Archive for the ‘muslim’ 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

E.E.O.C.

April 28, 2016

It is time for the EEOC to take the leap forward that the democrats have been complaining about for the past 100 years about equality in the work place.  It is time for the EEOC to do away with quotas in every way and form and function.

The EEOC can do something totally mind boggling that would make every liberal head spin by requiring all employers public and private by redoing the employment process that is currently used for one thing called quotas in the work place.

Its time to end the use of full names required on applications or resumes and require last names only.  It’s time to get rid of gender identity identification on applications.  It’s time to rid the application process of race related identification as well.

its time that applications should have at the top of every.  Application the following statement: The best qualified applicant will be selected for the job posted.

The application and resume should only have the following: first initial and last name only, instead of full name which will identify the applicants gender.

Remove the gender identity boxes

Remove race identifying on the application.

Remove age as well unless it is a job requirement of OSHA

Using the new system would require the employers to select which applicatants based on the qualifications in the resume and interview accordingly and have no preset notions of each applicant.

h1

The Media And The Democrats Lie Again

March 31, 2015

The latest attack on conservatism has been happening since the Governor of Indiana,
signed into law a bill that is nearly 100% identical to the bill that then president
bill clinton signed into law in 1993. The law that I am referring to is the Freedom Of Restoration Act that then president bill clinton signed into law and 25 other states had signed into law similar or identical to the federal law.

Here is a little bit of history on the bill that was signed into law by then president bill clinton, a group of native american indians were arrested and jailed for possession of peyote that they stated was for religious purposes. In 1993 when the democrats held congress and the presidency the bill Religious Of Freedom Restoration Act was passed with near 100% in the house and near 100% in the senate and bill clinton signing it into law.

Now that a Republican Governor and Republican legislature have passed the nearly identical Religious Freedom Restoration Act to the Federal version is to be deemed discriminatory against gays, lesbians, transgender but yet wont protest the same federal law that has been on the books since 1993. Here is the Federal Law Link, and Indiana’s law Link, as you can tell the laws are nearly identical the only issue is that a Republican Governor did the same thing that the democrats rushed to protect the use of peyote by native american indians.

Now that liberals are having to deal with the state of Indiana having the same law on their state law books, they had to come up with a farce of claiming discrimination and will not allow the truth to be known. The law has what is called the Sherbert Test which mandates strict scrutiny if a law has violated the freedom of religion in the 1st amendment.

liberals and democrats and the media hate that a state with a republican governor, and state controlled legislature are applying the same federal law and having it on the state law books. They now see this law only in one light and will not accept any other story line other than it is based on allowing sexual discrimination against gays and lesbians and transgendered.

Colorado does not have this law on their books and case in point is when a lesbian couple knowing full well that a specific bakery ran their bakery based on their religious beliefs. They went in and tried ordering a wedding cake knowing that they would be turned down for the cake only, for years they had been customers for other bakery items. The couple never turned them away from buying any of their products they only turned them down for the wedding cake based on their religious values and beliefs. They were put out of business by the lesbian couple complaining to the state for the bakeries discrimination against them based on sexual orientation.

This law in Indiana now has the state making sure that bills passed and signed into laws do not encroach on the first amendment of the Constitution. George Stephanopoulos on ABC tried to redirect the interview many times by implying that the law was blatantly discriminatory only against gays and lesbians. The Governor would have nothing to do with that tactic and kept on message and even educating George that the same law was passed by the democrats and signed into law by bill clinton in 1993.

The democrats passed the bill in 1993 and signed into law the same year praised it for being all inclusive. Now that the law is being used for practical reasons and it fits squarely into conservative views and values they are in a catatonic state of anger that their law is being used for good.

Bill Clinton signed the bill into law in 1993 and obama voted for a nearly identical bill in 1998, democrats hate when a law can be used by conservatives in the same manner to protect individuals and businesses

This Law means that the person or business is considered innocent until the state can find that a law was not burdensome on a person or business now……..As does the Federal Law…….

h1

Joe Biden, Idiot Or Just Ignorant

February 25, 2015

Joe Biden, MOST incompetent vice president even more so than Al Gore, he stated in a speech that the govt must emancipate the peoples wealth, just as the democrats emancipated the slaves during the Civil War.

Last time I checked My history it was President Abrahman Lincoln who by presidential decree freed ended slavery while the democrats have done everything under the sun to bring back slavery and they have succeeded beyond theuir imagination by creating the economic slavery plantation.

They have another entire generation thinking that what the govt gives out is totally free such as the following

rental assistance

Medical coverage – subsidies – obamacare –

school: from kindergarten to college now

cars: cash for clunkers

Houses: Community Reinvestment Act: created the savings and loan scandal of the 1980’s, created the housing bubble in 2008, soon will cause another housing bubble again under new rules applied by congress in 2009.

credit scores: 2009 banking reform law: if your credit score is over 650 anytime you check it or it is checked then upto 10 points are taken and given to people with low credit scores

unempolyment benefits: no cut off or deadlines

welfare: all progress has been reversed from the welfare reform act of the 1990’s

Jobs: instead of working one fulltime job you will now need to work 2 jobs because employers are keeping the hours to under 30 hours to escape the penalty under obamacare.

Biden was talking about the 1% holding all the wealth but that is just smoke and mirrors, the democrats true target is the middle class because that is the segment of the population where the total wealth could run the federal govt for years.  Every action the democrats have passed into law has hurt the middle class and the poor making them more relient upon the federal govt.

The democrats  never emancipate anything or anyone, they just ENSLAVE them deeper to the federal govt.

Biden let the cat out of the bag by telling us that the democrats are going after the middle class wealth….

Just remember the DEMOCRATS have always been the party of slavery, they provoked a civil war to keep slavery….

h1

ObamaCare The Law That Is Racist

October 13, 2013

I woke up sometime during the night because mother nature has deemed me old enough to have a time clock alarm in my bladder thank you mother nature.

The title says it all and I wrote down what it means and by federal law this program must end……….

The Affordable Patient Health Care Act aka obamacare comes right to the point of being racist and discriminatory in the same breath first time that congress has allowed and even voted on a bill that lets the federal govt to use discrimination and be racist legally at the same time.

This law discriminates against you because of your age!

This law discriminates against you because of your sexual preference!

This law discriminates against you based on your skin color!

This law discriminates against you because of your gender as well!

This law discriminates against you if you are not muslim!

This Law also discriminates against couples who are married………..

talking about racism this law was written and aimed at illegals to begin with because the democratic party needs a new group to enslave and they will be worshiped for it.

If you are an American Citizen already you are punished by the law….

Exceptions to this are in you are black, gay, lesbian, perpetual pro amnesty, muslim, pro baby death (planned parenthood actually admitted they are for this), if you are getting govt subsidies and are willing to live according to the rules that the federal govt sets forth for you to live on govt handouts then you will not be punished by the law.

Soon this law will encumber if a person will be selected by the govt to go onto a college education provided by the state, The U.K. is a great example of how the govt selects who gets into college.

Prove me wrong with verifiable proof that obamacare is not based on racism and discriminatory acts built into the law by the democratic party

This law also does what the democrats have been trying to do by re-enslaving the very people who were freed by President Abraham Lincoln, plus it shreds the constitution by letting the HHS Dept do what

they have been unable to do and that is bypass the constitution and the rule of law………….

h1

The Ryan Budget The Democrats HATE………

September 6, 2012
LIST OF BUDGET CUTS PAUL RYAN IS PROPOSING.. (WTF ) NO WONDER THE DEMS HATE HIM.

READ TO THE END… IT TOOK MY BREATH AWAY…..

A List of Republican Budget Cuts

Notice S.S. and the military are NOT on this list.
These are all the programs that the new Republican House has proposed cutting. Read to the end.

* Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy — $445 million annual savings.
* Save America ‘s Treasures Program — $25 million annual savings.
* International Fund for Ireland — $17 million annual savings.
* Legal Services Corporation — $420 million annual savings.
* National Endowment for the Arts — $167.5 million annual savings.
* National Endowment for the Humanities — $167.5 million annual savings.
* Hope VI Program — $250 million annual savings.
* Amtrak Subsidies — $1.565 billion annual savings.
* Eliminate duplicating education programs — H.R. 2274 (in last Congress), authored by Rep. McKeon, eliminates 68 at a savings of $1.3 billion annually.
* U.S. Trade Development Agency — $55 million annual savings.
* Woodrow Wilson Center Subsidy — $20 million annual savings.
* Cut in half funding for congressional printing and binding — $47 million annual savings.
* John C. Stennis Center Subsidy — $430,000 annual savings.
* Community Development Fund — $4.5 billion annual savings.
* Heritage Area Grants and Statutory Aid — $24 million annual savings.
* Cut Federal Travel Budget in Half — $7.5 billion annual savings
* Trim Federal Vehicle Budget by 20% — $600 million annual savings.
* Essential Air Service — $150 million annual savings.
* Technology Innovation Program — $70 million annual savings.
* Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program — $125 million annual savings..
* Department of Energy Grants to States for Weatherization — $530 million annual savings.
* Beach Replenishment — $95 million annual savings.
* New Starts Transit — $2 billion annual savings.
·       Exchange Programs for Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Their Historical Trading Partners in Massachusetts — $9 million annual savings
* Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants — $2.5 billion annual savings.
* Title X Family Planning — $318 million annual savings.
* Appalachian Regional Commission — $76 million annual savings.
* Economic Development Administration — $293 million annual savings.
* Programs under the National and Community Services Act — $1.15 billion annual savings.
* Applied Research at Department of Energy — $1.27 billion annual savings.
* Freedom CAR and Fuel Partnership — $200 million annual savings..
* Energy Star Program — $52 million annual savings.
*Economic Assistance to Egypt — $250 million annually.
* U.S.Agency for International Development — $1.39 billion annual savings.
* General Assistance to District of Columbia — $210 million annual savings.
* Subsidy for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority — $150 million annual savings.
*Presidential Campaign Fund — $775 million savings over ten years.* No funding for federal office space acquisition — $864 million annual savings.
* End prohibitions on competitive sourcing of government services.
* Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act — More than $1 billion annually.
* IRS Direct Deposit: Require the IRS to deposit fees for some services it offers (such as processing payment plans for taxpayers) to the Treasury, instead of allowing it to remain as part of its budget — $1.8 billion savings over ten years.
*Require collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees — $1 billion total savings.WHAT THE HELL IS THIS ABOUT?
* Prohibit taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees — $1.2 billion savings over ten years.
* Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of — $15 billion total savings.
*Eliminate death gratuity for Members of Congress.WHAT???
* Eliminate Mohair Subsidies — $1 million annual savings.
*Eliminate taxpayer subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — $12.5 million annual savings  WELL ISN’T THAT SPECIAL
* Eliminate Market Access Program — $200 million annual savings.
* USDA Sugar Program — $14 million annual savings.
* Subsidy to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) — $93 million annual savings.
* Eliminate the National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program — $56.2 million annual savings.
*Eliminate fund for Obamacare administrative costs– $900 million savings.
* Ready to Learn TV Program — $27 million savings..
* HUD Ph.D. Program.
* Deficit Reduction Check-Off Act.
*TOTAL SAVINGS: $2.5 Trillion over Ten Years

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.