?

Many people enjoy the benefits of social (entitlement) programs that are designed to supplement ones income in the event one loses their job, becomes disabled, etc. While these programs are designed to assist one in their time of need, they also seem to generously naive. Workers Compensation and disability claims, for example, are at an all-time high, despite the fact that workplace injuries consistently trend downward. The reason for this, is due to many states adopting more generous policies as to what can be deemed a disability, for example, back stiffness, acid reflux, and my favorite, “piriformis syndrome” which is pain in one’s rear after sitting too long. Clearly, many have sought to take advantage of the system at the expense of tax payers. Now, while this can, and hopefully will be, reformed, doesn’t it show, if nothing else, that these safety nets in many ways make us lazier? Also, do you believe that one is more likely to spend their money unwisely, if they know subconsciously they do not deserve it?

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/osh.pdf

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeff...

248k new jobs, unemployment under 6%, first time since 2008, and job growth from July and August revised up adding 69k more jobs. Labor participation, however, dropped 0.1% (97k people) for a third straight month, and hourly wages also dropped a penny. MacEachin says unemployment needs to fall below 5.5% before wages improve. The majority of jobs added are retail (part-time) while “good-paying jobs” are “sluggish”.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-jobs-report-...

I’m no doubt a global warming skeptic, however, assuming for the sake of this argument that global warming is real, as the author of the article below, Kmele Foster believes, how can one be anti-capitalist? The vast majority of the advancements in green technology have been made in the private sector by for-profit companies, mostly in the U.S. If the anti-capitalists had their way, it would pretty much diminish any opportunities for future advancements.

http://reason.com/reasontv/2014/09/23/global-warmi...

According to a recent study by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and University of Washington, the main cause of the 1 degree increase in ocean temperature from 1900 to 2012 is due to changes in ocean circulation because of weaker winds, not because of a buildup of greenhouse gases. According to the study, “When coastal wind speeds weaken, they result in less evaporation from the sea surface and unusually low pressure that alters ocean currents and causes temperatures to rise over time” and “weakening winds accounted for more than 80% of the warming trend along the Pacific Northwest coast between Washington and Northern California. In Southern California, weaker winds were responsible for about 60% of the increased warming. Lastly, “If global warming had been the most powerful influence on land and sea temperatures, those temperatures would have been different.”

Looks like the science isn’t so settled.

http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-pacific-warm...

According to a recent study by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and University of Washington, the main cause of the 1 degree increase in ocean temperature from 1900 to 2012 is due to changes in ocean circulation because of weaker winds, not because of a buildup of greenhouse gases. According to the study, “When coastal wind speeds weaken, they result in less evaporation from the sea surface and unusually low pressure that alters ocean currents and causes temperatures to rise over time” and “weakening winds accounted for more than 80% of the warming trend along the Pacific Northwest coast between Washington and Northern California. In Southern California, weaker winds were responsible for about 60% of the increased warming. Lastly, “If global warming had been the most powerful influence on land and sea temperatures, those temperatures would have been different.”

Looks like the science isn’t so settled.

http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-pacific-warm...

All this talk about “white privilege” really got me thinking. I’ve always denied being privileged in anyway, however I never understood just how privileged I really was. Growing up I watched my father work 6 days a week roofing rich people’s homes in Marin County. I went to public school and worked with my father on weekends as a teenager to help support the family. I worked two jobs in the summer to save enough to go to college. Had to drop out college to help pay my parents mortgage to prevent foreclosure. Got married to the love of my life and began a family. Went back to school while working full time. Graduated with my bachelors and $50k in student loan debt.

I don’t want anybody to think that I am complaining about anything. On the contrary, I am extremely grateful for everything I have. Anybody who has ever been in the roofing industry knows just how tough that work is, and I know without a doubt it shaped me into the man I am. I have nothing but gratitude for everything my parents did for me. I wouldn’t trade my life or my experiences for a single trust fund.

Climate scientists and meteorologists are rather speechless on the fact that this year, we have only had 1 Tropical storm since the beginning of this year's hurricane season, marking the lowest weather activity in 70 years for the first few weeks of the season. Obviously, there is plenty of time left for the hurricanes to come, but the global warming CONspiracy posits that we should expect more hurricanes and stronger ones. However, the past few years has failed to provide such. Isn't this really just another indication that human beings really just have no clue what they are talking about when it comes to the weather?

According to the Daily Mail, satellite images of the arctic taken exactly two years to the day 8/25/12 – 8/25/2014, shows a 43% increase in arctic sea ice. All the meanwhile, global CO2 emissions have not significantly decreased in the past two years, at least sufficient to accommodate for such a large increase in sea ice. It’s important to remember too, that Al Gore said in 2007, “The ice cap is falling off a cliff. It could be completely gone in summer in as little as 7 years from now.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-273...

According to a recent report in the UK, “Hundreds of children have been systematically raped, beaten and sex trafficked in a northern English town for more than 12 years.” Girls as young as 11 years old were being raped and sold into sex slavery. This had not gone unnoticed either. Social counselors had seen massive amounts of evidence of the abuse, and did nothing about it, because they were afraid of being labeled as “racists”. Why? Because the perpetrators are “mostly of Pakistani heritage”. Is this not the inevitable consequence of political correctness? At what point does a society stop worrying about perception, and start doing the right thing?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/28/world/europe/uk-chil...

The President has received quite a bit of criticism, even from Democrats, regarding his recent announcements that he will work unilaterally to push a climate and immigration agenda. Most recently, the President announced the U.S. participation in a new UN treaty in which he and his administration boldly claimed they will actually work to side-step Congress due to its “dysfunction”, despite the Constitutional requirement for a two-third ratification of any treaty by the Senate. Regardless of whether or not you support the President’s policies, do you think it is good for a President to act in such a manner? Are these actions not relative to a dictator? Is the ‘ends justify the means’ approach to governing really in the best interest of liberty?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/us/politics/obam...

It seems many liberals are upset at Boeing right now because they announced they are laying people off here in the U.S. while increasing production in China. I know that there are many people on the left and right who don’t understand basic supply and demand principles, but for those that do, why blame Boeing? In a competitive market, don’t producers and suppliers compete for consumer business? In a global market, don’t countries compete for producer and supplier business? If these are such vital jobs that need to be in America, why would you not support fostering a business environment that makes staying in the U.S. more attractive, as opposed to suggesting punitive measures (i.e. increased taxes and tariffs) that would only drive more companies out of America?

Whenever a politician dies while in office, the media stops and focuses only on that for two weeks, but a U.S. General dies in the field, first since the Vietnam war, and the media hardly covers it. Why? And why no half-staff order by the President? Whitney Houston and Nelson Mandela got that respect, but not for a man who served most of his life defending this country? It's shameful in my opinion, regardless of where you stand on the political sphere.

In America, we have designations and hyphenations for virtual every racial and ethnic group you can think of, except for those who descend from Europe. Most minorities in America identify with their race or with their nationality, such as blacks and Latinos. Caucasian people, however, are commonly referred to as being 'white' regardless of their national origins. For example, I am mostly Italian. My grandmother is the daughter of Italian immigrants who lived in the Bronx, just as many Italians did during that time. She has a sign that hangs on her wall that reads, "Whites Only! No Coloreds, Jews, or Italians!" to remind herself of her struggles. So, at what point did she, as well as I, become "white"? Do you think this sort of grouping will eventually happen to the Latino community, given their European heritage?

According to the last Census, approximately 49% of households receive assistance from government. Some of the things included in this statistic are Medicare, social security, and Medicaid, along with welfare benefits and food stamps, etc. Put aside your personal feelings regarding these programs, and just tell me what you would do, if you were or are one of these people, and you were told the government will no longer be providing assistance to you any longer?

The mainstream media is in full protect-Obama mode, and are making the claim that the bad winter is the reason for the GDP dipping 1%. Some economists are saying that the dip is a result of Obama's bad policies as well as the bad weather.

If it was solely the weather to blame as so many in the media are claiming, then why did the hurricanes in 2005, which was considered one of the worst hurricane seasons on record, didn't have a similar effect on GDP?

http://www.multpl.com/us-gdp-inflation-adjusted/ta...

President Obama recently criticized our founders and the Constitution for giving each state an equal number of Senators, because it is a barrier to him being able to push his agenda. The purpose behind equal representation in the Senate, was due to the fact that prior to the Seventeenth Amendment, Senators were appointed by the state legislatures, and represented the state's interest, while the elected representative in the House represented the interests of the voters in their district. This was specifically addressed by Madison to prevent single party rule. With that said, do you agree with the President, and would you favor only a single party in the US?

Obama blames 'structural' design of Congress for gridlock - Washington Times

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/23/ob...

1. Socialism will eventually lead to a fascist dictatorship as it replaces individual rights with collective rights and centralizes power with the government.

2. Socialism empowers the collective whole promoting equality, and can replace capitalism if implemented correctly.

Why?

Liberals used to be the party of freedom. They were abolishinists, fought against Jim Crow and segregation, stood for women's rights, etc. They used to have a "live and let live" mentality. Is that still true today? The big movement from the left today is "equality" specifically with marriage, income, and affirmative action. But lately, there seems to be a growing movement to vilify anybody who does not agree, to threaten their livelihoods and outcast anybody who does not conform to the liberal ideology. Universities are banning books that may be hard for some racial demographics to read for fear they may get offended. Gay activist groups attack any employer of someone who expresses a traditional view on marriage. Is that who liberals are? The ideology of banning and outcasting anyone and anything that does not conform to the ideology?