Archive for the ‘antismoking’ Category

h1

Net Neutrality The Fail

December 15, 2017

In 2015 the three FCC commissioners specifically selected by Obama stated that the Internet should be treated as a Utility, so the three sat down with the people from Google, FB, and Twitter and hammered out just how net neutrality would be applied and how it will work. Only problem was that it only affected companies that provided access to the internet such as verizon, comcast and AT&T as examples meaning they could not selectively slow down content. The Net Nuetrailty rules gave internet giant content providers the ability to decide what is considered free speech and what is deemed hate speech, the 2015 net nuetraility act was written with a huge influence by George Soros.

The past two years, I have seen content providers become the sole arbiters of what they deem is free speech and what is hate speech, my web blog was deemed hate speech because I freely give my opinions regardless who you are that will read my blogs, they are my opinions and nobody is forced to read them at all. FB enjoyed being the sole arbiter of free speech on their website, only problem was anyone who disagrees with FB’s political views is deemed a person with hate speech, their pages are blocked, suspended, and even canceled. YouTube is another content provider who extensively used net neutrality to block, defund and even cancel channels they deem not consistent with their political views, google is another content provider who did the same thing as FB, and YouTube.

The ruckus over ending net nuetrailty means that snowflakes and liberals can not silence those who disagree with their political views anymore, the way it was before 2015. What most liberals and snowflakes do not realize is that internet providers still slowed down you internet speed once you reached a certain level of data used, and it was perfectly legal to do so, because in the 2 year contracts people would agree to listed that the persons internet speed would be slowed down after using 10 gigs of data just as an example. Even telephone companies with non contract phones had the same detail as 2 year contracts. So in reality the only real thing about net nuetrailty was allowing left leaning corporations be the sole arbiters of what is deemed free speech and what they define as hate speech.

With the current FCC having three republican commissioners giving Obama’s net nuetrailty rules a total rebuke and handing oversight to the FTC, takes away the liberals and progressives the ability to control free speech. The internet has been around now for 28 years, prior to the net nuetrailty rules the internet ran perfectly without the governments heavy handed approach. When the internet took off in the 1990’s the Democratic Party wanted price controls over how much companies like AOL, compuserve, prodigy, and earthlink as examples could charge customers for internet access. My first year of having internet access my monthly charge was 70 a month for 100 hours of internet access each month. Today, I have a selection of tiers of internet speed and the prices reflect those speed levels. Either in January or February I will be getting gigabit internet access speed for 80 dollars a month, I am choosing the speed that best reflects my needs.

The internet has blossomed and exploded without any help or controls that the deomcratic Party feels is necessary, treating the internet as a utility gave the democrats the control over the internet they have so longed desired because it never discriminated who could access the internet, where as the democrats want to silience free speech unless you agree with their political views.

For 25 years the internet operated just fine without strict heavy handed government controls. For the past two years, the internet was under free speech attack if you disagreed with the content providers political views, such as disagreeing with abortion as just one example. Roe V Wade was a Supreme Court decision in the 1970’s but there was a demcocrat actually implying that without net neutrality a lady would not be able to look up where to get an abortion, surprise net nuetrailty boils down to who decides what is free speech and what they deem as hate speech.

Democrats and progressives literally hate the head FCC comissioner Ajit Pai, who with the other two FCC memebers wrote the rules repealing net nuetrailty and giving freedom back to the people who use the internet without fear of being labeled hate speech writer, homophobic, islamphobic as just a few examples. If you disagree with liberals, democrats and progressives, you are a unredeemable deplorable person.

Once again this blog is my opinion…….

Advertisements
h1

1945

November 11, 2016

During President Truman’s presidency he pushed for his own version of universal health care but the AMA called in socialized medicine it was quickly defeated. Congress in 1945 passed the McCarran-Ferguson Act, which gave the states the right to regulate the health insurance industry in their respective states.

That act allowed the states to establish pre-existing exclusion time lines, it also allowed the states to pick and choose what health insurance companies were allowed to sell health insurance within state boundaries. This act basically established winners and losers in the health insurance industry. Currently health insurance companies are prohibited from selling cross state lines, the walls were established in 1945. The democrats have been trying for single payer health care since President Truman, every act passed by congress when controlled by the Democratic Party has been focused on one goal aka single payer.

Our nation is to diverse and to big for single payer health insurance, because of the larger cities such as New York City and Los Angeles, would use a larger share of a single payer government controlled budget. Health insurance has always been a private industry product purchased by consumers, or the consumers opt to pay the doctors directly for a higher discount.

I experienced direct payments to doctors offices for a few years and noticed that I received a discount due to paying in cash where the doctors billing office had no paperwork to fill out for the insurance company. The McCarran-Ferguson act in effect established monopolies within each state.

The 1974 act and then the 1996 act in an inverse way helped insurance costs to skyrocket, its congress is why the cost of insurance has been going up by preventing the free market to decide the winners and losers or who merges with who. Its time to let the consumers to decide instead of trying to establish single payer, costs would decline if all 1500 insurance companies were allowed to compete in the free market.

Another way to dramatically reduce costs is to limit what lawyers can be paid in malpractice court cases. Costs vary for doctors and nurses depending on their specialty. For an OB/GYN the Premium could be as high as 110,000 a year or more depending on the state they practice in.

By congressional act all health insurance companies have to carry a reserve to pay for claims and malpractice cases. some insurance companies use the interest off the reserves to pay for other items.

I’m hoping that Trump and congress pass a simple bill allowing all health insurance companies to compete in all 50 states, instead currently each state allows only a few insurance companies to operate within state boundaries, which actually artificially raises costs of premiums and cost of health care with in each state.

This was all done on purpose to eventually allow the democrats to gt single payer for the country, Single Payer nearly became an actual reality had hillary been elected, because that would have been the logical step in order to save the ACA aka obamacare. Obamacare was an illegal law to begin with since it originated in the senate instead of the house.

Harry Reid stripped the original written bill that was in the (HR3962), the affordable healthcare act as it was originally written was stripped of its original bill and became the patient protection and affordable care act. This was an illegal bill because it was a spending bill and all spending bills must originate in the house.

Because Scott Walker had been elected to replace ted kennedy, the democratic party no longer had 60 votes to stop a filibuster, so they used a process called reconciliation that’s used for budget bills only. both of the steps are illegal under the Constitution.

It’s been an illegal law because obama has been illegally funding thru other agencies since congress has refused to fund it. Obama has directed the secretary of the Health and Human Services agency to take the premiums paid and redirect the payments to the health insurance companies so that they do not leave the markets.

The health insurance companies are leaving the markets in each state because the age group they were promised that would purchase insurance are opting to pay the penalty and pay cash directly to their doctors. The insurance companies are experiencing huge losses because the healthy people are opting to pay the no insurance penalty.

If congress passes the bill to allow all 1500 health insurance companies to compete nationwide, they will also allow people to chose cafeteria style health insurance rather than uniform plans that are preset. honestly being as old as I am why do I need to have OB/GYN coverage, or pediatric coverage.

If we get cafeteria style health care plans, I know exactly how mine would be:
major medical
prescription coverage
yearly preventive heath care doctors visits
mental health
dental
eye coverage.
my coverage for this would be 175 a month and 15 for copays

My current coverage is for:
29 items relating to health care for women from the age 13 to 99
34 items relating to health care for children
22 items relating to male health care
no major medical – was told it didn’t conform to the ACA
eye care coverage
prescription coverage
total cost is 980 a month for the premium
co-pays 30 for doctors visits and prescriptions

As I read more, I will re-edit this post……

h1

The Real Truth Is Exposed About The Housing Bubble!!!!

November 5, 2011

This ties the C.R.A. bill signed into law in 1976, bill clintons secret commission that found their

findings on false information and used the findings as a loaded gun to the banking, savings and loans

and the mortgage companies.  It is these two actions that created and caused the abuses and the

economy that we have today, it can be laid at the feet of the Democrats and obama is taking it even

more to the left of the left…………

Smoking-Gun Document Ties Policy To Housing Crisis

By PAUL SPERRY, FOR INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY Posted 10/31/2011 08:05 AM ET

 View Enlarged Image

President Obama says the Occupy Wall Street protests show a “broad-based frustration” among Americans with the financial sector, which continues to kick against regulatory reforms three years after the financial crisis.

“You’re seeing some of the same folks who acted irresponsibly trying to fight efforts to crack down on the abusive practices that got us into this in the first place,” he complained earlier this month.

But what if government encouraged, even invented, those “abusive practices”?

Rewind to 1994. That year, the federal government declared war on an enemy — the racist lender — who officials claimed was to blame for differences in homeownership rate, and launched what would prove the costliest social crusade in U.S. history.

At President Clinton’s direction, no fewer than 10 federal agencies issued a chilling ultimatum to banks and mortgage lenders to ease credit for lower-income minorities or face investigations for lending discrimination and suffer the related adverse publicity. They also were threatened with denial of access to the all-important secondary mortgage market and stiff fines, along with other penalties.

Bubble? Regulators Blew It

The threat was codified in a 20-page “Policy Statement on Discrimination in Lending” and entered into the Federal Register on April 15, 1994, by the Interagency Task Force on Fair Lending. Clinton set up the little-known body to coordinate an unprecedented crackdown on alleged bank redlining.

The edict — completely overlooked by the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission and the mainstream media — was signed by then-HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros, Attorney General Janet Reno, Comptroller of the Currency Eugene Ludwig and Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, along with the heads of six other financial regulatory agencies.

“The agencies will not tolerate lending discrimination in any form,” the document warned financial institutions.

Ludwig at the time stated the ruling would be used by the agen cies as a fair-lending enforcement “tool,” and would apply to “all lenders” — including banks and thrifts, credit unions, mortgage brokers and finance companies.

The unusual full-court press was predicated on a Boston Fed study showing mortgage lenders rejecting blacks and Hispanics in greater proportion than whites. The author of the 1992 study, hired by the Clinton White House, claimed it was racial “discrimination.” But it was simply good underwriting.

It took private analysts, as well as at least one FDIC economist, little time to determine the Boston Fed study was terminally flawed. In addition to finding embarrassing mistakes in the data, they concluded that more relevant measures of a borrower’s credit history — such as past delinquencies and whether the borrower met lenders credit standards — explained the gap in lending between whites and blacks, who on average had poorer credit and higher defaults.

The study did not take into account a host of other relevant data factoring into denials, including applicants’ net worth, debt burden and employment record. Other variables, such as the size of down payments and the amount of the loans sought to the value of the property being bought, also were left out of the analysis. It also failed to consider whether the borrower submitted information that could not be verified, the presence of a cosigner and even the loan amount.

When these missing data were factored in, it became clear that the rejection rates were based on legitimate business decisions, not racism.

Still, the study was used to support a wholesale abandonment of traditional underwriting standards — the root cause of the mortgage crisis.

For the first time, Washington’s bank regulators put racial lending at the top of their checklist. Banks that failed to throw open their lending windows to credit-poor minorities were denied expansion plans by the Fed in an era of frenzied financial mergers and acquisitions. HUD threatened to deny them access to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which it controlled. And the Justice Department sued them for lending discrimination and branded them as racists in the press.

“HUD is authorized to direct Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to undertake various remedial actions, including suspension, probation, reprimand or settlement, against lenders found to have engaged in discriminatory lending practices,” the official policy statement warned.

The regulatory missive, which had the effect of law, advised lenders to bend “customary” underwriting standards for minority homebuyers with poor credit.

“Applying different lending standards to applicants who are members of a protected class is permissible,” it said. “In addition, providing different treatment to applicants to address past discrimination would be permissible.”

To that end, lenders were directed to “make changes in marketing strategy or loan products to better serve minority segments of the market.” They were also advised to “change commission structures” to encourage brokers and loan officers to “lend in minority and low-income neighborhoods” — a practice Countrywide Financial, the poster boy of the subprime scandal, perfected. The government now condemns the practice it once encouraged as “predatory.”

FDIC warned banks that even unintentional discrimination was against the law, and that they should be proactive in making “multicultural” loans. “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,” the agency said in a separate advisory.

Confronted with the combined force of 10 federal regulators, lenders naturally toed the line, and were soon aggressively marketing subprime mortgages in urban areas. The marching orders threw such a scare into the industry that the American Bankers Association issued a “fair-lending tool kit” to every member. The Mortgage Bankers Association of America signed a “fair-lending” contract with HUD. So did Countrywide.

HUD also pushed Fannie and Freddie, which in effect set industry underwriting standards, to buy subprime mortgages, freeing lenders to originate even more high-risk loans.

“Lenders should ensure that their loan processors and underwriters are aware of the provisions of the secondary market guidelines that provide various alternative and flexible means by which applicants may demonstrate their ability and willingness to repay their loans,” the policy statement decreed.

“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac not infrequently purchase mortgages exceeding the suggested ratios” of monthly housing expense to income (28%) and total obligations to income (36%).

It warned lenders who rejected minority applicants with high debt ratios and low credit scores to “be prepared” to prove to federal regulators and prosecutors they weren’t racist. “The Department of Justice is authorized to use the full range of its enforcement authority.”

It took a little more than a decade for the negative effects of the assault on prudent lending to be felt. By 2006, the shaky subprime mortgages began to default. In 2008, the bubble exploded.

Clinton’s task force survived the Bush administration, during which it produced fair-lending brochures in Spanish for immigrant home-loan applicants.

And it’s still alive today. Obama is building on the fair-lending infrastructure Clinton put in place.

As IBD first reported in July, Attorney General Eric Holder has launched a witch hunt vs. “racist” banks.

“It’s a more aggressive fair-lending enforcement approach now,” said Washington lawyer Andrew Sandler of Buckley Sandler LLP in a recent interview. “It is well beyond anything we saw during the Clinton administration.”

Tom Perez, assistant attorney general for civil rights, recently testified that his division “continues to participate in the federal Interagency Fair Lending Task Force.” And he and the task force are working with the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to “enhance fair-lending enforcement.”

The fair-lending task force’s original policy paper undercuts the notion the financial crisis was all about banker “greed,” though it certainly played a role after the fact. Rather, it offers compelling evidence that the crisis evolved chiefly from government mandates and threats to increase lending to applicants who could not afford them.

h1

NASA BLOWS AWAY GLOBAL WARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE THEORIES

August 1, 2011

New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

ForbesBy James Taylor | Forbes – Wed, Jul 27, 2011

http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.html

Related Content

  • New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming AlarmismNew NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.

Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA’s Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.

“The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”

In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted.

The new findings are extremely important and should dramatically alter the global warming debate.

Scientists on all sides of the global warming debate are in general agreement about how much heat is being directly trapped by human emissions of carbon dioxide (the answer is “not much”). However, the single most important issue in the global warming debate is whether carbon dioxide emissions will indirectly trap far more heat by causing large increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds. Alarmist computer models assume human carbon dioxide emissions indirectly cause substantial increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds (each of which are very effective at trapping heat), but real-world data have long shown that carbon dioxide emissions are not causing as much atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds as the alarmist computer models have predicted.

The new NASA Terra satellite data are consistent with long-term NOAA and NASA data indicating atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds are not increasing in the manner predicted by alarmist computer models. The Terra satellite data also support data collected by NASA’s ERBS satellite showing far more longwave radiation (and thus, heat) escaped into space between 1985 and 1999 than alarmist computer models had predicted. Together, the NASA ERBS and Terra satellite data show that for 25 years and counting, carbon dioxide emissions have directly and indirectly trapped far less heat than alarmist computer models have predicted.

In short, the central premise of alarmist global warming theory is that carbon dioxide emissions should be directly and indirectly trapping a certain amount of heat in the earth’s atmosphere and preventing it from escaping into space. Real-world measurements, however, show far less heat is being trapped in the earth’s atmosphere than the alarmist computer models predict, and far more heat is escaping into space than the alarmist computer models predict.

When objective NASA satellite data, reported in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, show a “huge discrepancy” between alarmist climate models and real-world facts, climate scientists, the media and our elected officials would be wise to take notice. Whether or not they do so will tell us a great deal about how honest the purveyors of global warming alarmism truly are.

James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News.

h1

THE COMING TAXES THAT WILL MAKE THE U.S. THE NEW ARGENTINA

July 20, 2011

The tax kikes that Obama wants is just what is going to happen but far worse, the bush tax rates will roll back to clinton era tax rates and then the Hidden taxes kick in and those are the Obama Care taxes aka the IMT.

Individual Mandate Tax are as follows:

1 Adult        2 Adults          3+ Adults
2014      1% AGI/$95 1% AGI/$190   1% AGI/$285

2015   2% AGI/$325  2% AGI/$650   2% AGI/$975

2016 +  2.5% AGI/$695  2.5% AGI/$1390  2.5% AGI/$2085

this doesn’t include Employer tax Mandates:
Employer Mandate Tax(Jan 2014):  If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $2000 for all full-time employees.  This provision applies to all employers with 50 or more employees. If any employee actually receives coverage through the exchange, the penalty on the employer for that employee rises to $3000. If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer).


Combined score of all individual and employer mandate tax penalty: $65 billion/10 years

Surtax on Investment Income his increase involves the creation of a new, 3.8 percent surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single).



  Capital Gains Dividends Other

2010-2012              15%                       15%                  35%

2013+ (current law)      23.8%                        43.4%                43.4%

2013+ (Obama budget)     23.8%                    23.8%                43.4%

Illegal aliens do not have to pay any taxes under Obamacare

Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax($86.8 bil/Jan 2013): Current law and changes
First $200,000                          All Remaining Wages
($250,000 Married)                   Employer/Employee
Employer/Employee

Current Law              1.45%/1.45%                               1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed                   2.9% self-employed

Obamacare Tax Hike   1.45%/1.45%                                 1.45%/2.35%
2.9% self-employed                 3.8% self-employed

Medicine Cabinet Tax($5 bil/Jan 2011)
this means that health savings accounts are a thing of the past and so are flexible spending account, and are health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin)

HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike($1.4 bil/Jan 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.

Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka“Special Needs Kids Tax”($13 bil/Jan 2013): Imposes cap of $2500 (Indexed to inflation after 2013) on FSAs (now unlimited). . There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children.  There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education.  Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education.

Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers($20 bil/Jan 2013): Medical device manufacturers employ 360,000 people in 6000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3% excise tax.  Exemptions include items retailing for less than $100.

Raise “Haircut” for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI($15.2 bil/Jan 2013): Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction for medical expenses to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI).  The new provision imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI; it is waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only.

Tax on Indoor Tanning Services($2.7 billion/July 1, 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons

Elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D($4.5 bil/Jan 2013)

Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike($0.4 bil/Jan 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services

Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals(Min$/immediate): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new “community health assessment needs,” “financial assistance,” and “billing and collection” rules set by HHS

Tax on Innovator Drug Companies($22.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year.

Tax on Health Insurers($60.1 bil/Jan 2014): Annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year. The stipulation phases in gradually until 2018, and is fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits.

$500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives($0.6 bil/Jan 2013)

Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2(Min$/Jan 2011): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns.

Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting($17.1 bil/Jan 2012): Requires businesses to send 1099-MISC information tax forms to corporations (currently limited to individuals), a huge compliance burden for small employers

“Black liquor” tax hike(Tax hike of $23.6 billion).  This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel.

Codification of the “economic substance doctrine”(Tax hike of $4.5 billion).  This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance” and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed


h1

THE NAZI STATE OF MINNESOTA

October 15, 2007

There was a time that Minnesota used to be a fantastic place to live and work, but slowly over the past 50 years the residents of the Nazi State of Minnesota, have seen the erosion of personal and property rights taken away thru the guise of healthier living and alleged dangers.

The latest is taking away the rights of individuals to smoke a cigarette in public and soon to be in private, and the property rights of business owners by enforcing some notion that people cant think for themselves when it comes to patronizing any establishment or businesses that allowed smoking.

The state has also allowed cities to decide what is more important between basic protection or some idea that government sanctioned social programs are better than Police,Fire, Sanitation, and public utilities, the quality of life and property rights that have been created by the current regime in the Nazi State of Minnesota  are in a nose dive due to choices made by the elitist elected to office who oppose personal and property rights by individuals.  They wish to create a class of people to be solely relying on the govt. to think for them, and make all the choices so that they wont ever have to for themselves.

Minnesotans no longer are allowed to think for themselves because it might be against the law.  I left the state and have never looked back, because I think and decide for myself and not worrying if the Nazi Thought Police aren’t around making sure that I don’t step out of the box.

The current radio and television ads that are proclaiming fresh air are based and false testimony and lies and it was admitted that the persons lied about which establishments they couldn’t attend because of the smoke presence endangered their lives.  Why would a political party even consider holding their convention in a state that doesn’t advocate personal responsibility.

The current slate of elected democrats see the people who are nothing more than cattle to tax them while they work to take away more of individuals paychecks, because individuals are smart enough to spend their money on their own.  Soon I will no longer have any attachment of any kind to the NAZI STATE OF MINNESOTA.  I will no longer have to support the liberals and the nazi democrats that live within the state borders.  Minnesota shouldn’t be thought of as the education state but as MINNESOTA MURDER INC. since the 1990’s there has been a upswing in murders in the twin cities and in outstate Minnesota because the state doesn’t allow safety for its citizens who live there.