraged to join the military and serve our country.

II. United Nations

The Republicans think that our founding fathers based the Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, Bill of Rights on traditional Judeo-Christian Bible and Ethical Values. They could not be farthest from the truth. They based those documents on the ideas that were being discussed among Intellectuals in Europe and America.

III. Social Security

The Republican Party believes in the original purpose of Social Security; which was just another form of tax because the average lifespan was below 55. To their credit they believe in the idea that it's for people's retirement and not money for the government to spend. The problem is that Social Security is just another case where the government thinks that it knows how to handle your money better than you do. Social Security should be completely eliminated for those not already on it or within 5 years of reaching the appropriate age.

IV. Agriculture

The Republican Party is against free-trade with anyone. True Liberalism is for free-trade with everyone. Regulations, tariffs, and other forms of controlling trade create an artificial influence on the economy and retards advancement and growth. People may loose their jobs as things change but they will gain new jobs that our economy is creating. People at the bottom may need to go back to school to learn a new skill but so be it; that is just the way the cookie crumbles.

V. Immigration

Here they just plain lie because they know the truth is not what the American Public wants. So they try to adlib and create what they think the American Public wants to get them reelected. They say all the right things though so they have a good editor. They are for legal immigration and reform of our immigration system to make it easier to enter our country legally. They are for securing our boarders and building the fence that was promised a couple years ago now. They are for strict-enforcement of current immigration laws. They are for penalizing businesses who hire illegal immigration. They are against non-citizens having the right to vote or being afforded any rights given to citizens by the Bill of Rights. If they actually believe all of this now, great; but I doubt them to have this quick of a change of heart.

VI. General

They should make it illegal for any elected official to receive money or any item worth more than 500 dollars per agency in any given year. They should eliminate all Taxes and adopt the Fair Tax Act. They should eliminate the Federal Reserve and institute of 3% growth in our money supply. The Economy WILL stabilize and provide near constant growth automatically. To their credit the Republicans say they are for this in their platform. Yet their elected officials do not often follow through with action.

    As you can see, a liberal view is one that values the individual over the group. A Liberal values individual freedom versus group controls. The government has only three roles that it should maintain and that is it. The first is to defend and protect our Nation against enemies both foreign and domestic. The second is to provide services that help various industries to be diverse and have many competitors. Capitalism naturally tends to strive towards oligarchies and monopolies. So the government should step in and assist companies that are new or experiencing an economic downturn in an industry with additional resources. It should not regulate industries and/or transfer wealth from rich people to poor people. You choose to be what you are; whether you admit to this fact or not is immaterial. Refusing to make the choice is ineffectual as you will make the choice by default. Whether you live above or below the poverty line is your choice. People need to start owning up to themselves and doing what they want instead of looking to the government for handouts.

NO FATE BUT WHAT YOU MAKE!

I have covered 17 San Francisco Giants games this year, but, truthfully, I’ve really covered 17 of Barry Bonds’s games. There would have been no reason to cover the last-place Giants so much if Bonds’s were not pursuing Hank Aaron’s record for career home runs.

The last Bonds game I covered was in San Francisco on Wednesday night, when, of course, he hit his 757th homer. It was a majestic home run, a bullet that blazed down the right-field line and plopped into McCovey Cove.

One day earlier, Bonds broke Aaron’s record with a homer off Mike Bacsik of the Washington Nationals. It was a no-doubt-about-it homer to right-center, a replay we’ve all seen numerous times. It gave Bonds 756 homers and the top spot on the home run pedestal.

Anyway, after traveling from San Francisco to New Jersey on Thursday (into Friday morning), I was happy to see my bed for the first time in two weeks. But by Friday night, I decided to check in on Bonds. The Giants were facing the Pittsburgh Pirates and Matt Morris, a pitcher San Francisco traded last week.

So what happened? Bonds went deep again. The first at-bat that I watched on TV was Bonds’s second plate appearance in the game, and he lifted a two-run homer. Whether in San Francisco or New Jersey, I had now witnessed or seen Bonds smash homers in the last three games that he started.

Now that Bonds, who has been suspected of using steroids, has 758 homers, I believe he will try to hang around to reach 800. If Bonds hits nine more this season, that will give him 33 for the season and 767 for his career. All Bonds would need to do is hit another 33 in 2008 to get to 800.

To hit those homers, Bonds needs to find a team first. Peter Magowan, the Giants’ owner, has offered strong indications that the team needs to rebuild in 2008 and that Bonds will not be part of that process. Would the Angels make a run at Bonds? He will be 44, but he leads the major leagues in OPS (on-base percentage plus slugging percentage) at 1.088.
I have three questsions: Will Bonds play in 2008? If yes, for whom will he play? Will he reach 800 homers?
http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/11/bary-bonds-and-800-homers/

This is Barry Bonds' shame.  The man is an egomaniacal flimflam artist who won the inglorious award this year of being the first to cheat his way past Hank Aaron's record.  Hank Aaron was and is a true heroe.  He was virtous, honorable, and very humble even when he set the record.  He was a true role-model.  Barry Bonds is the thug the exemplifies all of major league sports.  Barry Bonds epitomizes everything that I find wrong with the people who play any major league sports.  They all are egomaniacal flimflam artists who could really care less about the fans who make them millions of dollars every year.  However, I do not blame them.  I blame society, because it is the one that has created the culture that made this favorable.  American society is incredibly results oriented and could really careless about what created the results.  American's really do not care if someone breaks the law that society itself creates if it gets American's what they want.  This is why Americans have failed to build anything of value in the last hundred years.  Where is our generation's Statue of Liberty?  Where is our Mount Rushmore?  Where is our Aztec Pyramids?  The only thing we given the future is Las Vegas.  Why? because we have become a society that demands results regardless of the cost.  We want everything immediately and to hell with the consequences.  Mount Rushmore took decades to make.  You think our country has the stomach to do anything for one decade let alone a couple?

Now I am not beg on unconstructive critizim and so I try to help people understand what they can do to change this.  First of all, yes YOU can do something to change this.  If you want to change the world; you do it one person at a time.  Secondly, you start caring more about someone's ethics and virtues more than how much money they have.  Start following your own ethics and virtues irregardless of what the LAW is.  The law is merely what society wants.  It is a set of possible consequences for actions that society deems unwanted.  This does not mean that you can not do what is against the law.  It means that if you get caught you will have to deal with the consequences.  Big DEAL! You deal with consequences every day of your life.  You go 5 miles an hour faster than the speed limit even though you know a possible consequence is paying a speeding ticket.  Finally, start focusing on your dreams and goals.  Focus on what you want to happen instead of things you do not want to happen.  The universe does not care about nots and other negativity.  If you think "I do not want a car wreck!" guess what? the universe see's 'Oh! he/she is thinking about a car wreck.  coming right up!'.  You start doing this? and you will start effecting society and the world.  Sure you are only one person but sometimes that is all it takes.

Former U.S. Sen. Joseph Raymond McCarthy died in May 1957 at age 47 and was buried in an unpretentious grave in St. Mary's Cemetery in Appleton, Wis.

This month, 50-year-old executive hearings of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations -- the subcommittee that Joe McCarthy chaired -- were released by Sens. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, and Maine Republican Susan Collins, who are the ranking minority member and chair, respectively, of that committee.

The two senators, assisted by Donald Ritchie, an associate Senate historian, joined with Communists in an attempt to further vilify a man dead some 46 years. The three of them shoveled together a new heap of canards that was eagerly reprinted by media around the nation.

THE REST OF THE STORY:

Skimming the 4,000 pages of these hearings yielded some interesting details never mentioned by the senators or the media. All Washington reporters know that the chair of a committee or subcommittee is an important figurehead with considerable power -- a fact as important 50 years ago as it is now. However, the chair does not operate alone. On every committee, there is a ranking minority member from the other party and other senators who can advise and, in severe cases, discipline the chairman.

In the three years that McCarthy controlled the Investigations Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations, there were several senators on his committee who were later recognized as having great experience and leadership qualities. Among them, John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon.

There were also political giants including Sens. Henry Jackson, Everett Dirksen, John McClellan, Stuart Symington, Karl Mundt and that highly vocal liberal Hubert H. Humphrey. Any one of them could have stopped the man denigrated as "Tail Gunner Joe" but did not because public opinion was on McCarthy's side.

John Kennedy called McCarthy a "great American patriot"; kid brother Bobby Kennedy joined McCarthy's staff as assistant counsel and Tail Gunner Joe became godfather to his first child.

BOLSTERED MYTH:

Sens. Susan Collins and Carl Levin ignored McCarthy's support from these political giants from both parties and instead preferred to bolster the myth voiced by Jimmy Carter that Joe McCarthy added to "America's inordinate fear of Communism." Collins sought refuge in the historical value of the released documents, perhaps not realizing how the liberal left will use them as mortar to cement the travesty of oppression they have tried to create.

Carl Levin was even more predictable. He seized on the term "witch-hunt," indicating that none of the people McCarthy's subcommittee questioned were enemies of the United States and, like any good Democrat, he linked this mythical "persecution of the innocent" to the crackdowns on terrorism initiated by Attorney General John Ashcroft after 9/11.
The Collins/Levin/Ritchie attack on anti-communism made no mention of the decrypted documents made public in 1995 known as the "Venona papers."

These documents from Russian intelligence officers to their bases in Moscow provided snapshot views of Russian espionage in the United States in the early 1940s. They showed that literally hundreds of Americans may have been working for Russian intelligence, and scores of them in government.

Nor was there mention of statements made by Russian KGB and government officials on the same subject when their archives were opened. These documents provide us with facts: McCarthy glimpsed the vicious truth.

AN OBJECTIVE READING:

Any objective reader of the McCarthy material will realize that in death, as in the latter years of his life, McCarthy was treated with less than American justice.

The hysterical terms "witch-hunt," "star chamber" and "secret sessions," all attributed to McCarthy's investigations of Communists in our government and public life, were once again heard. And today, just as it was back then, such labeling is absolute nonsense.

The documents released were the normal "executive sessions" of a Senate committee, several of which took place -- and continue to take place -- most days in Washington. Their purpose is to determine whether the evidence given is sufficient to warrant a public hearing. Any witness at an executive session can be represented by his or her attorney.

Should the questions be so pointed as to bring out something criminal, then the witness customarily takes the protection of the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination. There is nothing of a star chamber about the process.

As to "witch-hunts," McCarthy knew that there were well- organized Communist "witches" seeking to destroy the U.S. republic. He also knew he had taken an oath to protect the Constitution and this is exactly what he proceeded to do.

Much has been made in today's media of the 1953 appearance of composer Aaron Copeland before McCarthy's committee. Copeland repeatedly denied on oath any involvement with Communism. Later that year, based on a sworn passport application Copeland made, the FBI began a perjury and fraud investigation.

This inquiry produced overwhelming evidence of his Communist Party connections but, by prosecution time, Democrats and Republicans had censured McCarthy in the Senate and anti-Communism had become a cause to be held in contempt. And there was no further thought given to a prosecution of Copeland.

POPULARITY AND HATRED:

McCarthy was wildly popular; American voters believed in him and were hostile toward Communism and Russian dictator Joseph Stalin. He was also the target of great hatred for a variety of reasons.

McCarthy was well aware of these enemies and of their canards. He had a wonderful catchphrase, "Digging out a skunk is a dirty, smelly business. No one wants to be near you when you're done -- but someone's got to do it."

If we look back in the files on international Communist subversion, we will see the successes the KGB achieved. In Britain, the legendary Kim Philby was not only a senior member of MI6 and an advisor to the fledging CIA, but a KGB general as well; in France, Charles Pathe, another KGB spy, had his very own cabinet ministers; and in Italy, where the Communists nearly achieved political power through the Moscow-trained Palmiro Togiliatti, America spent millions to reverse early defeats of democracy.

In Germany, their second chancellor after World War II, Social Democrat Willie Brandt, had been recruited by Moscow while still in exile during the Nazi years and did his best for the East. Willie was cute -- he also sold himself to the CIA.

And yet, these same files show no hideous Russian success in the United States. This tells us the KGB was afraid of Joe McCarthy. Sure, there were spies, but Moscow realized that to use the Communist Party for espionage with McCarthy in the Senate would spell disaster. And that, in turn, tells us his objective to protect the United States Constitution - and the people it was written for -- was successful.

Dateline D.C. is written by a Washington-based British journalist and political observer.

Orwell Today: McCarthy's Glimps Into The Vicious Truth
Free Republic: We Now Know

The American People have a very real need to wake up and realize that McCarthy was right.  They need to realize that the Democrates are the result of the Venona Project.  The king pin is the one everyone loves to much; the former president Hillary Clinton.  McCarthy died believing in his cause when the whole world around him was viciously unamerican against him.  McCarthy died holding the candle in the wind of the monsoon.  We will not let McCarthy die in vein.

Will we ever get real tax reform in the United States? For several decades, economists, journalists, and politicians have been discussing the pros and cons of the flat tax, sales tax, value-added tax, and other proposals as alternatives to our current federal income tax. One commission after another has made recommendations to overhaul the federal income tax, but little has come of these efforts. Special interest groups and partisan politics have blocked all efforts at reform since 1986. Every year Congress further complicates the tax code. President Bush established another commission, his Advisory Panel on Federal Income Tax Reform, on January 7, 2005, but it will doubtless encounter the same obstacles. A new commission is not needed. A better approach is simply to look around the world at a raft of success stories. The flat tax has been adopted in eight newly independent Central and Eastern European countries, has been proposed by political parties in two more, and is even under consideration in China.

Estonia was first, implementing a 26 percent flat tax in 1994. The relatively high rate was set to balance its budget, a requirement of its new constitution. Since then, buoyed by strong economic performance, Estonia has eliminated the corporate tax on retained earnings, taxing only distributed profits. The rate is scheduled to fall to 24 percent in 2005 and 20 percent in 2007.

Next to follow in 1995 was Latvia with a 25 percent rate.

Russia is the big story. It took the tax reform world by storm in 2000 with a 13 percent flat tax, replacing its previous three-bracket system that topped out at 30 percent. The results have been spectacular. The economy has enjoyed four years of sustained growth. Real (inflation-adjusted) ruble revenue from the personal income tax rose 25.2 percent in 2001, 24.6 percent in 2002, 15.2 percent in 2003, and 16 percent in the first half of 2004. By year’s end, total receipts will have more than doubled; the share of consolidated budget revenue received from the personal income tax increased from 12.1 percent in 2000 to 17 percent at the end of 2003.

After a pause of three years, the flat tax resumed course. In 2003 Serbia implemented a comprehensive 14 percent flat tax on personal and corporate income.

Taking a page from Russia’s playbook, Ukraine implemented a 13 percent flat tax in 2004, replacing five brackets of 10, 15, 20, 30, and 40 percent. Dividends and interest on bank deposits will be taxed at an even lower 5 percent rate beginning in 2005. News reports suggest that Ukrainian officials consulted with their Russian colleagues. The advice they received was that incentives and revenue would rise and that the underground economy and tax evasion would decline.

In 2004 Slovakia implemented a 19 percent flat tax on both individual and corporate income. The measure, which passed by a vote of 85 to 48, garnered the support of some opposition deputies. The 19 percent flat tax replaced five brackets of 10, 20, 25, 35, and 38 percent and the corporate rate of 25 percent. It greatly simplified the previous system, which included 90 exceptions, 19 sources of income that were not taxed, 66 items that were tax-exempt, and 27 items with their own specific tax rates (e.g., bank interest, honoraria, etc.). Once the corporate tax is paid, dividends received by individuals are tax-free.

Georgia’s new president, Mikhail Saakashvili, was inaugurated on January 25, 2004. Five days later he stated that one of his new government’s top priorities was the introduction of a flat-rate tax system. On December 22, 2004, Georgia’s parliament approved the 12 percent flat tax effective January 1, 2005, by an overwhelming vote of 1,071 to 11. Seven days later, on December 29, 2004, the newly elected government of Romania implemented a 16 percent flat tax on personal and business income, effective January 1, 2005. Opposition political parties in the Czech Republic and Poland have proposed a 15 percent flat tax on both personal and corporate income.

In every case, a simple flat tax replaced complicated tax regimes with multiple rates.

In November 2003 I was invited by the Ministry of Finance to Beijing to discuss personal income tax reform. A Chinese translation of The Flat Tax was published in May 2003 by the China Financial & Economic Publishing House, with the preface written by Vice-Minister of Finance Lou Jiwei. During the past few years, several Chinese professors of public finance have written articles on the economic and fiscal benefits of sharply reducing China’s top personal income tax rate of 45 percent, some suggesting a flat 20 percent rate. The government is likely to announce some preliminary reforms of the personal income tax in its March 2005 budget.

Better than another tax commission would be a road trip to Central and Eastern Europe to see firsthand the success of the flat tax.

http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/2993776.html


How is it that the old U.S.S.R. is more intelligent than the United State's of America?  I ask you how is it that our government is so retarded that they have taken three years to adopt the Fair Tax Act?  I tell you it is because our politicians are more corrupt than an apple that has been sitting on the ground for a week.  This is why we need to Vote every single politician out of office.  Kick them all out and vote Libertarians or green party people into office.  Reason? They are not in the system of corruption.  We need to send a message to the Republicans and Democrates both that we are sick and tired of their evil games.  Their job is to represent their constituents and many have publically said that they do not care what their constituents said.  Yet you continue to vote them back into office?  You know what the definition of insanity is? Doing something over and over again and expecting a different result each time.  Congress has a 90% relection rate and you wonder why they don't give a crap about you?  You don't give them a reason too.

So this coming 2008 election cycle; Kick every single Senator and Congressmen out of office and elect someone new from a different party.  If no one but a Republican/Democrates are running then at least kick the incumbant out and elect the new kid on the bloc.

  After San Francisco Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval introduced a resolution condemning the "defamatory language used by radio personality Michael Savage against immigrants,” Savage lashed back at the newly elected supervisor.

"Illiberalism is not only a mental disorder it is fascist at its core,” the mega-popular talk show host told NewsMax.com. "This schmuck says my comments are 'symbolic of hatred and racism.' And they want the City to sue me for 'symbolism.'

"There is no basis in American Law for such a suit but the larger point is the astonishing hate speech he is engaging in. To stop opinion by threatening legal action is akin to using the power of the State to control thought and speech.”

This, Savage fumed "is something out of Kafka and the ex-Soviet Union. Moreover, this illegitimi is working on behalf of a foreign government against an American Citizen. Does this constitute harassment against me? My attorney will soon answer this question as I ponder suing the City of San Francisco.”

Savage had suggested that a group of students who were fasting to advocate for immigration policy changes should be allowed to fast "until they starve to death, then that solves the problem.”

Meanwhile, Savage reminded NewsMax that the San Francisco Chronicle reported an apparent anti-Semitic remark Sandoval made, when he said that San Francisco residents who resented business leaders suing the city should picket them "at their houses in Tiburon and at their bar mitzvahs."

http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/8/9/213250.shtml?s=ic

I say go Savage! I am proud to consider myself part of The Savage Nation.  I do not agree with everything he says but like Neal Boortz he is right 95% of the time.  Socialism is a mental disorder where people through out logic and think only of themselves and their interests.  They truly do not care about anyone else but their own selfish interests.  Why do you think most Socialists are anti-religion?  Cause they know deep down that if there is an afterlife? their going to hell in a hand basket.

The U.S. State Department on Monday said it has urged the family of a former FBI agent who went missing in Iran to think twice about visiting the country, where four other U.S. citizens have been detained this year.

The department said it was up to the family of Robert Levinson, who went missing in March, whether to go to Iran to try to get information about him but advised them to heed U.S. government warnings urging caution about such travel.

In its latest May 31 travel warning, the department said it "continues to warn U.S. citizens to carefully consider the risks of travel to Iran" and notes that dual Iranian and American citizens may have difficulty leaving the country.

Four Iranian Americans have been detained, imprisoned or otherwise barred from leaving the country in recent months in what the U.S. government has described as a "disturbing pattern" of harassment of dual citizens by Iran.

Levinson, a Florida resident who is not one of the four and is not a dual citizen, went missing while on a visit to the Gulf island of Kish in Iran. U.S. officials have said they believe he is in Iran but have no credible information about his whereabouts.

Some published reports have said Levinson traveled to the region to investigate cigarette smuggling.

The United States, which broke diplomatic relations with Iran after the 1979 Islamic revolution, has made repeated inquiries about Levinson's whereabouts through Swiss diplomats who represent U.S. interests in Tehran.

Iran has said it has no information about Levinson, a response that the State Department has said is not credible.

In a report aired on ABC's "Good Morning America" program on Monday, Levinson's wife Christine said she and one of her children may visit Iran to seek information about him if they do not get answers about his whereabouts soon.

"It's a hard situation," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters, summarizing the U.S. advice as "think twice about traveling to Iran, given the current circumstances and the experiences that we've had with American citizens being prevented from leaving over the past several months."

"All of that said, that's a personal decision that they will have to make. They're going to have to weigh the risks," he added.
Reuters Article

Are these people crazy?  I saw them on FOX News and the wife and son admitted to intending to go over to Iran to look for their Husband/Father.  They seem to be completely oblivious to anything other than that the guy went missing in Iran.  I have news for them.  He is dead! Iran government killed him and if they go over there? they will be killed too.  They saw him as a government asset and they killed him to keep the US from knowing anything.  They don't care about our laws and sensibilities and they certainly won't bat an eyelash at killing these two.  I have a prediction... these two winners are going to start a war with Iran when they get their wish and meet their loved one; and their heads get stuck on pikes outside their capital.

 The Chinese government has begun a concerted campaign of economic threats against the United States, hinting that it may liquidate its vast holding of US treasuries if Washington imposes trade sanctions to force a yuan revaluation.

Two officials at leading Communist Party bodies have given interviews in recent days warning - for the first time - that Beijing may use its $1.33 trillion (£658bn) of foreign reserves as a political weapon to counter pressure from the US Congress.

Shifts in Chinese policy are often announced through key think tanks and academies.

Described as China's "nuclear option" in the state media, such action could trigger a dollar crash at a time when the US currency is already breaking down through historic support levels.

It would also cause a spike in US bond yields, hammering the US housing market and perhaps tipping the economy into recession. It is estimated that China holds over $900bn in a mix of US bonds.

Xia Bin, finance chief at the Development Research Centre (which has cabinet rank), kicked off what now appears to be government policy with a comment last week that Beijing's foreign reserves should be used as a "bargaining chip" in talks with the US.

"Of course, China doesn't want any undesirable phenomenon in the global financial order," he added.

He Fan, an official at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, went even further today, letting it be known that Beijing had the power to set off a dollar collapse if it choose to do so.

"China has accumulated a large sum of US dollars. Such a big sum, of which a considerable portion is in US treasury bonds, contributes a great deal to maintaining the position of the dollar as a reserve currency. Russia, Switzerland, and several other countries have reduced the their dollar holdings.

"China is unlikely to follow suit as long as the yuan's exchange rate is stable against the dollar. The Chinese central bank will be forced to sell dollars once the yuan appreciated dramatically, which might lead to a mass depreciation of the dollar," he told China Daily.

The threats play into the presidential electoral campaign of Hillary Clinton, who has called for restrictive legislation to prevent America being "held hostage to economic decicions being made in Beijing, Shanghai, or Tokyo".

She said foreign control over 44pc of the US national debt had left America acutely vulnerable.

Simon Derrick, a currency strategist at the Bank of New York Mellon, said the comments were a message to the US Senate as Capitol Hill prepares legislation for the Autumn session.

"The words are alarming and unambiguous. This carries a clear political threat and could have very serious consequences at a time when the credit markets are already afraid of contagion from the subprime troubles," he said.

A bill drafted by a group of US senators, and backed by the Senate Finance Committee, calls for trade tariffs against Chinese goods as retaliation for alleged currency manipulation.

The yuan has appreciated 9pc against the dollar over the last two years under a crawling peg but it has failed to halt the rise of China's trade surplus, which reached $26.9bn in June.

Henry Paulson, the US Tresury Secretary, said any such sanctions would undermine American authority and "could trigger a global cycle of protectionist legislation".

Mr Paulson is a China expert from his days as head of Goldman Sachs. He has opted for a softer form of diplomacy, but appeared to win few concession from Beijing on a unscheduled trip to China last week aimed at calming the waters.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/08/07/bcnchina107a.xml

I actually do not see this as a bad thing.  Tarrifs and other methods of restricting trade just hurts us.  It is a quick fix that only slows down the root problem.  Our government uses this to ignore the bigger problem though.  The fact that we import more energy than we export.

The majority of it's elected officials are wealthy cultural elitists.  The majority of it's supporters are uneducated and live below the poverty line.  The supporters do not want to accept responsibility for their own lives.  They want the government to come and live their lives for them.  The elected officials want to keep their supporters uneducated and below the poverty line because that keeps the supporters easily controlled and keeps the officials in office.  A Democrate couldn't win an honest debate about almost anything if his/her life depended upon it.  Instead their primary weapon against reason and logic is ignorance and denial.  They routinely discount any evidence that goes against what they support.  They routinely are very angry when faced with someone who thinks differently than them.  To a Democrate, anyone who does not follow their socialist propoganda is a hateful warmonger who should be silenced.

This is where the Truth about the Democratic Party gets ugly.  Their elected officials have proven themselves to pander to whoever will get them elected.  So the only thing you can hold them accountable to is their actions.  The vast majority of current Democratic elected officials are rich cultural elitists who want nothing to do with giving power back to the citizenry.  To a true Democrate the public is too stupid to know what to do with Freedom.  It was not always this way.  Back during Roosevelt and Kenedy the Democratic Party's Platform was alot closer to the current Republican plateform.  In Fact, JFK was the last Democratic President that was not a socialist.  Back during the cold war the Soviets instituted a program called the Venona Project.  The KGB released documents confirming this and much of what McCarthy claimed was true in the mid 1995.  Of course, our media has have done a great job of covering this reality up.  Why? because the Venona Project was a covert esponiage attempt by the KGB to turn one of the American Parties into a socialist propoganda machine.  This is why the Democrates want you to call them anything other than Socialists.  They like to be called Liberals but they are the furthest thing from Liberals because Liberals are what our founding fathers were.  Liberals is short for Libertarian.  As a Libertarian I am offended at the out right lies that the Democratic Party maintains.

They want a National Health Care system.  Yet everyplace else that has tried this has failed and is going back to a more privatized/capitalistic health care system.  Sweden is the only semi good example and their effort has lead to a ZERO job growth for the past decade.  You think that is good for us?  Canada has waiting lists just to get on a waiting list.  People from Canada actually come to the US to recieve Health Care cause their system is broken and can't serve all the people who need help.  If you believe Michael Moore's movie SICKO I encourage you to actually get to know some honest to god Canadians and ask their Opinion on their nation's health care system.

They want a bigger socialized Social Security because they want the public to DEPEND upon the Government.

They do not want the education system fixed because it would lead to more people being educated.  There is a very real statistical trend that shows that those who graduate Universities are typically Democrates until they get their first paycheck and they see what the government does with the money they TAKE.  Afterall the Hillary Clinton/Democratic talking point is that they know how to spend your money better than you do.

They want anything but a Fair Tax because that would limit their 'power'.  They would still get the same amount of money but they would loose the ability to penalize anything they didn't like.  NOTE: IN THE EASTERN BLOCK COUNTRIES IN EUROPE THEY HAVE STARTED TO ADOPT THIS FAIR TAX ACT.  REVENUE HAS PROOVEN TO INCREASE 30%+ MORE THAN EXPECTED.  THAT IS THEIR ECONOMY GREW 30% MORE THAN THE 20% THEY EXPECTED.  So why are our politicians against it?

They love Regulating and limiting the economy to be "Fair and Balanced".  Fair and Balanced in misery is more like it.  The Democrates do not want to be called Socialists because everyone has seen how Socialism has Failed.  It failed the Russians, Cubans, French, English, and Canadians all in different degreees of failure; depending upon how socialised they are.  In England they adopted a National Health Care system but now they have had to separate it out because they just couldn't afford to treat EVERYONE and still not go bankrupt.  The French failed when they allowed enough muslims to enter their country illegally to make up half their population.  The muslims were uneducated and poor and a drain on the government's socialized welfare state.  When they ran out of money and started going back to capitalism? the muslims got mad and started rioting which is still going on today.  That just pissed the French off and for once their taking their country back from foreign invaders.  I hope now that you see my point.  Socialism is a failed economic/political model.  Nothing good comes of it.

The government is better off aiding smaller businesses to compete with bigger businesses.  The Government is more effective when it adopts policies and regulations that enhance and assist a Capitalistic economy to give diverse options to the citizenry.

Now don't get me wrong.  I identify with the Libertarians.  I do not support and I do not defend the Republican party.  The GOP has proven that they don't give a da mn about what their constituents want.  They have proven that they are just as morally and ethically corrupt as the Democratic elected officials.  THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO KICK THEM ALL OUT OF OFFICE AND ELECT A WHOLE NEW SET OF CONGRESSMEN AND PRESIDENT.  DO NOT SETTLE FOR THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS BECAUSE THE MEDIA SAYS YOU HAVE TOO.  DO NOT SETTLE FOR ANYTHING BUT THE CANDIDATE THAT MORE CLOSELY ALLIES WITH WHAT YOU BELIEVE.

 With the ever present threat of terrorism some people are advocating that we start throwing away our rights. That if you are a Muslim in the US? It is OK for the government to tap your phone and do whatever they want without a judge's authorization or any sort of oversight. They say that they should not need a court order to be able to intercept an american citizen's phone call if they say particular words. They want to verbally silence all opposition by imposing some fairness doctrine.

My point is simple. The terrorist win everytime we pass a law that violates our Bill of Rights. The Terrorists win every time they force us to be something other than the land of freedom. Sure it may seem reasonable to treat a Muslim as a second class citizen. Sure it may seem reasonable to listen in on someone talking about terrorism. Except when it's you who are under the looking glass. Except when it is you that someone said was a terrorist; and without judicial oversight? they tapped your phones and violated your privacy. Except when it is you that gets held indefinitely without charge. THE PRICE OF FREEDOM IS ETERNAL VIGILANCE against those who would sacrifice it for the illusion of security.

We all need to remember that it was Al Gore's failure as a Vice President because he cared more about getting money from the airline industry that made our country lower it's guard. It is Clinton and Congress that ignored the warnings. It is Bush and Congress's fault that our southern boarder is unsecure. We need to start holding our political leaders accountable. We need to kick 90% of Congress out of office and vote in new people with the purpose of getting the job done instead of politics as usual. We need to enforce the laws we already have.

A mother asked President Bush, "Why did my son have to die in Iraq ??"

Another mother asked President Kennedy, "Why did my son have to die in Viet Nam ??"

Another mother asked President Truman, "Why did my son have to die in Korea ??"

Another mother asked President F.D. Roosevelt, "Why did my son have to die at Iwo Jima ??"

Another mother asked President W. Wilson, "Why did my son have to die on the battlefield of France ??"

Yet another mother asked President Lincoln, "Why did my son have to die at Gettysburg ??"

And yet another mother asked President George Washington, "Why did my son have to die near Valley Forge ??"

Then long, long ago, a wife asked..."Heavenly Father, why did my Husband have to die on a cross outside of Jerusalem ??""

The answers to all these are similar --

"So that others may have life, and dwell in peace, and live in freedom"

There is only two people in the entire recorded history of humanity that has offered to die for you. Jesus and the American G.I. One was for your soul and the other was for your freedom.

Tony Blair was recently asked why he was such a staunch supporter of the United States. "A good measure of a country is when you take the amount of people who want out and subtract that from the amount of people who want in.

IF YOU DON'T STAND BEHIND OUR TROOPS, PLEASE.. FEEL FREE TO STAND IN FRONT OF THEM!!!

 

Thank you for contacting me regarding the Fairness Doctrine. It is good to hear from you.

As you may know, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) originally adopted the Fairness Doctrine in 1967, which required broadcasters to present both sides of a controversial issue. The broadcaster was responsible for deciding which issues were controversial, as well as the spokespeople who presented the different sides of the issue.

The FCC, however, stopped enforcing the Fairness Doctrine in 1985. It has not enforced it since that time because it determined that there was a wide variety of perspectives available in the media and was no longer needed. There has been no serious attempt by the FCC to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine.

In the House of Representatives, Representative Mike Pence (R-IN) has introduced H.R. 2905, the Broadcaster Freedom Act, which would prevent the FCC from reinstating the Fairness Doctrine. Currently no legislation regarding the Fairness Doctrine has been introduced in the Senate. If legislation is introduced, it will first be considered by the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, which I do not sit on.

Congress must defend the American people's access to diverse sources of news and information, especially in the face of more media consolidation. I will continue to work in the U.S. Senate to promote access and diversity over the publicly-owned airwaves.

Thank you again for contacting me regarding the Fairness Doctrine. Rest assured, I will keep your views in mind should this issue come up during the 110 th Congress.

I hope all is well in Burbank.
Senator Patty Murray,
United States Senator Washington State

I am thinking Patty needs a reality check.  The "PUBLIC" owns nothing.

 

Thank you for contacting me regarding the "Fairness Doctrine" and our First Amendment Rights. It is an honor to represent the people of Eastern Washington and I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me.

The "Fairness Doctrine" is a term used for a federal regulation that requires broadcasters to present both sides of a controversial issue. It was enforced by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from 1949 to 1987. The FCC adopted it as a regulation, but it was never a law enacted by Congress. The FCC determined that the Fairness Doctrine was no longer justified due to the "multiplicity of voices in the marketplace." This determination was based on findings that the doctrine restricted broadcaster's journalistic freedom, and "in operation, actually inhibit[ed] the presentation of controversial issues of public importance to the detriment of the public and in degradation of the editorial prerogative of broadcast journalists."

Like you, I staunchly support our First Amendment rights and I will not compromise on the rights guaranteed to us under the Constitution. Should legislation regarding the "Fairness Doctrine" come before me, I will certainly work to ensure our freedom of speech. I think the "Fairness Doctrine" effectively, and dangerously, mandates what can and cannot be said. I will keep your thoughts and concerns in mind throughout this process.

Thanks again for contacting me on this important issue. I invite you to visit my website at www.mcmorrisrodgers.house.gov for additional information. Please do not hesitate to contact my office if I can be of further assistance.

Best Wishes,
Cathy McMorris Rodgers
Member of Congress

I just wish more people in Washington D.C. realized they must not tamper with Free Press and Free Speech. Free does not mean fair. Free means unfettered with government intervention. The people drive what the marketplace delivers. The far left is just appauled that anyone could rationally think a coherent thought that they don't give out. So naturally they seek to silence anyone who critizises them.

 Thank you for contacting me with your thoughts regarding immigration reform.  I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue, and regret the delayed response.

On June 28, 2007 the Senate voted against cloture on the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (S. 1348) by a vote of 46-53.  I voted for cloture because I firmly believe the Senate should continue working to deliver comprehensive immigration reform.  We need to get tough by vigorously enforcing the immigration laws on the books right now, address this problem in a way that is fair to taxpayers and be practical and return to the rule of law as we deal with the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S.

Any changes to our national policy on immigration must keep border security and enforcement a top priority.  S.1348 would have authorized additional border agents and port of entry inspectors, as well as authorized a virtual fence to allow the border to be patrolled with unmanned aircraft, cameras, sensors, and other technology, expanding the reach and effectiveness of our border security personnel.  Additional resources would have been added to enforce employment regulations as part of a program that would require employers to check Social Security numbers of new hires against a federal database.

The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act also included a measure that I sponsored to help northern border communities cover the high cost of prosecuting federal border crimes, and incorporated legislation to make it a crime to construct or finance a tunnel across a border leading into the U.S.   Currently, tunnel construction is not a crime, meaning suspects only face drug conspiracy or illegal immigration charges, and are not charged for the actual tunnel construction, even though it poses a serious threat to national security. 

Comprehensive immigration policy must also address labor shortages in certain fields such as agriculture and technology which are hurting Washington 's economy, and accommodate market demands for foreign labor.  The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act would have created a new temporary guest worker program, allowing foreign workers to fill vacant jobs in the U.S. to help meet the needs of businesses and agriculture producers and ensure the United States remains competitive in this global economy.  S.1348 also included the DREAM Act to give students serving in the United States Army or pursuing higher education an opportunity for citizenship.

As you may know, the House of Representatives introduced the STRIVE Act, its version of the immigration reform legislation on March 22, 2007.  If enacted, this legislation would require the U.S. to work with Mexico to address border security, and increase border security personnel and criminal penalties for aliens who break the law. The STRIVE Act has been referred to House Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees for further review.  Please be assured that I will keep your comments in mind should I have the opportunity to consider legislation reforming our nation's immigration policy in the 110th Congress.

Thank you again for contacting me to share your thoughts on this matter.  Finally, you may be interested in signing up for my weekly update for Washington state residents.  Every Monday, I provide a brief outline about my work in the Senate and issues of importance to Washington state.  If you are interested in subscribing to this update, please visit my website at http://cantwell.senate.gov.  Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,
Maria Cantwell
United States Senator

All I saw was a whole lot of whinning about how they liked the Amnesty Bill.  Well too bad the people who elected you into office don't.