ariscus99

I just saw a video in which Stossell says he agrees with Rand Paul that a private business can discriminate in any way they choose. I'm glad I was sitting down when I heard that. What a shock!

His view of it, according to the video, was that yeah, if you want to discriminate that should be your right. He also said that racism, is wrong, that he's not racist, and doesn't really like people that are. But if a private business which gets no public funding, chooses to be racist, that should be their right. It's not against the law to be racist. And any business that used those practices, would just self destruct, especially this day in age. You'd loose the money of whomever your not allowing in, plus the rest of the people would probably stop coming to your establishment based on principal. So let them be racist and fail. All of this goes out the window at any publicly funded place. But I have to say I agree, call me racist if you want, I'm not, I know I'm not, I also know it's not against the law to be racist, so if someone chooses to be a racist, it's their choice, while I don't agree with it, and I feel there is no place for racism in our world, it's just something you can't stop, racism both ways mind you. Should it be mandated that the black students association have white people in it? How about black unions? I'm a firefighter, part of IAFF and CSFA, my shift partner is also part of IAFF and CSFA but he's also part of a union I can't join the BFA(black firefighters association). Should that be mandated to allow me and other white fire fighters to join it? What about black colleges, there isn't a college in the US that has the overwhelming majority of students one race like those colleges do, it's not allowed, except at black colleges.

John Stossell had a pretty insightful view of the whole Rand Paul debacle. It was on the Megan Kelly show on fox news and then again I believe on FBN. What he says makes decent sense to me.

Im at work and haven't watched the video yet. But are these people similar to the ones who voted for Obama because of his pro life stance and because Palin was going to be his VP(see Howard stern videos of Obama supporters from '08)? There are idiots in every crowd.

Got a question. Patty G is on here now, where is Airiscus99?

Really guy? You haven't got tired of that already? I have numerous posts on other parts of LBT instead of being a full on tool and continuing this foolishness why don't you go see the rest of he posts I've made that have nothing to do with anything she's intersted in. On top of that I don't even hold lost of the same views as patty. That's not to say I don't like her, just that we definetely don't see eye to eye on all things political. I'm fiscally conservative, and that's about it. I don't want to waste money on social programs. But as far homosexual rights, wimens rights, civil rights, I am on the middle to left side of those things. To me there is no difference in any two people whatsoever. The only exception to that being I don't think illegal aliens should be given anything I've seen their devistation first hand several times over. Also stem cell research and science progress I support 100%

Sources or didn't happen.

dailykos

You know how you and the rest of the libs blast anything quoted by fox news? The dailykos is pretty much the biggest left wing hack, bs, super liberal, no news site on the internet. So I'll stick with the CBS poll for now. Thanks

Looks like the pendulum may be swinging back.

Washington (CNN) -- CNN Political Editor Mark Preston looks at what Tuesday's primaries could say about the rest of 2010.

The president takes another loss

A Democratic governor and Democratic gubernatorial candidate fell in November, the late Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy's seat went Republican in January, and now Sen. Arlen Specter has lost a primary battle even though he had President Obama's backing. What does this mean for the Obama endorsement? Do Democrats want his help in November? Of course, it just depends on who, when and where. Obama still can energize the black and youth vote, and now the big question will be -- can he excite the people who voted for the first time in 2008?

Liberals get loud

Liberals pumped money and support into Arkansas Lt. Gov. Bill Halter's primary challenge of Sen. Blanche Lincoln. Halter didn't win but forced Lincoln into a runoff. The draw on Tuesday is considered a win by Lincoln's liberal opponents, who view it as an affirmation that this two-term incumbent didn't have the muscle to win a third term. All eyes turn to the June 8 runoff and beyond. Other centrist Democrats must be concerned that they could be next.

Tea Party gets a big win

The Tea Party can take full ownership of Rand Paul's landslide win over Trey Grayson in the Kentucky Senate Republican primary. Now what is next? The Tea Party is not an actual political party, but rather it is a decentralized movement. Can Tea Party activists from around the country all come under one tent? After all there is strength in numbers. Or do they prefer to keep the status quo?

I don't find the majority of Americans to be well educated in matters of politics, our government or our constitution.

Looks like those you think are the most uneducated actually are more educated...

Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated than the general public, and are no more or less afraid of falling into a lower socioeconomic class, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

children working in the fields around chemicals and dangerous equipment,

Very left wing of you to put the blame for these children working in these environments on the company employing them and not the parent forcing them to work. Remember that little thing we used to have in this country called personal responsibility? :laugh:

For the record I think the blame is definitely on both, however, no personal responsibility is huge problem with American's today.

Good thing for our grocery bills that farmers got all that cheap labor. Lucky they had fear of the INS to hold over farmworkers' heads so they couldn't complain about being sprayed with dangerous pesticides, children working in the fields around chemicals and dangerous equipment, unsanitary conditions, and poor nutrition. American's have never taken advantage of these people. There must be thousands of white Americans lining up for these jobs.

Looks like maybe some white Americans are lining up for these jobs..:laugh:

A recent Immigration and Customs Enforcement audit of Pro’s Ranch Markets in Phoenix, has resulted in the firing of 300 illegal aliens. The federal audit discovered that 20 percent of the company’s workforce were living and working in the country illegally.

Julie Pace, an attorney for Pro’s Ranch Market claims the illegal aliens, presented forged documentation at the time they were hired.

Pace said: “We complied with all the requirements, but they were still able to slip through.”

Pro’s Ranch Market operates six stores in the Phoenix area.

Since the illegal aliens were fired, local residents have been flooding into the stores, applying for the job openings.

By Alan Gomez, USA TODAY

When federal agents descended on six meatpacking plants owned by Swift & Co. in December 2006, they rounded up nearly 1,300 suspected illegal immigrants that made up about 10% of the labor force at the plants.

But the raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents did not cripple the company or the plants. In fact, they were back up and running at full staff within months by replacing those removed with a significant number of native-born Americans, according to a report by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS).

That was the most extreme example of what has become an increasingly common result of the raids: "They were very beneficial to American workers," according to Vanderbilt University professor Carol Swain.

"Whenever there's an immigration raid, you find white, black and legal immigrant labor lining up to do those jobs that Americans will supposedly not do," said Swain, who teaches law and political science.

Exactly who is filling the jobs has varied, depending on the populations surrounding the plants:

• Out West, one of the Swift plants raided by ICE, had a workforce that was about 90% Hispanic — both legal and illegal — before the raids. The lost workers were replaced mostly with white Americans and U.S.-born Hispanics, according to the CIS.

• In the South, a House of Raeford Farms plant in North Carolina that was more than 80% Hispanic before a federal investigation is now about 70% African-American, according to a report by TheCharlotte Observer.

• Throughout the Great Plains, a new wave of legal immigrants is filling the void, according to Jill Cashen, spokeswoman for the United food and Commercial Workers union, which represents 1.3 million people who work in the food-processing industry. Plants are refilling positions with newly arrived immigrants from places such as Sudan, Somalia and Southeast Asia.

Of course we know that all the republicans, who had eight years under bush to address this problem, did a bang up job about immigration reform. I mean, what was stopping them? Maybe they were afraid they might have to cut their own grass or clean their own toilets.

Of course none of these "freebies" were given to illegal immigrants during the bush regime. :laugh:

Of course they were, and I complained about it just as much then. I know in your mind(or at least how you display your thought process on these forums) anyone with the slightest conservative inkling, hates all things liberal, and loved Bush unconditionally, but some of us are actual free thinkers and have our own opinions on things. And sometimes the people on the news think the same way. Astonishing, I know.

Maybe bo can help us out..

Dear President Obama:

I'm planning to move my family and extended family into Mexico for my health, and I would like to ask you to assist me.

We're planning to simply walk across the border from the U.S. Into Mexico, and we'll need your help to make a few arrangements.

We plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports, immigration quotas and laws.

I'm sure they handle those things the same way you do here. So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Calderon, that I'm on my way over?

Please let him know that I will be expecting the following:

1. Free medical care for my entire family.

2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might need, whether I use them or not.

3. Please print all Mexican government forms in English.

4. I want my grandkids to be taught Spanish by English-speaking (bi-lingual) teachers.

5. Tell their schools they need to include classes on American culture and history.

6. I want my grandkids to see the American flag on one of the flag poles at their school.

7. Please plan to feed my grandkids at school for both Breakfast and lunch.

8. I will need a local Mexican driver's license so I can get easy access to government services.

9. I do plan to get a car and drive in Mexico , but, I don't plan to purchase car insurance, and I probably won't make any special effort to learn local traffic laws.

10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo from their president to leave me alone, please be sure that every patrol car has at least one English-speaking officer.

11. I plan to fly the U.S. Flag from my house top, put U S. Flag decals on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any complaints or negative comments from the locals.

12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, or have any labor or tax laws enforced on any business I may start.

13. Please have the president tell all the Mexican people to be extremely nice and never say critical things about me or my family, or about the strain we might place on their economy.

14. I want to receive free food stamps.

15. Naturally, I'll expect free rent subsidies.

16. I'll need Income tax credits so although I don't pay Mexican Taxes, I'll receive money from the government.

17. Please arrange it so that the Mexican Gov't pays $4,500 to help me buy a new car.

18. Oh yes, I almost forgot, please enroll me free into the Mexican Social Security program so that I'll get a monthly income in retirement.

I know this is an easy request because you already do all these things for all his people who walk over to the U..S. From Mexico . I am sure that President Calderon won't mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely.

Thank you so much for your kind help. You're the man!!!

First San Diego, now L.A., AZ is not messing around. They say; "Boycott us? We'll boycott you!"

Dear Mayor Villaraigosa,

I was dismayed to learn that the Los Angeles City Council voted to boycott Arizona and Arizona-based companies — a vote you strongly supported — to show opposition to SB 1070 (Support our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act).

You explained your support of the boycott as follows: “While we recognize that as neighbors, we share resources and ties with the State of Arizona that may be difficult to sever, our goal is not to hurt the local economy of Los Angeles, but to impact the economy of Arizona. Our intent is to use our dollars — or the withholding of our dollars — to send a message.” (emphasis added)

I received your message; please receive mine. As a state-wide elected member of the Arizona Corporation Commission overseeing Arizona’s electric and Water utilities, I too am keenly aware of the “resources and ties” we share with the City of Los Angeles. In fact, approximately twenty-five percent of the electricity consumed in Los Angeles is generated by power plants in Arizona.

If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona’s utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands. If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona’s economy.

People of goodwill can disagree over the merits of SB 1070. A state-wide economic boycott of Arizona is not a message sent in goodwill.

Sincerely,

Commissioner Gary Pierce

HAHAHA OMG are you kidding ! I probably have more Indian friends than you even know !

ARE YOU KIDDING ....

Urban dictionary ! Now thats funny !

So saying thank you come again is racist ! WOW now you are really reaching for strings ! :thumbup:

She construes everything as racist, or sexist, look back through some of my posts, I called someone a tool shed and she "yelled" at me for calling someone a slut. I said "get real lady" and I was a sexist. If there is the slightest inkling of negativity that she can tie to a group of people she will then try to blast you for it. Grasping for straws is her game.

I have always wondered, Who declared us right? Just because we think what we do is the best way, don't others have the right to determine how they want to live? Maybe everyone in the world doesn't want a democracy. Why do we feel the need to push ourselves into their lives? (Obvious human injustices excluded, i.e. genocide etc.)

Couldn't agree more. We have our hands in too many places around the world. And yeah, what we have works pretty well for us, but that doesn't mean it will work well everywhere else or that anyone else wants it. I've long wondered what makes us think we should be able to have our military force wherever we want, yet no one can have theirs here(rightfully so, I don't want any other military ever setting foot on US soil). What makes us so special? And how much money do we waste having these bases all over the world? Lets bring our troops home. The ones who are fighting, can keep on fighting until we've accomplished what we need to, but the ones who are just hanging out all over the place, need to come home. My little brother has been station in Great Britain, Germany, Korea, and the middle east, and the only bases where anything was going on was in Qatar and S. Korea because he was right on the DMZ. I just don't get what makes us think we have the right to be anywhere but right here?

San Diego is trying to back pedal and say they aren't really boycotting AZ, it's political not personal. Well it looks like Arizonian's don't really care, they're saying "you boycott us, we'll boycott you."

Some in Arizona canceling trips to S.D.

Outrage over local censure votes may be a misunderstanding

BY LORI WEISBERG, UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

FRIDAY, MAY 14, 2010 AT 12:04 A.M.

San Diego tourism leaders and hoteliers fear they could lose a sizable chunk of business this summer from valued “Zonies” who are so angered by elected leaders’ recent censure of Arizona for its illegal-immigration law that they’re mounting an informal boycott of their own.

The San Diego Convention & Visitors Bureau and several hotels report receiving e-mails and letters from Arizona visitors saying they intend to change their plans to travel here in light of local outcry over their home state’s anti-illegal-immigration stance.

Tourism officials are striking back. In an open letter, they urge Arizona residents to overlook local politics and come to San Diego just as they always have for its mild climate, beaches and attractions. The visitors bureau, in conjunction with the San Diego County Hotel-Motel Association, plans to circulate the letter to media outlets and in advertising this weekend in The Arizona Republic.

The bureau says it has received about 25 to 30 e-mails from Arizona residents reacting to resolutions passed last month by the San Diego City Council and school board, which were little more than symbolic protests aimed at the neighboring state’s lawmakers.

Still struggling from the prolonged economic downturn, San Diego’s visitor industry can ill afford to lose any of the 2 million Arizonans it counts on annually, said ConVis President Joe Terzi.

“We’re in a very tough environment already because of everything else going on, and we don’t need another negative impact to our industry,” Terzi said. “This affects all the hardworking men and women who count on tourism for their livelihoods, so we’re saying, don’t do something that hurts their livelihoods.”

Although the summer months typically are an economic bonanza for the San Diego visitor industry, the recession and continued high unemployment have eaten away at lodging revenue as hotels have steeply discounted rates to fill their rooms. The Convention & Visitors Bureau spent $9 million last year promoting the region for the spring and summer months and is dedicating $7 million toward that effort this year.

“I’ve been approached by a number of hotels who are very concerned because they’ve received cancellations from Arizona guests,” said Namara Mercer, executive director of the county Hotel-Motel Association. “It’s a huge piece of business for not just the hotels but for all of San Diego. Everybody’s excited because they think occupancies will be stronger this summer, and now this.”

In some cases, it appears that Arizona residents misconstrued the votes taken by San Diego’s elected leaders as calls for an actual boycott of Arizona as opposed to statements of opposition.

In one letter received by the Sofia Hotel in downtown San Diego, a “boycott” was cited as the reason for canceling a planned trip to the city.

“Nothing against the Sofia; however, wanted to let you know that we were planning on coming out in August and staying for 10-14 nights,” read the letter. “Since San Diego decided to boycott AZ, we decided to do our part and vacation elsewhere. Really sorry since we truly like staying at your place and will miss it.”

In many of the e-mails to the visitors bureau, Arizonans bluntly expressed their displeasure with San Diego’s stance on the illegal-immigration law and said that staying away was the best way of registering their protest.

“So you see when people in government start to boycott it goes both ways,” said one e-mail. “You just lost our visits to our favorite places in your city and the $3,500 we had in our budget to spend there.”

In a draft letter yet to be approved by visitors bureau and hotel association leaders, Terzi sought to clarify the city’s position on the immigration law while stressing the respect the region has for Arizona’s visitors.

“While immigration is a complex and sensitive issue for our nation, we believe it needs to be addressed independent of actions that would harm our economies and hardworking residents,” states the letter. It implores prospective visitors to “look past the political posturing and make your travel decision for all the right reasons.”

Charles Holladay, manager of the Ramada Plaza in Mission Valley, noted that as much as 50 percent of his summer business originates in Arizona, and he already has received a cancellation from a regular customer.

“I understand the City Council was being passionate about their politics, but I don’t think they thought it through,” Holladay said. “If it negatively impacts hotel revenue, it impacts the transient occupancy tax, and that goes right into the general fund, so they’ll have less money for their programs.”

San Diego Councilwoman Donna Frye said she believes some Arizona residents are acting out of a misunderstanding.

“The City Council did not pass a resolution boycotting Arizona, and I would hope that the good citizens of Arizona understand that and will continue to visit San Diego,” Frye said.

School board President Shelia Jackson said that while she was disappointed to hear of people opting to stay away from San Diego, she doesn’t regret her vote.

“It’s sad that people would cancel their plans to come here in reaction to that, but I still think we did the right thing,” Jackson said. “Certainly, we know how important tourism is to San Diego, and it wasn’t my intent to impact the tourism trade.”

Point is here is the Attorney General threatening lawsuits and he hasn't even read a 10 page law? Whats he there for ?

Sad is what it is !

Looks like the LA city council is in the same boat as Holder.

LA City Councilman blasts AZ law for provisions in CA penal code

Share

129

POSTED AT 10:55 AM ON MAY 17, 2010 BY ED MORRISSEY

PRINTER-FRIENDLY

Before critics of Arizona’s new immigration law make fools of themselves, they should really try to read the bill. And if those critics are officials of other states or cities, maybe they should take a quick tour of their own laws first, too. Kerry Picket at the Washington Times interviewed Los Angeles City Councilman Ed Reyes, who said that he would need his passport to travel in Arizona, but she points out that the very same provisions to which Reyes objects exist in California’s own penal code:

The Los Angeles City Council’s vote to boycott Arizona caused more consternation than anything else. LA City Council members voted an overwhelming 13 – 1 to terminate any city contracts with Arizona (worth around $7.7 million) as did other American cities who have considered resolutions to protest the Arizona law or seek boycotts. Among these cities are San Francisco and Saint Paul, Minnesota. …

“I cannot go to Arizona today without a passport,” Los Angeles Councilman Ed Reyes, a Democrat, said before the vote. “If I come across an officer who’s had a bad day and feels the picture on my ID is not me, I could be summarily deported — no questions asked. That is not American.”

Kerry has plenty of audio within the Times article, but transcribes the key points:

PICKET: Where exactly in the law does it say that? Considering that it prohibits that? As I’m asking here, federal law which has been around for about seventy years has been saying that undocumented individuals have to be carrying papers, so what exactly has changed between federal law of the last seventy years and Arizona’s law?

REYES: What’s changed is you have a very active effort to round up people that look a certain way, and if you have proof you are an American citizen that let you go, and if you don’t they deport you. So now, that I look like a Mexican, and I am Mexican American, I become a target.(AUDIO)

PICKET: Why is this law considered any different than what has been around for the last seventy years…because it’s being enforced?

REYES: Why does a state have to call that out? Why can’t it just follow the federal law like you said for the past seventy years? (AUDIO)

Well, why does California have to call it out, Councilman Reyes? Kerry did a little digging and found this nugget in Section 834b in the California Penal Code:

(a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws. (:thumbup: With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the following: (1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding documentation to indicate his or her legal status. (2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or leave the United States. (3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal status and provide any additional information that may be requested by any other public entity. © Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city, county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly prohibited.

Sounds very similar to the provisions of SB 1070, the bill that prompted LA’s City Council to launch its boycott of Arizona. Will they also now boycott their own state? They do seem to be conducting a boycott of common sense and legal scholarship at City Hall.

This is all so reminiscent of Nazi Germany where they had to have a target for all their problems and that was the Jews. Jews were portrayed as taking jobs from the Germans and the cause of their economic woes. So, it was easy for the Germans to look the other way when the Jews were rounded up to go to "labor" camps.

So according to your post here, 51%(per CBS) of Americans are reminiscent of Nazi's?

Or about 60% of Americans? (according to rasmussen) Why would you want to be somewhere where the majority of the people remind you of Nazi Germany?

The majority of American's are in favor of this.

Did any of you take the time to read the bill? It's pretty clearly written.

Did you read any of the books I posted? They talk about it in there, take the time to read.

from Ariscus99: Maybe our resident fact checker should do a little on her own claims.

Still smarting from your big laundry list of neocon lies about social security being debunked in a nanosecond by me?

Not at all you spouted off liberal propaganda without doing any fact checking whatsoever and then you blame it on something you saw on tv. I'm sure the guy who wrote the bill just happened to mis-speak and you didn't hear from the huff post or the daily kos that that is what the law says. It literally took me about 48 seconds to find and list the bill. You pop off all the time about not letting right wingers get away with posting lies and not posting their source. All I'm doing is holding you to the same standard. I don't know why I shouldn't be allowed to? The bill, regardless of what the huff or kos tells you can be read and undrstood very easily and nowhere in it does it mention not teaching about other cultures and actually has a part in t that says students aren't allowed to have any disciplinary action taken against them because of their nationality.

Now, in addition to this law about stopping people and asking for proof of citizenship, there is a law being considered in the state to ban ethnic studies in the schools. No more african-american studies, no more latino studies, no more islamic studies. Don't you think it benefits all of us to learn about the other cultures who come here as well as for them to learn about our history? When we learn about each other doesn't that promote harmony for living amongst each other? First the textbooks in Texas, now this.

Maybe our resident fact checker should do a little on her own claims.

AZ HB 2281

HB 2281 prohibits a school district or charter school from including courses or classes that either promote the overthrow of the United States government or promote resentment toward a race or class of people.

History

The State Board of Education (SBE) must prescribe a minimum course of study, incorporating Arizona’s academic standards, to be taught in Arizona public schools (Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 15-701). School district governing boards must approve the course of study, including the basic textbook for each approved course and all other units recommended for credit before implementing each course in both elementary and high schools. Pursuant to A.R.S. § 15-701.01, a governing board may adopt courses of study that are in addition to or higher than that prescribed by the SBE.

Current law requires the principal of each school to ensure that all rules pertaining to the discipline, suspension, and expulsion of pupils are communicated to students at the beginning of each school year. All cases of suspension must be for good cause and must be reported within five days to the governing board by the superintendent or person imposing the suspension. The school district governing board is required to post regular notices and take minutes of any hearing concerning the discipline, suspension, or expulsion of a pupil (A.R.S § 15-843).

Provisions

· States that the Legislature finds and declares that public school pupils should be taught to treat and value each other as individuals and not be taught to resent or hate other races or classes of people.

· Prohibits a school district or charter school from including in its program of instruction any courses or classes that:

Ø Promote the overthrow of the United States government.

Ø Promote resentment toward a race or class of people.

Ø Are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group.

Ø Advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.

· States that if the SBE determines that a school district or charter school is offering a course that violates this act, the SBE must direct the Superintendent of Public Instruction (Superintendent) to notify the school district or charter school that it is in violation.

· Stipulates that if the SBE determines that the school district or charter school has failed to comply within 60 days after a notice has been issued by the Superintendent, the SBE may direct the ADE to withhold up to 10% of the monthly apportionment of state aid that would otherwise be due to the school district or charter school and requires ADE to adjust the school district or charter school’s apportionment accordingly.

· Specifies when the SBE determines that the school district or charter school is in compliance with not offering a prohibited course, ADE must restore the full amount of state aid payments to the school district or charter school.

· Stipulates that actions taken under this act are subject to appeal pursuant to laws relating to uniform administrative hearing procedures.

· States that this act cannot be construed to restrict or prohibit:

Ø Courses or classes for Native American pupils that are required to comply with federal law.

Ø The grouping of pupils according to academic performance, including capability in the English language, that may result in a disparate impact by ethnicity.

Ø Courses or classes that include the history of any ethnic group and that are open to all students, unless the course or class violates this act.

· Prohibits rules pertaining to the discipline, suspension, and expulsion of pupils from being based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or ancestry.

· States that if the ADE, the Auditor General, or the Attorney General determines that a school district is substantially and deliberately not in compliance with pupil disciplinary actions and if the school district has failed to correct the deficiency within 90 days after receiving notice from the ADE, the Superintendent may withhold the monies the school district would otherwise be entitled to receive from the date of the determination of noncompliance until the ADE determines that the school district is in compliance.

· Makes technical and conforming changes.

I'm reading through this and having a hard time finding where it says they can no longer teach about other cultures? Maybe you can highlight with your favorite red color the part that says no teaching of other cultures in the bill because I sure as heck can't find it. Or maybe your listening to too many liberal news organizations and just spitting out their talking points without doing a little fact checking.:w00t:

The tax on the cadillac plans would only affect those plans that are like over $28,000 for a family (more for unions) and they don't take effect until I think 2014. Now, unions negotiate for these benefits. The tax is actually on the healthcare provider who will likely pass it on to the consumer. However, the unions negotiate their contracts. Do you really think they're not going to ask for more in salary if they pay a tax on the amount of their benefit that exceeds this limit? Of course they are. And they'll still have great healthcare coverage.

As far as cigarette and gasoline taxes - Obama never promised not to raise those. He was talking about payroll and capital gains taxes. Taxes on the money your earn and invest, not on discretionary spending.

They can negotiate whatever they want, that is clearly not the point. One of bo's big points throughout the 08 campaign was that Mccain had proposed a tax on health care benefits and that had never happened before, and he under bo he would make sure it never would....oops another lie.

He said, no new taxes on people making less the 250k a year. That means no new taxes. Not no new taxes of this kind or that kind. If you make the promise for NO NEW TAXES the people expect, you guessed it, no new taxes. So now he's gonna tax in other places and pretend it's not his fault. Yeah those things are discretionary, but so is income tax, I can choose to make no money and not have to pay any taxes, I can choose not to ever own a home or rent one, I can choose to be homeless and live off the land and never pay any taxes, thats not the point, to call something like gasoline discretionary is so far out of touch with reality it's almost comical. What are your options? Public transport? Great if you live on the east coast, what about the west coast and middle America where public transportation is pitiful? And you will still pay a tax on gasoline or diesel because the transportation companies will pay it and pass it on to you. So another bo lie. New taxes for one and all under bo.

[COLO=red]So on your paycheck stub there will now be a "cap and trade" tax deduction? I guess if you make over $250,000 and smoke and the cigarette tax goes up, you will pay more. ROFLMAO.[/color]

So your saying that if crap and tirade is passed, it will have no affect on American's making less then $250k a year? A tax doesn't need to be deducted from your payroll to affect you. If the government added an additional 5 cent tax to all gasoline purchases would that not be a tax increase on people making less then $250k a year? And, the big one you didn't mention was taxing of health care benefits, which as bo made ever so clear during the campaign has never been done before, but it is now, thank you mr president.

More Broken Promises

African activist organizations are speaking out in support of a planned protest outside President Obama’s fundraiser, 5:30pm on Thursday, May 13th at 5th Ave and 55th St outside the St. Regis Hotel. Hundreds of activists will protest outside the fundraiser because Obama committed to increase funding for global AIDS, but he has broken his promise. As a result, thousands of people each month who were promised medication are being turned away, forced onto waiting lists where they will likely grow sicker and die. rganizations from across Africa are endorsing the action. These include (list in formation): African Centre for Volunteers, AIDS and Rights Alliance for Southern Africa, AIDS Response, Community Media Trust, HIV iBase, International Community of Women Living with AIDS (ICW) East Africa, Mamelani Projects, National Association of People Living with HIV/AIDS in Nepal (NAP+N), National Empowerment Network of People Living with HIV/AIDS in Kenya (NEPHAK), Positive Action for Treatment Access

Section27, Treatment Access Movement, Treatment Action Campaign, and World AIDS Campaign

Below are statements from organizations of people living with HIV in Nigeria, Uganda and Kenya, further expressing support. Treatment Access Movement (Nigeria): “Defaulting on the promises now makes living with HIV hell. Obama came with great promises and we had great hope in him. If Bush could keep his promises and exceed expectations in fighting AIDS in Africa and Nigeria in particular, I think Obama has every reason to do more.”

International Community of Women Living with HIV (East Africa): “Mr. President Sir, you have broken your promises to the people who trusted in you. Your broken promises to Ugandans is causing 168 new infections in Ugandan women, killing seven people per hour”. Positive Action for Treatment Access (Nigeria): “It is without saying that the developing countries are at risk. We were promised drugs, which we were told, before taking that huge step, that the drugs were for life. Why would anyone want to leave us out in the cold? What do you want us to do if you refuse to increase the funds? You say you want to invest in Prevention. It cannot be separated from treatment. What happens to the infected persons? It takes us back top the fear of the unknown.”

National Empowerment Network of People Living with HIV/AIDS in Kenya (NEPHAK): “We appreciate past and current PEPFAR efforts in Kenya. We are even grateful for the just unveiled Kenya - PEPFAR Partnership Framework that is geared towards the delivery of Universal Access. Nonetheless, we are not even halfway through, especially when it comes to issues and needs of people living with HIV and communities affected by HIV/AIDS, TB and Malaria. Not even half of PLHIV who are eligible for treatment are accessing the life-saving medicines. Worse, Kenyan treatment for PLHIV is still based on old WHO treatment guidelines.”

What makes Obama's broken promises different from the campaign double-talk we are used to from politicians?

DG: The actual phrase I heard from one important player in Jewish Democratic circles was, "Sociopath is too nice a word to describe Obama." That was a Kiddush [festive synagogue event] conversation, so no names, of course. The difference is the magnitude and depth of the deception. In July 2008, the press was full of reports of Obama's anti-Israel connections, including the fact that his foreign policy advisor in his Senate office was the odious Samantha Power – who proposed international military intervention to end the 'Israeli occupation' – as well as Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was an official campaign spokesman, along with many others.

Obama gave assurances to the Jewish community which were so persuasive that Martin Peretz announced in his 'Spine' blog that Obama could be trusted. Brzezinski and Power were shown the door (Power after she made inappropriate remarks about Hillary Clinton) and the Jewish community was satisfied that Obama was as reliable as, say, Bill Clinton. Obama has extraordinary gifts of persuasion, and has been profligate about employing them. He persuaded some very wealthy and sophisticated people that he was on their side, and then turned on them.