How Much is a Trillion:Video

I have been discussing the vast amount of money that a trillion is, and it's such an incredibly huge sum that no one seems to really be able to get their minds around it. When we say this program will cost us (fill in the blank) trillion dollars, people don't seem to be able to distinguish how monstrously expensive such a program is. What helps me is visualizing a trillion one dollar bills stacked on top of each other. The height of that stack would measure 67,866 miles. This would reach more than one fourth the way from the earth to the moon! If you had decided to make a carpet out of one dollar bills, the area covered by one trillion one dollar bills measures 3,992 square miles. This would cover an area equal to twice the size of the state of Delaware!
What if we were to line up one dollar bills end to end? Did you know, that if you line up one trillion one dollar bills this way, it exceeds the distance from the Earth to the Sun! It would take a beam of light more than 16 minutes to travel from the Earth to the end of that line of one dollar bills and back again!

The video below explains it a little better. Instead of using the one dollar bill, like I did, it explains it using 1,000 dollar bills.



I think what really truly makes it strike home for me is the fact they brought out about spending a million dollars a day. If Jesus started spending a million dollars a day since he was walking the Earth in the flesh, He still would not have spent a trillion dollars. Yet our government recently showed it's willingness and it's ability to burn through trillions as if they were millions.

Can we afford this healthcare bill?? Especially in light of the fact that the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) observes, “The 2009 Social Security and Medicare Trustees Reports show the combined unfunded liability of these two programs alone has reached nearly $107 trillion in today’s dollars"! And with all of that spending, it STILL isn't even going to cover the uninsured.
Why do it then?
So that we can ration care. Redistribute the health. That's what it's all about.

For the trillion dollar comparisons, visit:http://www.ehd.org/science_technology_largenumbers.php

Why Do Writers and Intellectuals and Artists Always Seem to Fall in Love With Tyrants and Tyrannical Governments?

Have you ever noticed the imagery the left produces to describe their opponents? They throw about the word fascist and Hitler and Nazi to describe anyone that they disagree with.

They seem to fear someone like Sarah Palin as a tyrant that would march into Washington and oppress the masses, or create a Christian theocracy. You know, the kind of things she never achieved in Alaska.

Strangely enough, these leftist intellectuals look at actual tyrants with a strange fondness and are happy to pronounce them champions of the people.

Recently they have been going to Cuba to smoke cigars with Fidel Castro and have been returning with glowing reports of what a great leader he is. These intellectuals are blind to the fact that his government controls every aspect of the peoples lives. They control what they read, what they see.

They fawn over Chavez. They make excuses for his takeover of the public media as a necessary step in order to progress forward. Every oppressive thing he does is seen as a great justice on behalf of the people.

They used to treat Stalin the same way. They still hold the greatest murderer the world has even known in the highest esteem. Chairman Mao as they affectionately call him.

Writers and artists fall for these charismatic personalities as if they are blind lemmings happily sheepily dutifully worshipfully praising the tyrants of the world, and anyone that talks about freedom and liberty is a tyrant in their eyes.

Somehow, they are convinced that people that want less government, less governmental control of all of our lives are the oppressors. Oppression by liberty. Who would have guessed? Of course we do have so much in common with those liberty loving Nazis. We like weak government just like Hitler did. We believe all humans are equal, just like Hitler thought. We love free speech and the right to bear arms, just like Hitler did. We dislike government run media just like Hitler did.

In the meant time, they don't see taking property off of one person against their will as stealing. They don't see the redistribution of that private property as a form of tyranny. Taking private property from one person by another person is stealing. If you advocate this, you are in favor of a tyrannical government. You are much closer to a Nazi than I will ever be. Hitler also like to redistribute the wealth. He took from those evil wealthy Jews and spread that around. The Nazi's banned gun ownership.

"National Socialism" is the Nazi party ideology. It basically consists of loose and general criticisms of free markets, enforced by the anti-semantic dogma that Jews are the source of all domestic evils. It's very wavy but is generally against private property, and in favor of absolute state control of the economy. The Nazis aimed towards a system which allowed them to conscribe all labor and distribute all produce - equally - as popular demand insisted it. Well, equally amongst the Aryans and citizens, that is. The anti-semiticism of Nazi nationalism often associated big business and free trade with Jewish movements, which, of course, Nazis viewed as "subversive" to the "rule of the master race".

But us liberty loving people are the Nazis.

Taking Over Everything (2)

Taking Over Everything (2)

Posted using ShareThis

Time For the States to MAN UP

The United States that was founded in the last decades of the 18th century is no more.
The evidence of this is clear in the actions of the last three administrations and the house and senate that have ruled in the past few years.
They no longer represent us, the people that elected them. They have become detached and beholden to the powers that granted them the vast amounts of money they need to get elected. They are beholden to the parties that refuse to fund in their reelection campaigns if they vote with their constituents and against the current party line.

The idea of having representatives meet in Washington was intended by our founders to bring the voice of the common man to the halls of a government. They knew that when they returned home, their neighbors would hold them accountable. This way the common man had a voice in every level of government.
The idea of having two senators from every state was to give the states a say in the federal government. This is no longer so. The states have lost their voice in Washington. The 17th amendment was passed by the progressives in the early 20th century in order to strip the states of any say and to build a stronger central government. The states have been stripped of their sovereignty.

Our government has become a bloated blundering drunken doomed dinosaur. It is headed for extinction. It is not sustainable. And it will take the American people down with it unless the people and the individual states intercede. It is time for an intervention. It's time to stop enabling the alcoholic.

First thing the states need to do is stop taking federal money. It won't be easy, because it is a lot of candy. But they must wean themselves off of it. It is the states that should be granting funding to the Federal government, not the reverse.

Secondly, the States need to call for an amendment to the US Constitution that repeals the 17th amendment. If congress refuses to submit this amendment, the States have a power that has never been used. Two thirds of the States can call for a constitutional convention to proposes this amendment. This way the State legislatures can once again send their own senators to the senate and it will once again represent the states that sent them.

Term limits for all members of congress must be administered. It is clear that the spirit of the founders idea that we could send common people to Washington to be the voice of their neighbors has become a farce. Instead, professional politicians find a seat and won't move out of it, enjoying the perks and benefits too much.

Capitol Hill should be under lock and key for 11 months of the year. In the case of a true national emergency, congress may be recalled for a brief gathering, but otherwise, all voting should be done from the Congressman's office in his own district. With electronic technology and the internet and satellites, there is little reason to be so far away from the home districts anymore. Four weeks out of the year, congress may meet on Capital Hill. This will help ensure that lobbyists have a harder time bribing our representatives, and it might break up the "good 'ol boy" network.

Government Intervention: It's Good for Everyone

No Accident

I am beginning to think our nation is being run by nutty Marxist college professors and their nutty Marxist college pupils. How can so many of the people picked by the President be so far left? If I hear another person say that he just isn't "Vetting" these people good enough, I am gonna pass out. Our President WANTS these people to work for him. The traits that we American people find unacceptable in these people is Exactly what the White House liked about them.
How else can we explain it?
Anita Dunn told a gathering of college kids that Mao Tse-Tung was one of her favorite philosophers. In fact, he is one of two that she TURNS TO MOST! Only thing wrong with that is that he killed more people than Hitler did.
Van Jones resigned without shame or consequence when it was learned he was a committed communist and thought the US Government orchestrated 9/11.
Science Czar John Holdren once considered putting sterilents into our drinking water. He also advocated Forced abortions.
Cass Sunstein, the regulatory Czar is on record saying the U.S. should move in the direction of socialism (except we are too racist for it). He also thinks animals have legal rights to sue humans.
What kind of safe schools Czar thinks anyone involved in NAMBLA is worthy of praise as he has said, and ignores statutory rape?

TO BE CONTINUED

GE Selling Obama's Network to Comcast?

From LA Times:

Comcast, the nation's largest cable operator with almost 25 million subscribers, has been looking to increase its content holdings for several years. In NBC Universal it would get its hands on not only a big broadcast network and movie studio, but also several powerful cable channels, including USA, Syfy, CNBC, MSNBC and Bravo.

That would be incredible. My guess is that the FCC would never allow it. Could you imagine a conservative leaning Comcast CEO John Malone allowing MSNBC and CNBC to continue down their path of fringe left wing rhetoric and President Obama worshipfulness? My guess is that moonbat commentators like Kieth Oberman and Rachel Maddow would be fired based on their plummeting ratings while other News networks commentators such as O'Reilly and Beck have only themselves to battle it out with ratings wise. I think an owner with an eye for making money would probably clean house at NBC news and restore at least the appearance of journalism to the newsroom.