Adam Smith

During the course of my life experience I have had two surgeries where the surgeon had a black eye. One of the surgeons had a new black eye during the course of follow up visits.

I had not really thought much about it until recently; there was a commercial of all things for one of those bariatric weight loss offices. The commercial featured a surgeon who spoke of the benefits and services and he had a single black eye.

I personally have not had a black eye since the bar hopping days of my early twenties, so what exactly are these people doing which results in a black eye; or is it simply a patient waking during the surgeries and beating the heck out of them?

When I was young(er), Mom made fruit cakes each year for the holiday season. She would shop for the ingredients after the holidays each year after the stores began clearing the candied fruits and such out. As best I can remember, she would generally start making the cakes around February, but never served them until Thanksgiving.

As is the case so many times, Mom passed before anyone thought to ask for the recipe, and no recipe was ever found.

I know the cakes had candied fruits, nuts -it was a dark batter- after baking she would wrap the cakes in cloth/ plastic & aluminum foil, then place them in a cool dark location in the house- I'm not sure of the frequency, but she would pull them out to check and administer a little rum as needed.

The recipes that I have come across generally allow two or three days for the flavors combine (mature), so am leery to use such recipes for something that will mature for months.

There will be no 'gotchas', I will lay out all of my findings and resources. I just want to know if there is anyone able to explain why the Democrat Party touts (in historical and present sense) their ‘fiscal responsibility' compared to the Republican Party.

If we accept the postulate that if a party holds 2 of 3 seats (executive branch and 1 house or both houses) that they will most likely control the budget, then the results of the data are as follows:

Over the course of 108 years, Dems controlled 61 years and Reps controlled 47.

Federal debt increased from 2.143 billion (7/1/1901) to 13.561 trillion (9/30/2010). Not including supplemental appropriations since they aren’t included in budget figures.

Dems would own 7.382 trillion of debt and Reps would own 2.272 trillion.

Using the same process but looking at GDP, Total GDP from 1902 until 2010 would total 145.042 trillion.

Dems would own 64.740 trillion of GDP since 1902, and Reps would own 80.302 trillion of GDP.

If Dems controlled only controlled 16 additional years, why is the debt attributable to them 3 times as great and why would the total GDP for years they controlled be 16.438 trillion less than Reps?

Sources:

www.bea.gov

www.whitehouse.gov/omb

www.gao.gov

senate.gov

www.house.gov

With all of the talk lately about the 14 trillion or so federal deficit, just curious if anyone has looked into it or had any thoughts about it.

With all of the talk lately about the 14 trillion or so federal deficit, just curious if anyone has looked into it or had any thoughts about it.

This is a list that I personally have compiled over the course of the last couple of weeks. It is not complete by any means, but I think it does give a sampling of my concerns as well as the concerns of many. Due to the length of the posting, I have not included links but have included the dates if one wanted to look it up.

ABORTION:

1. Voted against partial birth abortion ban- October 2007

2. He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive

3. Voted no on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP- March 2008

4. Voted no on prohibiting minors from crossing state lines for abortions- March 2008

5. Voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out of state abortions- July 2006

6. Voted against restrictions on public funding of abortion.- 2000

ECONOMIC ISSUES

7. Voted no on $40B in reduced overall federal spending- December 2005

8. Sponsored tax credit bill for providing 85% ethanol gas- April 2005

9. Voted no on CAFTA, Central America Free trade- July 2005

10. Mandates health care- February 2008

11. Voted to end $300 million worth of tax breaks for businesses.- 2004 (anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of economics understands that restrictive policy results in a reduction, not increase)

12. Believes that tax cuts on rich does not create jobs- May 2004

13. Voted to raise the minimum wage in Illinois from $5.15 an hour to $6.50 an hour over two years. – 2003 ( again, anyone with the slightest understanding of economics realizes that those adversely affected by such actions, are the individuals this measure is meant to help)

14. Favored single payer health care despite denial- January 2008

15. Successfully sponsored the Health Care Justice Act, a study of ways to implement a universal health care system statewide.- 2004

16. Free public college for any student with B average- July 1998

17. Voted against making permanent the repeal of the state's 5 percent sales tax on gasoline.- 2000

CRIME/ GUNS

18. Voted against making gang members eligible for the death penalty if they kill someone to help their gang. -2001

19. Deal with street level drug dealing as minimum wage affair- October 2006

20. Death penalty should not discriminate by gang membership- October 2004

21. Questions harsh penalties for drug dealing- October 2007

22. Endorsed Illinois handgun ban- April 2008

23. Respects 2nd amendment, but local gun bans ok- February 2008

24. Voted against letting people argue self-defense in court if charged with violating local weapons bans by using a gun in their home. -2004

25. Voted no on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers- July 2005

26. In 1999, Obama voted against a bill barring early release for (criminal) sex offenders

27. He unsuccessfully sponsored limit of one handgun purchase per month. - 200

28. Unsuccessfully sponsored measure to expunge some criminal records and create an employment grant program for ex-criminals.- 2002

WAR ON TERROR

29. Restore habeas corpus for detainees in War on Terror- June 2007

30. Close Guantanamo and restore habeas corpus- June 2007

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

31. Supports granting drivers license to illegal immigrants- November 2007

32. Voted yes on continued federal funds for ‘sanctuary cities’- March 2008

33. Extend welfare and Medicaid to immigrants- July 1998

34. Voted yes to allow illegal aliens to participate in social security- May 2008

35. Voted no on terminating legal challenges to English only job rules- March 2008

DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE

36. Opposed 1996 Illinois DOMA bill- March 2007

37. Opposes CA Prop. 8 define marriage as one man one woman- July 2008

MORAL AND COMMON SENSE ISSUES

38. Sponsored resolution rejecting photo ID for voting- September 2005

39. Obama voted “present” on a bill to keep pornographic book and video stores and strip clubs from setting up within 1,000 feet of schools and churches- 2001

40. Obama voted against filtering pornography on school and library computers

41. Obama voted for sex education for kindergarten children through the 5th grade

42. Include class based affirmative action with race based- October 2007

43. Supreme court was wrong on school anti-integration ruling- July 2007

44. Supports affirmative action in colleges and government- July 1998

45. National smoking bans only after trying local bans- September 2007

46. Voted no on declaring English as the official language of US government- June 2007

47. Voted against giving tax credits to parents who send their children to private school. - 1999

48. Jerusalem as joint Palestinian- Israeli capitol ok- July 2008

POLITICS

49. Statement: owes unions who endorse him, that’s why he’s in politics- October 2006

50. No money from lobbyist, but money from bundlers who lobby ok- July 2007

51. No money from lobbyist, but money from spouse of lobbyist ok- April 2007

52. Nearly $200,000,000 in unreported campaign contributions

According to estimates by the Tax Policy Center – Urban Institute and Brookings Institution, if current tax policy is extended, the effective tax rates for 2012 will be as follows;

for those making:

Less than 10K_-4.2%

10-20K______4.1%

20-30K_____14.3%

30-40K_____18.2%

40-50K_____17.3%

50-75K_____19.6%

75-100K____19.4%

100-200K___25.6%

200-500K___32.1%

500-1000K__30.2%

And 33.7% for more than 1000K

Under the Obama Proposal: Difference:

Less than 10K___ -10.4%______-6.2%

10-20K______3.9%___________-0.2%

20-30K_____14.4%___________+0.1%

30-40K_____19.1%___________+0.9%

40-50K_____18.2%___________+0.9%

50-75K_____20.0%___________+0.4%

75-100K____20.6%___________+1.2%

100-200K___26.2%___________+0.6%

200-500K___33.0%___________+0.9%

500-1000K__37.7%___________+7.5%

And 39.8% for more than 1000K_+6.1%

Under the McCain Proposal: Difference:

Less than 10K___ -4.2%________0.0%

10-20K______3.7%___________-0.4%

20-30K_____13.3%___________-1.0%

30-40K_____17.2%___________-1.0%

40-50K_____16.7%___________-0.6%

50-75K_____19.2%___________-0.4%

75-100K____19.2%___________-0.2%

100-200K___25.3%___________-0.3%

200-500K___32.3%___________+0.2%

500-1000K__30.1%___________-0.1%

And 33.7% for more than 1000K_-0.3%

So based on this data one can conclude that;

1) Under the Obama plan, you will see a reduction in taxes if you make up to 20K and an increase for all other income levels

2) Under the McCain plan, you will see a broad based reduction in taxes with the greatest reductions at the 20-40K level. There would however, be a minor increase at the 200-500K level.

Based on this, how does one conclude that the Obama camp is looking out for the middle class?

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/displayatab...

During the course of the Obama campaign, we have heard that senator Obama is the candidate who will work across the aisle; yet in the 109th congress senator Obama voted with his party a staggering 94.8% of the time. Though skewed due to the time senator Obama has spent campaigning, during the 110th congress he has voted with his party 96% of the time. Conversely, senator McCain has repeatedly been repudiated by members of his own party for having voted across the aisle. If we check senator McCain’s senate record, we find that during the 109th congress senator McCain voted with his party 79.4%, and though as with senator Obama the numbers are skewed, has voted with his party 88.3% of the time during the current session. If senator Obama is the ‘candidate of change’, the candidate that will cross the aisle, why does senator McCain hold the historical record supporting such a statement?

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/

I am not advocating the recall of all those in the house and senate who voted for the inclusion of a timetable, just those who sold their votes for special interest earmarks (pork). It seems to me illogical that if one believes placing a timetable restriction on troop funding is dangerous, then how does the insertion of an earmark in any way make it less dangerous? If we make the natural presumption that national security were outweighed by political favor, then it would seem to me that a recall based on at most; violation of oath of office or at minimum dereliction of duty would be in order. Since most states allow recall under these conditions, with the submition of petition containing the number of signatures equivalent to 25% of the votes cast in the previous election, do you think this should be pursued?

I am not advocating the recall of all those in the house and senate who voted for the inclusion of a timetable, just those who sold their votes for special interest earmarks (pork). It seems to me illogical that if one believes placing a timetable restriction on troop funding is dangerous, then how does the insertion of an earmark in any way make it less dangerous? If we make the natural presumption that national security were outweighed by political favor, then it would seem to me that a recall based on at most; violation of oath of office or at minimum dereliction of duty would be in order. Since most states allow recall under these conditions, do you think this should be pursued?