worldlyone's Blog

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) program. He promised:
1. That participationin the program would be completely voluntary.
2. That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes to the Program.
3.That the money the Participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income tax purposes each year.
4. That the money the participants put into the independent "Trust Fund" rather than the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security.
5. That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Secusrity check every month - and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal governament to "put away" -- you may be interested in the following:

Q: Which political Party took Soc. Sec. from the independent "Trust Fund" and put it into the General fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate.
Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Soc. Sec. (FICA) withholding?
A: The Democratic Party.
Q: Which Political Party started taxing Soc. Sec. annuities?
A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the "tie- breaking" deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice- President of the US.
Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?
A: (MY FAVORITE) Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party and immigrants at the age of 65 began to receive Soc. Sec. payments even though they never paid a dime into it!!

Then after all this lying and thieving and violating of the original contract (FICA), the Democrats have the gall to tell you that the Republicans want to take your Soc. Sec. away.

The worst part is uninformed citizens believe it!!!

A  message for Rick ----- guess what   "WE ALREADY KNOW YOU ARE ITALIAN". Do you not know any other subject?  I have nothing against Italians but, enough is enough already.  You need to get new writers.

No one has mentioned this but, the absolute best female singer today has been diagnosed with hepatitus. Sources say she apparently contracted it during her earlier days while she was using drugs.  My wish is that Natalie Cole has a speedy recovery and provides us with more of her magnificent music.

The Democrtic Party has become the Lawyers Party. Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton are lawyers. Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama are lawyers. John Edwards is a lawyer and so is his wife, Elizabeth. Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Al Gore did not graduate). Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school.  Look at the Democrat Party in Congress: the Majority Leader in each house is a lawyer.

The Republican Party is different. President Bush and Vice President Cheney were not lawyers, but businessmen. The leaders of the Republican Revolution were not lawyers. Newt Gingrich was a history professor; Tom Delay was and exterminator; and, Dick Armey was an economist. House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer, not a lawyer.  The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon. Who was the last Republican President who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting President, running against Ronal Reagan in 1976.

The Rpublican Party is made up of real people doing real work. The Democratic Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick , like Frist, or who immerse tehmselves in history, like Gengrich.  The Lawyers Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want and need, as enemies of America. And, so we have seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers Party, grow.

When politicians as lawyers begin to view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then th role of the legal system in our life becomes all-consuming. Some Americans become"adverse parties" of our very government. Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions that create  law instead of enforcing laws already on the books; we are driven by distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next President is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and law in America is too big.

Perhaps Americans will understand that CHANGE cannot be brought to our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse....but perhaps Americans wiil not. In that cae, may God have mercy on us.

"The public cannot be too curious concerning the characters of public men" ----Samuel Adams.

About the time our original 13 states adopted the constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.  A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, those nations progressed through the following sequence:

1. from bondage to spiritual faith; 2. from spiritual faith to great courage; 3. from courage to liberty; 4. from liberty to abundance; 5. from abundance to complacency; 6. from complacency to apathy; 7. from apathy to dependence; 8. from dependence back into bondage."

Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University of Law, St, Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:

Number of States won by: Democrats: 19, Republicans: 29.

Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000, Republicans: 2,427,000.

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republicans won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare...."  Olson believes the United States is now between the complacency and the apathy phase of Professors Tyler's definition of democracy, with some 40% of the nation's population already having reached the governmental dependency phase.

If the (Democratic) Congress grants amnesty to 20 million criminal invaders called illegal's and they vote then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years. If you are in favor of all this, then by all means vote DEMOCRATIC, otherwise, the only hope we have is to vote REPUBLICAN.

I take issue with John Hook's news broadcast about the new move over law. He keeps saying "when you see emergency vehicles and red lights approaching, move over" . I submit, it's supposed to be when you are approaching emergency vehicles stopped along the roadway, move over. The law to move over for approaching emergency vehicles has been in effect for many years.