Cuba's new President Miguel Diaz-Canel flew to Caracas for his first foreign trip as head of state, a show of solidarity for Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro, a fellow Marxist.
"I pledge to you that no matter how big the challenges, you can count on Cuba today and forever," Diaz-Canel said after meeting Maduro in the Miraflores presidential palace.
"Venezuela now needs our solidarity," he earlier told Venezuela's Constituent Assembly, a pro-government legislative super body.
Both Venezuela and Cuba are examples of what the Obama intended for the United States when he promised that he would fundamentally transform the United States. Both Venezuela and Cuba are examples of what happens to a nation when they adopt the programs now being offered by the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) here in the United States.
Marx called capitalism evil. Marx condemned capitalism because he encourages competition. Marx condemned capitalism because it encourages individuals to strive to fulfill their individual potential even when that means by the individual excelling they violate the limited standards of the collective and members of the collective feel inadequate. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) now punish the individuals who excel academically, financially, or any other way by demonizing their achievement because it might feel a member of the collective as being inadequate.
If Americans want to know what Obama and his fellow comrades desire for America, all they have to do is look south to Cuba and Venezuela. Obama wanted to normalize our relations with Cuba because he identifies with the policies implemented in both Cuba and Venezuela.
Cuba and Venezuela are not unique in their failure. They are what every country has become who adopts and embraces the “Hope and Change” promised by the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats). “Hope and Change” has only and can only result in a society that becomes a nation in total social and financial decay.
It is far more difficult, because it requires far more effort and responsibility on the part of the individual citizens, to embrace and be a part of an individualist society. But the rewards are so much greater. Freedom and independence are never easy to acquire and maintain, but the rewards and satisfaction are oh so much greater. Fellow Freedom Loving Americans, let us never stop fighting for freedom and liberty, because the result is so worth it.
While the American news outlets (if one dares to call them news outlets and not gossip outlets) are reporting on Roseann, The View, the late-night television shows, and what the lugubrious arguments of others in the Marxist dominated entertainment and celebrity world, real news is happening. The American Revolution ushered in a new concept of governance; that the citizen would be the sovereign and the government would be the servant. The collectivist world was appalled by this novel idea introduced by John Locke and implemented by Thomas Jefferson and the rest of the forward thinking American Revolutionaries. The collectivist movement has been fighting this concept of freedom and demanding that in fact Hobbs was correct when he said that the sovereign must be the government and the people had no rights and must willing serve that sovereign.
The belief that government is always right, and people should adhere willingly to its dictates has taken many different forms with the overall movement being divided into two prominent movements; the collectivist movement and the Islamic movement. Both forces are at work today to eliminate the movement of freedom and independence ushered into the political world by the American colonists only about 250 years ago.
The collectivist movement, which includes the globalists, took a terrible blow when Woodrow Wilson and Edmund House’s League of Nations was rejected by the United States. This failure however led way to the United Nations and eventually the European Union, both of which are proteges of a one world government advocating the elimination of individual liberty, nationalism, and borders. It is this elimination of borders that has caused just unrest in both Europe and the United States. The attempt by the collectivists to eliminate the Southern border of the United States is a primary reason anti-globalist Donald Trump was elected to the presidency and is a major reason for the growing anti-EU movement in Europe.
The collision of these two worlds is vividly occurring today in Italy, however, the American news outlets do not report on this critical world happening because it is news, it is not gossip, and it does not demonize Donald Trump. This is a real news story and how it ends will have a major affect on the European Union as well as the global governance movement.
In Italy recently, to form a government, there was a formation of a ‘populist’ coalition between the left-wing Five Star Movement (M5S), led by Luigi Di Maio, and the right-wing La Liga (The (Northern) League), led by Matteo Salvini.
Although the two parties differ on many issues, and distrust each other greatly, they decided to form a coalition based on their shared anti-Euro, anti-EU, and anti-immigrant policies. Di Maio and Salvini chose Giuseppe Conte, an obscure law professor with no political experience, to serve as prime minister, to be confirmed by the parliament.
But they also chose Paolo Savona to be finance minister, someone who at one time in the past raised objections to Italy joining the eurozone. Following constitutional procedure, Conte submitted Savona’s name to Italy’s president, Sergio Mattarella. Mattarella, who is staunchly pro-Europe which means pro-globalist, vetoed the choice of Savona, based on his previous statements about the eurozone, even though he says that he no longer believes them. Conte resigned, and the entire proposed government collapsed.
This infuriated Di Maio and Salvini, who claimed that Mattarella was catering to the demands of Brussels and Berlin, which means pro-European Union and pro-globalist, rather than to the will of the people of Italy. Di Maio called for the impeachment of Mattarella, something unlikely to be successful under Italy’s constitutional system.
Salvini demanded new elections, believing that his Northern League would gain additional seats in parliament. “In a democracy, if we are still in democracy, there’s only one thing to do, let the Italians have their say,” he said.
How this scenario ends will have a great impact on whether or not the European Union continues to drive Europe toward open borders with no restriction on immigration into the Euro Zone, and national governments becoming even more subservient to the globalist dominated European Union. To lose Italy would be devastating to the EU and the globalist movement, especially with the recent rejection of the EU by the UK and the rejection of the EU mandated quotas by much of Eastern Europe.
This is critical to the people of the United States because it will be a rejection of the globalist movement of both the EU and the UN by sections of Europe that were considered to be strong believers in all that the globalist movement is. This rejection will give even more credence and credibility to the anti-globalist movement of Donald Trump in the United States. It will have a far greater affect on your life and mine then does what the news media is deeming as critical news stories; what Roseann tweets, what the ladies of the view say, what late night hosts say, or what people who make a living by regurgitating previously written lines say or think.
One of the key strategies of any movement attempting to bring about a sovereign government, (a dictatorial government) is to try to focus the attention of their potential servants on frivolous and meaningless happenings as opposed to those happenings that are critical to the freedom and liberty of the people.
Yes, we are seeing two worlds colliding, but the American news or gossip outlets refuse to headline these critical stories. It certainly illuminates which side the gossip outlets favor.
The Unions have always backed the Marxist philosophies, “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs,” and competition is horrible because it encourages people to perform at their best and then rewards based on those efforts. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) have backed these philosophies for years by promoting unions and by promoting the American Safety Net System and the American Welfare System. Never mind that it is the anti-Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) philosophy that propelled the United States to become the most prolific economy the world has ever seen.
It was the adoption of American Capitalism and Individualism that allowed the American system to grow and expand, minimizing poverty and constantly raising the standard of living for all. It was this system of Individualism that made the Untied States the envy of the world and why people from without dreamed about becoming a part of this American Dream that is exactly the opposite of what the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) and some of the Republican Establishment are demonizing today in the same way Marx did.
The Untied States has done something remarkable. We elected a non-politician president named Donald Trump. Trump was and is a business man who understands the value to the individual and to the company when a worker’s employment is based on effort and contribution. Of course, the unions and the Marxist proclaimers are crying discrimination against our workers who have come to believe the pay check is a gift and not a result of hard work and contribution.
Trump has issued three executive orders aimed at getting rid of low-performing federal employees, the White House announced. The changes could save taxpayers an estimated $100 million per year, according to the announcement. The new rules promote basing employment on merit rather than tenure. Additionally, federal agencies are encouraged to fire employees instead of suspending them. Employees will also have less time to improve their performance, according to published reports.
A White House announcement stated, “Tenured federal employees have stolen agency property, run personal businesses from work, and been arrested for using drugs during lunch breaks and not been fired.” In a statement accompanying the release, Trump said the government must “operate more efficiently and more securely.” Under the new orders, federal workers will be expected to devote at least 75 percent of their time on direct job duties.
The American Federation of Government Employees, a union for federal workers, said that 700,000 members have denounced the reforms. Political opposition and potential litigation may result, union leaders suggested. “We will see him in court, we will see him in the street, we will see him wherever we can be,” AFGE president J. David Cox Sr. said in a Washington Examiner report.
Cox called the orders “a classic example of this administration’s attack and assault on women, attack and assault on minorities.” Cox told the Washington Examiner the new rules were “modeled after the VA Accountability Act” that recently became law, allowing for expedited firing of Veterans Administration workers. He also said he fears the orders are a step toward making federal workers “at will” employees. That could mean taking political considerations in into account for hiring and firing decisions.
Cox said that in his opinion, “President Trump has no respect for the rule of law and this is just the latest case.”
President Trump has no respect for lazy employees who feel entitled and believe in being rewarded on need and not effort and ability. President Trump believes in Individualism and not Collectivism. President Trump believes in the American Capitalist system that was also promoted and championed by our Founders. Thank you President Trump for protecting the American public from the “free loading and enabling” policies of the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) and Republican Establishment.
When our nation was founded, a government was formed with great hesitation by the founders. The founders understood that in forming a government they were creating the single biggest threat to the freedom they had just won. In order to protect those freedoms, freedoms they had just won from a tyrannical government, freedoms granted by our Creator and not man nor government, the founders wrote the Constitution. Patrick Henry stated, “The Constitution is an instrument not for the government to restrain the people, but for the people to restrain the government, less it (the government) should come to dominate our lives and our interests.”
The Constitution is not the governments. In fact, the Constitution places limits on the powers of the government. The Constitution states specifically what limited powers the federal government has and reinforces the fact that the federal government’s powers are indeed greatly restricted in the 10th Amendment. This is one reason those who advocate for bigger and a more controlling government also would have us believe that the Constitution is a “living document.” All a “living document” means is that the Constitution has no meaning and thus there are no restriction on the government which is in direct contrast with the whole purpose of the Constitution.
Ronald Reagan said, “The government is not the solution, the government is the problem.” Thomas Paine said, "It is the responsibility of the patriot to protect his country from its government." Sam Adams told us, "If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
This is Comrade Obama’s view of government, “Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems; some of these same voices also doing their best to gum up the works. They’ll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices”
The age-old question is do we trust those individuals who are in government or do we constantly insist on constant review and total transparency. Our founders and other freedom loving Americans warned us about the danger of entrusting individuals with great power and control and not requiring constant review and transparency. Those who believe in the goodness and control of government insist that all in government can be and should be trusted.
We are now learning why our founders were correct and Comrades like Obama are wrong. The desire by those individuals in government to rule and control can never be underestimated or dismissed. We are learning of people like Holder, Mueller, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, and others who took it upon themselves to determine what is right for the American people. We are also now learning that this directive came from Comrade Obama.
These individuals determined it was their decision to determine what the American people can and should know, who should be elected president, that it was right for them to lie and mislead, that it was right for them to release government and classified information, and that they are above the law and therefore their actions and deeds should not be investigated and revealed.
Now Clapper, who has on several other occasions blatantly lied to the American people, is telling us it was for the good of the American people and the Trump campaign that the federal government spied on the Trump campaign. This is distorted logic that only a conspiring and narcissistic individual could conceive. The facts seem to point to Obama at the very least approving of these actions.
What is being revealed is that a conspiracy to thwart the rule of law and the Constitution itself was a part of the daily workings of the Obama regime. They apparently believed their scheme would go undiscovered when Hillary took office. Then election night happened. They continued to try to cover their anti-freedom activities with the appointment of Mueller. Now the truth is unraveling despite of Mueller’s activities.
Holder and the others have said a complete and transparent investigation would be harmful to and undermine the DOJ and the FBI and in fact the whole government. To allow the deeds of those who desired to undermine the very fabric of our Republic to remain secret would be far more dangerous. The United States is facing a Constitutional crisis. Our Republic has and is being threatened. These who have perpetrated this conspiracy are in the same category as was Benedict Arnold.
Stacy Abrams is being touted as a black female who won the race for the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) primary for governor in Georgia. We hear the black female loud and clear but what we are not hearing is that Stacy Abrams eliminates the Democrat and totally embraces the Marxist/Progressive. Here are many of her stated policies:
Stacy Abrams advocates for public education of your children by the state from the cradle. The Marxist has always advocated that the values of the child is to be determined by the state and not the parent because the child is really the property of the state and not the responsibility of the parent.
Stacy Abrams says Georgia should have a fair economy by lifting the poor out of poverty which means wealth confiscation and redistribution as determined by the state along with central planning. She also says this includes state wide universal healthcare.
Stacy Abrams advocates for more government control over the lives of the citizens. She advocates making people more dependent on the government and less self-reliant claiming that some people are incapable and can only survive and even thrive with the help of the government. This is of course advocating collectivism over individualism, communism over the American ideal of pursuit of happiness and not guaranteed outcome for all.
Stacy Abrams advocates total and complete voter registration and no restrictions or requirements of proof of citizenship at time of registration or when voting. Like all the Marxist/Progressives in the United States, she understands that election results can be greatly enhanced by promising people the benefit of others hard work and effort and then allowing all legal or illegal voters to cast ballots, so they can receive based on need and not on effort or contribution.
Stacy Abrams echoes Karl Marx in his belief that “From each according to his ability to each according to his needs” as Stacy Abrams claims that merit based should be ignored and need based should be the rule.
Stacy Abrams advocates the Marxist philosophy as did Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Mao, Castro, Chavez and does Obama, Holder, Jarrett, and Axelrod. The frightening aspect of Abrams victory in the primary is that several other openly Marxist/Progressives won by wide margins in the Democrat primaries. The party of Truman and Kennedy has become the party of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Mao, Castro Chavez, Obama, Holder, Jarrett, and Axelrod.
These Marxists, including Abrams, as all Marxists despise the principles upon which the United State was founded and prospered; those principles of individualism, rule of law, limited government, divided government and sovereignty by the people. As did Marx and Lenin, these current Marxists advocate collectivism, arbitrary law, big government, concentrated power, government control, and a “Dictatorship by the Proletariat” that will bring about the Marxist classless society that is totally conforming and totally equal socially, politically, and economically; a desired utopia that has ended in a total social and economic catastrophe every time it is attempted.
The union is to a Marxist society what the family is to a free society; the basic unit. The family is the creation of God and serves as the purveyor of values as responsible parents pass the values of self-reliance and self-responsibility from generation to generation. The union is the creation of Marxists and enables society to rely on collectivist values which proclaim the worship of government while demonizing the importance of self-reliance and self-responsibility.
The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) are in fear that the Unites States Supreme Court will uphold the basic principle of freedom that an individual has the right to decide for themselves to what group they wish to belong, if any, and if they wish to have their money spent for them the way they want or the way the almighty union and government declares they should spend it. Now that the membership of the Supreme Court leans towards freedom and liberty and away from the tyranny promised by Obama when he proclaimed he would fundamentally transform the United States into a Marxist tyrannical state, the Marxists who have relied on the confiscated funds of workers to advance their Marxist ideology are scrambling.
As a side note; those of you who might have been saying or even thinking that Obama is just a person who is left leaning and have been questioning my assertion that he is in fact a Communist, the facts become more and more clear every day Obama is just that; a devoted Communist. Those of us who have studied and understand Marxism and the ways of the Marxists have known that Obama is a devoted Marxist prior to him even entering the senate. Those of us who understand how Communists view the Untied States and understand it is the goal of every Marxist to fundamentally transform the United States from an individualist society to a collectivist society, and that they will use any means necessary, are again being proven correct as we see the assault on freedom waged by the likes of Obama and Holder as they violated everything sacred in the United States and politicized our DOJ, FBI, IRS, CIA and NSA in attempt to manipulate our election, the very think they accused the Russians of doing.
Marxist officials in Marxist dominated states are pursuing an end-run around Janus v. AFSCME, a case that could give government workers across all states the option of declining to pay union fees just for the privilege of working. Pro- and anti-union partisans alike anticipate the court is likely to rule against the unions — a decision that Marxist leaders know will shrink their bank accounts and, in turn, their power.
The play by the Marxists is simple: Beef up public-employee union’s ability to recruit and retain members to counteract the chunk of revenue loss these unions know is inevitable now that they will no longer be able to legally confiscate these funds. Some Marxist dominated state governments are passing laws that makes it harder for people to opt out of having their funds confiscated under the guise of paying union dues by letting unions set the terms for refusals and allows union thugs to intimidate new employees during the workday. These right to intimidate laws would apply to all workers including public-employee workers.
Unions have been on the decline over the past 30 years, due to the spread of right-to-work laws. In 2015, just 11 percent of all workers were in unions, less than half of what membership was in 1983. But government unions have remained a bastion of union power, with the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimating rates of public-sector union membership were five times higher than that of private-sector workers last year. Now the same non-intimidation and right to confiscate funds laws would apply to public sector workers as well. The Marxists are in terrible fear of this basic right of a free society being implemented. This is in direct contrast to their promise to fundamentally transform the United States from a free society to a Marxist tyrannical state.
The legislative Branch of government is the only branch of government that, according to the United States Constitution, can make law. Law is not to be made by the Executive Branch or the Judicial Branch of government. However, congress has failed to do its job and the executive and judiciary were only to willing and to eager to pick up the slack. The politicians in congress greatly appreciate this because it allowed them to pontificate without taking a stand. We saw this when then Speaker of the House made the most telling statement of how Congress avoided its duty when she infamously stated, “We must pass this bill, so we can learn what is in it away from the fog of the controversy.” What Pelosi stated, although she probably had no idea she was saying given her restricted intellectual capacity, is that congress will allow both the executive branch through regulations, and the judiciary branch through rulings, to make the difficult decisions and allow the congress to avoid their responsibility.
The left has come to hate Trump even more than they did prior to the election because Trump has stated that congress must do its work, as in the case of DACA, in the education area, and environmental areas to name a few. The left is also deathly afraid of judicial nominees that Trump has chosen because these are judges who understand their role is not to make law but to enforce law. This latest case is a perfect example with the judge saying his personal belief is of no consequence, he can only give a ruling based on the law. If congress does not like the ruling, then they must change the law. The ball is in your kitchen congress; can you stand the heat.
This is the background:
In April 2014, Epic Systems Corporation sent an email to a group of its employees. The email contained a modified arbitration agreement. The agreement mandated that all wage-and-hour claims made by the email’s recipients could be brought against Epic only through individual arbitration. The agreement also required that the employee waive their right to any other means of resolving such a disagreement. The email said that continuing employment at Epic constituted agreement to the new conditions.
Not long afterward, one of the group filed a lawsuit alleging he and others had been deprived of overtime pay. Epic asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit as the plaintiff, Jacob Lewis, had agreed to waive legal action when he acknowledged receipt of the company’s email. The trial judge refused to dismiss the case and allowed it to proceed to trial. Epic appealed to the Seventh Circuit. The Seventh Circuit agreed with the trial judge. The Seventh held that the National Labor Relations Act held precedence over the Federal Arbitration Act, a law allowing employers to impose arbitration. Epic appealed to the Supreme Court.
Neil Gorsuch, Trump appointee to the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, agreed with Epic (decision).
Gorsuch and the majority didn’t take a position on what policy was best but rather what the law required:
Gorsuch writes that the “policy may be debatable, but the law is clear: Congress has instructed that arbitration agreements like those before us must be enforced as written. While Congress is of course always free to amend this judgment, we see nothing suggesting it did so in the” National Labor Relations Act, “much less that it manifested a clear intention to displace the Arbitration Act.”
The larger point is that it isn’t the job of the Supreme Court to decide what is the best policy. That job belongs to Congress. This is very much in line with the immigration case decided last week which found Congress had passed a law that was impermissibly vague. And it shows a mature recognition that the courts do grave damage to their own credibility when they wade into policy battles to try to remedy a mess made by Congress.
The left is demonizing Gorsuch because he followed the mandate given to the courts in the United States Constitution. He ruled on the law as passed by Congress. The left says that because the courts have consistently ignored The Constitution and made rulings based on their personal beliefs, this is precedence and should be continued. The left is wrong again. The law is the law and only congress has the power to change it. Do your job congress. Enough grandstanding, pontificating, and shirking your duty. There is a new sheriff in town.
Venezuela – the country who has employed the very policies called for by the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) – collectivism, big government, confiscation of assets by the government supposedly to redistribute, government demands on how the people are to run their lives, restrictions on freedoms including speech and religion, and confiscation of guns, held an election on Sunday. Just like in all collectivist nations as desired by the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) the results were known on the Saturday before election Sunday – Maduro Wins in a Landslide. The predetermined number that was announced on Monday was Maduro 5.8 million votes and others 1.8 million votes. Most people said they did not vote but just like in California, New York, or Illinois the facts do not get in the way of the final tally.
The difference in Venezuela from the United States today is that the government can legally jail anybody who would challenge them. Although the Mueller team is adjusting to the Maduro ways. In the United States, we have learned, the law enforcement arms of the federal government still have to oppose the opposition in a covert manner. In Venezuela the government can and did close down the opposition overtly while in the United States Obama’s DOJ and FBI had to secretly tap the phone lines of Trump’s campaign, secretly infiltrate Trump’s campaign with spies, fund totally fabricated stories and then use them to try to give some rule of law excuse to spy and use that same fabricated story to have Brennan and Clapper lie about Russian collusion, somewhat covertly.
Votes will probably be destroyed if anyone has reasonable proof that vote tampering occurred. How does this differ from the campaign of Debbie Wasserman Schultz? Voters were being intimidated at the polls in Venezuela by government thugs. How does this differ from Black Panther thugs standing outside US voting stations with their military garb and Billy clubs? Irregularities in votes counted and citizens going to the polls will take place. How does this differ from Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) calling for illegal aliens being able to vote along with previously deceased voters and pets of voters, not to mention the number of Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) who believe if one vote is good than ten must be better.
Freedom Loving Americans take a good look at Venezuela. All the policies advocated for by the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) are the same policies called for by Chavez. We see the result in Venezuela and it will be the same result in the United States. The policies of the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) have always resulted in a nation that suffers from the worst of social and economic decay.
Will the Venezuela people recover? Eventually yes, however, they still have many hardships to suffer. Many more will be killed, die from starvation, be imprisoned, be robbed, and suffer the humiliation of not being able to provide for their families. All of this could have been avoided. They were promised “Hope and Change” and enough believed it was a better way so that Marxist Chavez was able to gain control and the downward spiral began. The United States is in that downward spiral thanks to the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats). The Marxist/Progressives including Obama’s DOJ and FBI failed in their attempts to rig the 2017 election. Unless the swamp is completely drained, our freedom remains at great risk.
Our national budget is totally out of control. Never the less, Ryan and McConnell, self-proclaimed conservatives who are concerned about the federal budget, led the fight to pass yet another budget omnibus bill within the last month. The omnibus bill is another failure by the Republican Establishment to keep their promise that they will be fiscally conservative and responsible. This massive spending spree once again gave Pelosi and Schumer even more than they dared to dream they would be able to get.
A true fiscal conservative, Rand Paul, has forced a vote on what he calls his “Penny Plan.” The goal of Paul is to bring some control on what many have called the greatest danger to our freedom, “an out of control budget deficit and debt.”
Rand Paul’s Balanced Budget:
• Paul’s budget simply states that for every on-budget dollar the federal government spent in FY18, excluding the BBA, it spend one penny less for the next five years (at which point balance is reached), with spending then growing at one percent thereafter.
• Reduces spending by $404.8B in FY19 and by $13.35T over 10 years relative to baseline.
• Total spending still increases by 14.6 percent over the ten-year window. Only in Washington could a 14.6 percent increase be characterized as a cut.
• Balances without making any changes to Social Security.
• Makes no specific policy assumptions – all the savings are reflected in a new budget function (Function number 930: New Efficiencies, Consolidations, and Other Savings). This budget sets a goal of balance and then calls on Congress to use the tools provided to make the changes in law needed to achieve that objective.
The BBA of 2018
• The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 raised the discretionary spending caps imposed by the Budget Control Act of 2011 nearly $300 billion. With federal debt over $21 trillion, the negative impact of borrowing more money for this spending outweighs any benefit derived from it.
Expansion of Health Savings Accounts
• Provides reconciliation instructions to the Senate Finance Committee to allow for expanded HSAs. Senator Paul’s HSA expansion would allow patients to save for their entire out-of-pocket costs and use HSAs to pay premiums, while also widening eligible disbursements to include supplements, over-the-counter medicine, and other activities that promote wellness and reduce the overall cost of health care.
Reconciliation and Budget Process Reform
• Provides reconciliation instructions to all committees with mandatory spending, ensuring every eligible committee participates in the reconciliation process, as was the process’ original purpose.
• Raises the waiver threshold for all budget points of order so the Senate is held to a higher standard.
• Makes the budget spending totals enforceable for 10 years instead of just one.
The Senate rejected Sen. Rand Paul’s balanced budget proposal known as the “penny plan.”
The measure would have cut spending by $13 trillion over 10 years and balanced the budget in five years.
“Republicans say they are for balancing a budget so today’s a litmus test. If your senator has been saying they’re for a balanced budget, they ought to vote for it,” Mr. Paul, Kentucky Republican, said in a last-minute pitch before the vote.
The vote was held and it predictably failed. Our senate supports bloated budgets and an unmanageable debt and deficits. Those who voted yes supported Paul's proposal. Those who voted no, support putting the United States in grave danger by voting to increase the single biggest threat to our freedom. an out of control debt.
Those who voted yes were, Barrasso - WY, Cornyn - TX, Crapo - ID, Cruz - TX, Daines - MT, Enzi - WY, Ernst - IA, Fischer - NE, Flake - AZ, Grassley - IA, Johnson - WI, Kennedy - LA, Lankford - OK, Lee - UT, Moran - KS, Paul - KY, Risch - ID, Rubio - FL, Sasse - NE, Scott - SC, Tommey - PA, and of course McConnell - KY voted no.
The Republicans who voted yes are telling the truth when they say they are serious about balancing the budget while those who voted against are saying one thing while doing another. In some circles these people are called liars.
A spectre is haunting THE UNITED STATES — the spectre of COMMUNISM.
Four Democratic candidates backed by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) won primary elections for legislative seats in Pennsylvania on Tuesday. The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States. DSA's members are building progressive (Communist) movements for social change while establishing an openly democratic socialist presence in American communities and politics.
This is from the DSA’s statement: We are socialists because we reject an international economic order sustained by private profit, alienated labor, race and gender discrimination, environmental destruction, and brutality and violence in defense of the status quo.
We are socialists because we share a vision of a humane international social order based both on democratic planning and market mechanisms to achieve equitable distribution of resources, meaningful work, a healthy environment, sustainable growth, gender and racial equality, and non-oppressive relationships.
These are quotes from the Communist Manifesto: “Then the world will be for the common people, and the sounds of happiness will reach the deepest springs. Ah! Come! People of every land, how can you not be roused.”
And here it becomes evident that the bourgeoisie is unfit any longer to be the ruling class in society and to impose its conditions of existence upon society as an over-riding law. It is unfit to rule because it is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery, because it cannot help letting him sink into such a state that it has to feed him instead of being fed by him. Society can no longer live under this bourgeoisie; in other words, its existence is no longer compatible with society.
The proletarians have nothing to loose but their chains. They have a world to win.
More from DSA: DSA carries on a fine old American tradition— the tradition carried on by Eugene Debs and thousands more. I am proud to be a member.
Debs originated the Socialist Party in the United States and identified with the Communist Party of the USA throughout his lifetime.
The DSA sings the same song sung by Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Lenin, Mao, Castro, Chavez, Frank Marshall Davis, Obama, Jarrett, and Axelrod.
The thread which runs through Lenin’s writings is his view that socialism should be a society where the working people control their own fate, a society organized to benefit the vast majority. This view was the foundation for Lenin’s efforts in socialist construction. The result was the Soviet Union.
Communism cannot exist without socialism. Socialism always morphs into communism.
Every attempt to bring about the fictional society espoused by Collectivism has ended with a society suffering from both social and financial decay. Poverty and crime escalate while the living standards for all but a few plummet. Tyranny is the inevitable end.
A spectre is haunting THE UNITED STATES — the spectre of COMMUNISM.