hugo

Newt is the only one who has actually accomplished reducing the size of government. Ron Paul is my man but he can't win. Watch out for Rubio. IMO, he is the best candidate to defeat Obama.

72,000 stimulus payments went to dead people Buzz up!78 votes Share retweet EmailPrint..By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer Stephen Ohlemacher, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 7 mins ago WASHINGTON – More than 89,000 stimulus payments of $250 each went to people who were either dead or in prison, a government investigator says in a new report. The payments, which were part of last year's massive economic recovery package, were meant to increase consumer spending to help stimulate the economy. But about $18 million went to nearly 72,000 people who were dead, according to the report by the Social Security Administration's inspector general. The report estimates that a little more than half of those payments were returned. An additional $4.3 million went to more than 17,000 prison inmates, the report said. Most of the inmates, it turns out, were eligible to get the payments because they were newly incarcerated and had been receiving Social Security before they were locked up. In all, the $250 payments were sent to about 52 million people who receive either Social Security or Supplemental Security Income, at a cost of about $13 billion. Other federal retirees also received the payments, but they were not part of the inspector general's review. The inspector general for the Social Security Administration has been performing an audit to make sure no checks went to ineligible recipients. The latest report was dated Sept. 24 but was just recently posted to the agency's website. People were eligible for payments if they were getting benefits during any one of the three months before the law was passed in February 2009. Dead people were ineligible to get the payments. But, the report said, there is no provision in the law to recover payments incorrectly sent to dead people. "Based on the failure of the SSA to properly check its records, and Congress' failure to fully think through the provisions needed to govern these payments, SSA lost $22.3 million in American tax dollars," said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla. "These findings are yet another example of congressional stupidity and a lack of accountability." The Social Security Administration said that despite tight deadlines, workers accurately processed more than 99.8 percent of the 52 million stimulus payments. "We worked with Treasury, developed new processes, and began issuing (payments) about 30 days earlier than the legislatively mandated deadline," the agency said in a written response included in the inspector general's report. "This was a major accomplishment for our agency." The inspector general's report said that if similar payments are authorized in the future, prison inmates should be ineligible and the government should be able to recover payments made to dead people. The Social Security Administration agreed with the recommendations

Liberals Confuse Me Christine O'Donnell, U.S. Senate candidate from Delaware, has faced considerable criticism and news media attention about her youthful association with witchcraft. Have we seen similar news media attention given to other politicians who have made bizarre remarks that border on gross stupidity -- possibly lunacy? During a congressional Armed Services hearing in March, Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., expressed concern that stationing 8,000 Marines and their equipment on Guam, our Pacific territory, could cause the island "to become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize." Such a remark is grossly stupid but the liberal press didn't give it anywhere near the amount of attention and derision that they gave Christine O'Donnell. On the campaign trail in March 2008, then-presidential candidate Obama told his Beaverton, Ore., audience, "Over the last 15 months, we've traveled to every corner of the United States. I've now been in 57 states? I think one left to go." Whether Obama misspoke or not, that's a grossly stupid remark, but white liberals among the intellectual elite and the liberal news media all but ignored it. Of course, when former Vice President Dan Quayle misspelled "potatoe," they pounced upon it and had a field day. So what might explain the liberals giving Hank Johnson and Obama a pass whilst playing up the perceived shortcomings of Christine O'Donnell and Dan Quayle? The answer might be as simple as just looking at the colors involved. O'Donnell and Quayle are white and Johnson and Obama are black. That means the white liberal vision comes into play where to openly oppose, criticize and ridicule blacks is racist. The key term is openly. I bet that when alone, in trusted company, white liberals crack up over the things that some black people say and do. The white liberal vision holds one set of standards to which white people are obliged and another that's lower for blacks. I don't believe that white liberals are racists in the sense that Klansmen and neo-Nazis are; however, their paternalistic and demeaning attitudes toward blacks are far more debilitating. There needs to be a bit of elaboration of the statement that to openly oppose, criticize and ridicule a black is racist. If the black in question is a conservative, possibly Republican, then any sort of criticism and treatment is acceptable. This was seen in the criticism and ridicule of Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell. Garry Trudeau's "Doonesbury" cartoon featured President Bush referring to Secretary Rice as "brown sugar." Pat Oliphant showed her as a parrot with big lips and Ted Rall's cartoon had Miss Rice proclaiming herself Bush's "House nigga." Don Wright's cartoon depicted Justice Thomas as Justice Scalia's lawn jockey. These cartoons were carried in major newspapers nationwide. Ask yourself what would happen to a nationally syndicated cartoonist, and the newspaper that carried it, depicting President Obama as a wide-eyed, fat-lipped monkey. Racial double standards are nothing new. It has been the currency on jobs and college campuses where there is an acceptance of behavior by blacks that would be condemned if done by whites. Often misguided white liberal professors, in the name of making up for injustices of the past, give black students grades they didn't earn. Being 74 years old, I have frequently told people that I'm glad that I received just about all of my education before it became fashionable for white people to like black people. That means I was obliged to live up to higher standards. More blacks need to be bold and challenge the demeaning attitudes of white liberals. During the early years of the Reagan administration, I had a number of press conferences in response to a book or article that I had written. At several of them, I invited the reporters to treat me like a white person -- just ask hard questions. Walter Williams

That was entertaining.

That would be reasonable hugo, just leaving the residents of the County to fend for themselves seems wrong to me. And the firefighters just watching a home burn also seems wrong to me. There are some things that should not be left to the individual. Both my neighbors homes are within 20 feet of mine. I would hate for their homes to be ablaze and no one putting them out because they had not paid an optional fire protection fee. You are correct it puts the firefighters in a position where they look like total assholes.

It appears the county does not provide fire protection and that the city does. IMO. the county should pay the city the $75 dollar per property fee either out of current tax revenues or with a tax increase.

That would be like buying insurance after the fire. Or like buying healthcare insurance after you get cancer. Or like giving healthcare away to illegal aliens.

It appears to me that the individual lived outside the city limits and that the county has no fire department and therefore the city allows county residents to pay a fee for fire protection. This fee is neccesary so county residents do not get a free ride on the backs of the city residents. He should have paid the fee.

In every state I have lived in (Texas and Missouri) you had to jump through a lot of hoops to move your child to a school outside the one your address indicate d he should live in. I was forced to send my child to a private school before I moved to a better area. I was still stuck with the same system , just better kids.

Aww Hugo was that a true story? Loosely based on my life in my rancher days.

A ventriloquist cowboy took a walk in the country and saw a rancher sitting on his porch with his dog. Cowboy: "Hey, cool dog. Mind if I speak to him?" Rancher: "This dog don't talk!" Cowboy: "Hey dog, how's it goin'?" Dog: "Doin' all right." Rancher: (Look of extreme shock) Cowboy: "Is this your owner?" (Pointing at rancher) Dog: "Yep." Cowboy: "How's he treat you?" Dog: "Real good. He walks me twice a day, feeds me great food, and takes me to the lake once a week to play." Rancher: (Look of disbelief) Cowboy: "Mind if I talk to your horse?" Rancher: "Horses don't talk!" Cowboy: "Hey horse, how's it goin'?" Horse: "Cool." Rancher: (An even wilder look of shock) Cowboy: "Is this your owner?" (Pointing at rancher) Horse: "Yep." Cowboy: "How's he treat you?" Horse: "Pretty good, thanks for asking. He rides me regularly, brushes me down often, and keeps me in the barn to protect me from the elements." Rancher: (Look of total amazement) Cowboy: "Mind if I talk to your sheep?" Rancher: (Gesticulating wildly and hardly able to talk)......"Them sheep ain't nothin' but liars, every darned one of 'em!!!!

Public Schools: Make Them Private by Milton Friedman Milton Friedman, a senior research fellow at the Hoover Institution, won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1976. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Executive Summary Our elementary and secondary educational system needs to be radically restructured. Such a reconstruction can be achieved only by privatizing a major segment of the educational system--i.e., by enabling a private, for-profit industry to develop that will provide a wide variety of learning opportunities and offer effective competition to public schools. The most feasible way to bring about such a transfer from government to private enterprise is to enact in each state a voucher system that enables parents to choose freely the schools their children attend. The voucher must be universal, available to all parents, and large enough to cover the costs of a high-quality education. No conditions should be attached to vouchers that interfere with the freedom of private enterprises to experiment, to explore, and to innovate. This article appeared in the Washington Post on February 19, 1995. Reprinted by permission of the author and the Washington Post. Introduction Our elementary and secondary educational system needs to be radically reconstructed. That need arises in the first instance from the defects of our current system. But it has been greatly reinforced by some of the consequences of the technological and political revolutions of the past few decades. Those revolutions promise a major increase in world output, but they also threaten advanced countries with serious social conflict arising from a widening gap between the incomes of the highly skilled (cognitive elite) and the unskilled. A radical reconstruction of the educational system has the potential of staving off social conflict while at the same time strengthening the growth in living standards made possible by the new technology and the increasingly global market. In my view, such a radical reconstruction can be achieved only by privatizing a major segment of the educational system--i.e., by enabling a private, for-profit industry to develop that will provide a wide variety of learning opportunities and offer effective competition to public schools. Such a reconstruction cannot come about overnight. It inevitably must be gradual. The most feasible way to bring about a gradual yet substantial transfer from government to private enterprise is to enact in each state a voucher system that enables parents to choose freely the schools their children attend. I first proposed such a voucher system 40 years ago. Many attempts have been made in the years since to adopt educational vouchers. With minor exceptions, no one has succeeded in getting a voucher system adopted, thanks primarily to the political power of the school establishment, more recently reinforced by the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, together the strongest political lobbying body in the United States. 1. The Deterioration of Schooling The quality of schooling is far worse today than it was in 1955. There is no respect in which inhabitants of a low-income neighborhood are so disadvantaged as in the kind of schooling they can get for their children. The reason is partly the deterioration of our central cities, partly the increased centralization of public schools--as evidenced by the decline in the number of school districts from 55,000 in 1955 to 15,000 in 1992. Along with centralization has come--as both cause and effect--the growing strength of teachers' unions. Whatever the reason, the fact of deterioration of elementary and secondary schools is not disputable. The system over time has become more defective as it has become more centralized. Power has moved from the local community to the school district to the state, and to the federal government. About 90 percent of our kids now go to so-called public schools, which are really not public at all but simply private fiefs primarily of the administrators and the union officials. We all know the dismal results: some relatively good government schools in high-income suburbs and communities; very poor government schools in our inner cities with high dropout rates, increasing violence, lower performance and demoralized students and teachers. These changes in our educational system have clearly strengthened the need for basic reform. But they have also strengthened the obstacles to the kind of sweeping reform that could be produced by an effective voucher system. The teachers' unions are bitterly opposed to any reform that lessens their own power, and they have acquired enormous political and financial strength that they are prepared to devote to defeating any attempt to adopt a voucher system. The latest example is the defeat of Proposition 174 in California in 1993. 2. The New Industrial Revolution A radical reconstruction of our educational system has been made more urgent by the twin revolutions that have occurred within the past few decades: a technological revolution--the development, in particular, of more effective and efficient methods of communication, transportation and transmission of data; and a political revolution that has widened the influence of the technological revolution. The fall of the Berlin Wall was the most dramatic event of the political revolution. But it was not necessarily the most important event. For example, communism is not dead in China and has not collapsed. And yet beginning in 1976, Premier Deng initiated a revolution within China that led to its being opened up to the rest of the world. Similarly, a political revolution took place in Latin America that, over the course of the past several decades, has led to a major increase in the fraction of people there who live in countries that can properly be described as democracies rather than military dictatorships and that are striving to enter open world markets. The technological revolution has made it possible for a company located anywhere in the world to use resources located anywhere in the world, to produce a product anywhere in the world, to be sold anywhere in the world. It's impossible to say, "this is an American car" or "this is a Japanese car," and the same goes for many other products. The possibility for labor and capital anywhere to cooperate with labor and capital anywhere else had dramatic effects even before the political revolution took over. It meant that there was a large supply of relatively low-wage labor to cooperate with capital from the advanced countries, capital in the form of physical capital, but perhaps even more important, capital in the form of human capital--of skills, of knowledge, of techniques, of training. Before the political revolution came along, this international linkage of labor, capital and know-how had already led to a rapid expansion in world trade, to the growth of multinational companies and to a hitherto unimaginable degree of prosperity in such formerly underdeveloped countries in East Asia as the "Four Tigers." Chile was the first to benefit from these developments in Latin America, but its example soon spread to Mexico, Argentina and other countries in the region. In Asia, the latest to embark on a program of market reform is India. The political revolution greatly reinforced the technological revolution in two different ways. First, it added greatly to the pool of low-wage, yet not necessarily unskilled labor that could be tapped for cooperation with labor and capital from the advanced countries. The fall of the Iron Curtain added perhaps a half-billion people and China close to a billion, freed at least partly to engage in capitalist acts with people elsewhere. Second, the political revolution discredited the idea of central planning. It led everywhere to greater confidence in market mechanisms as opposed to central control by government. And that in turn fostered international trade and international cooperation. These two revolutions offer the opportunity for a major industrial revolution comparable to that which occurred 200 years ago--also spread by technological developments and freedom to trade. In those 200 years, world output grew more than in the preceding 2000. That record could be exceeded in the next two centuries if the peoples of the world take full advantage of their new opportunities. 3. Wage Differentials The twin revolutions have produced higher wages and incomes for almost all classes in the underdeveloped countries. The effect has been somewhat different in the advanced countries. The greatly increased ratio of low-cost labor to capital has raised the wages of highly skilled labor and the return on physical capital but has put downward pressure on the wages of low-skilled labor. The result has been a sharp widening in the differential between the wages of highly skilled and low-skilled labor in the United States and other advanced countries. If the widening of the wage differential is allowed to proceed unchecked, it threatens to create within our own country a social problem of major proportions. We shall not be willing to see a group of our population move into Third World conditions at the same time that another group of our population becomes increasingly well off. Such stratification is a recipe for social disaster. The pressure to avoid it by protectionist and other similar measures will be irresistible. 4. Education So far, our educational system has been adding to the tendency to stratification. Yet it is the only major force in sight capable of offsetting that tendency. Innate intelligence undoubtedly plays a major role in determining the opportunities open to individuals. Yet it is by no means the only human quality that is important, as numerous examples demonstrate. Unfortunately, our current educational system does little to enable either low-IQ or high-IQ individuals to make the most of other qualities. Yet that is the way to offset the tendencies to stratification. A greatly improved educational system can do more than anything else to limit the harm to our social stability from a permanent and large underclass. There is enormous room for improvement in our educational system. Hardly any activity in the United States is technically more backward. We essentially teach children in the same way that we did 200 years ago: one teacher in front of a bunch of kids in a closed room. The availability of computers has changed the situation, but not fundamentally. Computers are being added to public schools, but they are typically not being used in an imaginative and innovative way. I believe that the only way to make a major improvement in our educational system is through privatization to the point at which a substantial fraction of all educational services is rendered to individuals by private enterprises. Nothing else will destroy or even greatly weaken the power of the current educational establishment--a necessary pre-condition for radical improvement in our educational system. And nothing else will provide the public schools with the competition that will force them to improve in order to hold their clientele. No one can predict in advance the direction that a truly free-market educational system would take. We know from the experience of every other industry how imaginative competitive free enterprise can be, what new products and services can be introduced, how driven it is to satisfy the customers--that is what we need in education. We know how the telephone industry has been revolutionized by opening it to competition; how fax has begun to undermine the postal monopoly in first-class mail; how UPS, Federal Express and many other private enterprises have transformed package and message delivery and, on the strictly private level, how competition from Japan has transformed the domestic automobile industry. The private schools that 10 percent of children now attend consist of a few elite schools serving at high cost a tiny fraction of the population, and many mostly parochial nonprofit schools able to compete with government schools by charging low fees made possible by the dedicated services of many of the teachers and subsidies from the sponsoring institutions. These private schools do provide a superior education for a small fraction of the children, but they are not in a position to make innovative changes. For that, we need a much larger and more vigorous private enterprise system. The problem is how to get from here to there. Vouchers are not an end in themselves; they are a means to make a transition from a government to a market system. The deterioration of our school system and the stratification arising out of the new industrial revolution have made privatization of education far more urgent and important than it was 40 years ago. Vouchers can promote rapid privatization only if they create a large demand for private schools to constitute a real incentive for entrepreneurs to enter the industry. That requires first that the voucher be universal, available to all who are now entitled to send their children to government schools, and second that the voucher, though less than the government now spends per pupil on education, be large enough to cover the costs of a private profit-making school offering a high-quality education. If that is achieved there will in addition be a substantial number of families that will be willing and able to supplement the voucher in order to get an even higher quality of education. As in all cases, the innovations in the "luxury" product will soon spread to the basic product. For this image to be realized, it is essential that no conditions be attached to the acceptance of vouchers that interfere with the freedom of private enterprises to experiment, to explore and to innovate. If this image is realized, everybody, except a small group of vested interests, will win: parents, students, dedicated teachers, taxpayers-- for whom the cost of the educational system will decline-- and especially the residents of central cities, who will have a real alternative to the wretched schools so many of their children are now forced to attend. The business community has a major interest in expanding the pool of well-schooled potential employees and in maintaining a free society with open trade and expanding markets around the world. Both objectives would be promoted by the right kind of voucher system. Finally, as in every other area in which there has been extensive privatization, the privatization of schooling would produce a new, highly active and profitable private industry that would provide a real opportunity for many talented people who are currently deterred from entering the teaching profession by the dreadful state of so many of our schools. This is not a federal issue. Schooling is and should remain primarily a local responsibility. Support for free choice of schools has been growing rapidly and cannot be held back indefinitely by the vested interests of the unions and educational bureaucracy. I sense that we are on the verge of a breakthrough in one state or another, which willthen sweep like a wildfire through the rest of the country as it demonstrates its effectiveness. To get a majority of the public to support a general and substantial voucher, we must structure the proposal so that it (1) is simple and straightforward so as to be comprehensible to the voter, and (2) guarantees that the proposal will not add to the tax burden in any way but will rather reduce net government spending on education. A group of us in California has produced a tentative proposition that meets these conditions. The prospects for getting sufficient backing to have a real chance of passing such a proposition in 1996 are bright. © 1995 The Cato Institute

There was a time when all Americans watched a total of three television stations and we were all influenced by similar broadcasting. Today we have newschannels that play to the right and those that play to the left.Most Republican primary voters watch Hannity, Beck and O'Reilly most Democrat primary voters watch Oberman, Maddow and The Ed Show. This radicalizes the primary voters in each party. The era of compromise is over. The opposition party will always be the party of no. The party in power will attempt to satisfy their increasingly radicalized base.The national debt will keep growing as no Republican can raise taxes and get throgh the primary nor can a Democrat cut spending and do the same. Until at some point we sink under the burden of our debts. Limited government may come in our lifetime because interest payments will suck up a large percentage of government revenue.

The leftists will never allow school vouchers because it would break their ability to indoctrinate our children for 12 years in their ideology. Parents should be able to promote their values (within a rational spectrum) to their children, governments should not.

Obama's ratings are still higher than Clinton's 1994 lows, Things were better in 94 than they are now. Seems like people are giving Obama a break.

When you have been President for nearly two years, have added two trillion to the national debt and still have unemployment at near 10% your approval rating will be very low regardless of your race.

I think I will wear the free mammogram costume.

I kinda like Jeopardy. The other five I agree with the Republicans.

I think the progresives do not realize that Obama did all that was politically possible. He could not have gotten a Canadian style healthcare system through. I favor abolishing the Department of Education. It ain't authorized in the Constitution. I do not blame GW for not abolishing the DOE. It would have been politically impossible in the current environment. I do blame him for expanding the role of the federal government in education with the No Child Left Behind Act. The fact is the current healthcare bill is unfunded and there will have to be radical changes. If the liberals win it will be turning to a no frills government run system. If the Conservatives win it will be a return to our current system. The bill adds inflationary pressures to an industry where costs are already skyrocketing. It cannot survive in its present state.

Then you tuned out of listening. There are several way. Medicare buy in, increase in the (measley 1.3%) medicare tax, but let's not get into that. Your slow, we understand why you don't get it. . . Half of it was "paid for" by GW Bush's unfunded expansion of government in medicine.

Thank you OS and Hugo:) Hugo - No smart aleck comment or sexual harassment? I feel gypped!! What's wrong Hugo, you feeling okay? Figured I would give ya a break on your birthday. Don't get used to it.

The neo-conservative myth is that you can cut taxes without cutting spending. The liberal myth is that you can spend into prosperity. The Barry Goldwater classical conservative reality is that low taxes are only possible with small government.

Happy Birthday! Have a great one.

More than half the nation - 55% - see Sarah Palin unfavorably, and 71% believe the "Going Rogue" author is not qualified to be President, according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll Thursday. The former Alaska governor and Tea Party darling said recently she will consider running for the White House, but both those numbers are new lows for her and don't augur well for a national political run. "More problematic for Palin is that even in her own party 52% think she's not qualified for the presidency - up by 16 points from an ABC/Post poll in November," writes ABC News pollster Gary Langer. Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/02/11/2010-02-11_poll_reads_palins_palm_no_chance_in_2012_71_of_americans_dont_think_shes_qualifi.html#ixzz10mFKGArn

I think the one thing we can all agree on is America is great abd that Canada and Australia stink. Five commonly misdiagnosed diseases CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE