Archive for the ‘no real job’ 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

Confederacy

August 25, 2017

The Democratic Party has now begun the whitewashing of the parties real history, they are trying to erase the real confederacy connection that the party has.

The democrats are going to have to purge all members of the house and senate members from the time of the confederacy. They will have to purge the awarding of the Margaret Sanger award, and the fullbright scholarship.

They will need to rename buildings named in honor of former demcorats, the party as a whole will have to renounce their creation of the KKK and the continued control of the organization as well.

The Civil war was not originally about slavery but excessive taxation by the federal government at the time. In Lincolns own papers it shows where he ordered the navy to fire upon fort Sumter the tax fort in Charlestown bay. Freeing the slaves was a means to end the war faster than to let it continue for years. What most people do not realize is that the emancipation proclamation only covered the southern states in the confederacy that was fighting against the union army.

It wasn’t until 1869 that congress freed the slaves that were slaves in the northern states, the main reason for the delay was”good help is hard to find”.

The media also needs to be held accountable for their actions as well, for lying about the connections of the person who was the organizer for the Charlottesville protest march is actually a founder of the occupy wall street protest. They now have people from their own party organizing protest marches for people with conservative views, so they can accuse conservatives creating a hostile environment that allows the taking and erasing of their true history.

Currently the entire media both print and television are helping the Democratic Party and its elected members whitewash their real history by implicating that the neo-nazis, white supremacists,and the KKK are all socialist progressive based. The KKK was created by the democrats during the reconcruction era and have continued to fund it thru the likes of George Soros, and other multimillionaires within the Democratic Party ranks. If they want to totally white wash their history then they need to renounce Margaret Sanger, Al Gore Sr, formers senators Fulbright and the scholarship, and senator Byrd as well.

They need every democrat whose family even remotely is tied to slavery and or rascism, to resign.they also need to admit they blocked the real end to slavery for four more years after the end of the civil war. Slavery was still allowed in the northern states for four years after the civil war ended on the basis of “good help was hard to find”.

h1

Decoration Day or Memorial Day

May 27, 2017

On May 5th 1868, General John A. Logan declared that May 30th would be known as Decoration Day Nation wide, that date was chosen because it held no significance as an anniversary of any past battle in America.

This day is set aside for the men and women who have given the ultimate sacrifice by giving their all, its also to honor those who are currently serving and for those who have served in the military for this nation willing and for those who were drafted as well.

We have places in this country who are attempting to whitewash history by removing monuments to soldiers and generals and important figures from the civil war. It is because of the civil war that we have Decoration Day/Memorial Day, the civil war was not fought over slavery but it eventually has been taught that is all it was about.

Prior to the start of the civil war, the federal government was taxing raw products and finished products that came from the southern states. The representatives in the house and in the senate told the federal government that if the excess taxation did not stop that they would leave the union and form their on nation. About that time the southern states were also looking at freeing all slaves and giving each male slave a 1/4 or 1/2 acre for each year they lived on a plantation.

In President Lincoln’s own words “we can not let the southern states leave for they fund the federal government” The federal government struck first by invading the southern states to prevent succession of the southern states.

President Lincoln issued the Emancepation Proclamation, on January 1st 1863, freeing all slaves, there was caveat to his speech, it only affected the slaves in the southern states while the civil war was going on. It wasn’t until 4 years later that the slaves in the northern states and southern states that was loyal to the union were freed.

Prior to the civil war as I had stated the southern states were looking into freeing the slaves the same at Russia had in 1859. Prior to Lincoln starting the war with a surprise attack on Charleston harbor on April 8th 1861, to occupy Fort Sumter which at that time was a federal tax collection fort. The southern states were starting the process of freeing the slaves. The occupation of Fort Sumter by the federal government military and navy altered that course of action by the southern states.

After the civil war had ended and congress initiated the process of reconstruction which in turn allowed for people from the northern states to move to the southern states became known as carpet baggers. It as during the era of reconstruction that majority of the representatives from the southern states were former slaves that were freed by Lincoln’s emancipation proclamation. The southern Democratic Party had created its response to the reconstruction time period which became known as the KKK party.

The klan was created as a response to the northern states using reconstruction era to have blacks in congress. The klan terroized and even killed blacks to get their point across. Up until the civil rights bill as passed by congress in the 1960’s, there was 7 other attempts to pass civil rights legislation by congress but the democrats in congress blocked them all.

It as the democrats that created the Jim Crow laws, the separate but equal education system, the whites only and blacks only laws. It was the democrats in power in the southern states that used the police, the police dogs, water cannons, and the states national guards against the civil rights marchers in the late 1950’s and the early 1960’s.

The civil rights bill that was voted on in the house in 1964 was filibustered by Al Gore Sr in the senate until another senator from Minnesota rewrote several sections that dealt with voting rights, the original version ould enshrine in the constitution the right to vote regardless color, religion, or gender, the rewritten version had it so that the senate had to revote on the voting rights act every so often, that is when enough democrats in the senate agreed to vote to pass the civil rights bill so the president could sign it into law.

What is now known as Memorial Day is because of the civil war, there were to many men killed during the civil war and to think we have people who have been elected feel it’s their right to remove monuments and to erase history because a few are offended by our nations past. To erase our past means that we as a nation are bound to repeat history. We need to embrace our past so that we do not repeat our past, but we are on the verge of repeating our past because a single political party prefers to keep groups of people as 2nd class citizens so that they will keep voting for them.

The civil war was not fought to keep a political party in power but to keep a young nation as a whole, every single soldier who has given their all in battle or in defense of this nation should be honored as well as those who are currently serving in the military and those who served and those who have retired from the military for they truly know what sacrifice truly means.

The song “If Your Reading This” best fits the term “giving it all”
It as first sung by Tim McGraw in 2007

If You’re Reading This
Tim McGraw
Lyrics
If you’re reading this
My Mommas sittin there
Looks like I only got a one way ticket over here
Sure wish I
Could give you one more kiss
And war was just a game we played when we were kids
I’m laying down my gun
I’m hanging up boots
I’m up here with God and we’re both watching over you
So lay me down
In that open field out on the edge of town
And know my soul
Is where my momma always prayed
That it would go
And if you’re reading this
I’m already home
If you’re reading this
Half way around the world
I won’t be there
To see the birth of our little girl
I hope she looks like you
I hope she fights like me
Stand up for the innocent and weak
I’m laying down my gun
I’m hanging up boots
Tell dad I don’t regret that I followed in his shoes
So lay me down
In that open field out on the edge of town
And know my soul
Is where my momma always prayed
That it would go
And if you’re reading this
I’m already home
If you’re reading this
There’s going to come a day
When you’ll move on
And find some one else
And that’s OK
Just remember this
I’m in a better place
Where soldiers live in peace
And angels sing amazing grace
So lay me down
In that open field out on the edge of town
And know my soul
Is where my momma always prayed
That it would go
And if you’re reading this
I’m already home

There is another song that I will post the lyrics to as well for the soldiers who are still living, that fits them.

It’s sung by Toby Keith the title is American Soldier

Lyrics
I’m just trying to be a father,
Raise a daughter and a son,
Be a lover to their mother,
Everything to everyone.
Up and at ’em bright and early,
I’m all business in my suit,
Yeah, I’m dressed up for success,
From my head down to my boots.
I don’t do it for money
There’s bills that I can’t pay.
I don’t do it for the glory,
I just do it anyway.
Providing for our future’s my responsibility,
Yeah I’m real good under pressure,
Being all that I can be.
And I can’t call in sick on Mondays
When the weekends been too strong,
I just work straight through the holidays,
And sometimes all night long.
You can bet that I stand ready
When the wolf growls at the door,
Hey, I’m solid, hey I’m steady,
Hey I’m true down to the core.
And I will always do my duty,
No matter what the price,
I’ve counted up the cost,
I know the sacrifice.
Oh, and I don’t want to die for you,
But if dyin’s asked of me,
I’ll bear that cross with honor,
‘Cause freedom don’t come free.
I’m an American soldier, an American,
Beside my brothers and my sisters
I will proudly take a stand,
When liberty’s in jeopardy
I will always do what’s right,
I’m out here on the front lines,
So you can sleep in peace tonight.
American soldier, I’m an American,
American soldier,
An American

I found the soldiers Creed and its a good one and i hope that I am not offending anyone by just changing one word in the creed for it is meant to honor all soldiers.

A Soldiers Creed

I am an American Soldier.
I am a member of the United States Military – a protector of the greatest nation on earth.
Because I am proud of the uniform I wear, I will always act in ways creditable to the military service and the nation it is sworn to guard.
I am proud of my own organization. I will do all I can to make it the finest Military.
I will be loyal to those under whom I serve. I will do my full part to carry out orders and instructions given to me or my unit.
As a soldier, I realize that I am a member of a time-honored profession—that I am doing my share to keep alive the principles of freedom for which my country stands.
No matter what the situation I am in, I will never do anything, for pleasure, profit, or personal safety, which will disgrace my uniform, my unit, or my country.
I will use every means I have, even beyond the line of duty, to restrain my comrades from actions disgraceful to themselves and to the uniform.
I am proud of my country and its flag.
I will try to make the people of this nation proud of the service I represent, for I am an American Soldier.

Thank you for taking the time to read my view on Decoration Day/Memorial Day,
A ordinary mans view.

h1

California

May 1, 2016

I am not surprised that the media is all agog in regards to the illegals rioting in Costa Mesa all because Donald Trump went to speak and exercise his right to freedom of speech.  Because the illegals disagree with his speeches they have the right to riot and destroy public and private property in Costa Mesa.

Freedom of speech is for everyone as long as you are a progressive, liberal, democrat, socialist, and or illegals.  If you are a conservative in anyway form or fashion your right of free speech or the right to gather or assemble for meetings and or conventions of any kind that is never to be tolerated.  Proof is in the media and they are glorifying the rioting and blaming trump for his speeches, for the cause of the riots.

If a republican or conservative disagrees with a democrat, liberal and or progressive they are considered to racist, homophobic, religion hating, and gender hating.  If a conservative disagrees with Obama regarding his politics that person is considered 100% racist.

I do not feel that a person breaking our nations laws by entering this nation illegally should not be rewarded and we need to get rid of the notion that if you are an illegal and your baby is born an American citizen, that was already decided by the Supreme Court that citizenship is passed onto your children only if one or both parents are already citizens of the United States.

The illegals should be arrested for making threats against legal citizens and legal immigrants who wish to have legal political rallies that the illegals disagree with so they have threatened to use violent demonstrations and rioting to disrupt all and any rallies for Donald Trump.  What’s fascinating is you do not see republican or conservative to even libertarians using violence at any Hillary or Bernie political rallies.

Hillary and Bernie are both accomplices to those who are using violence and riots because they disagree with what Trump is saying in his political speeches.  So if you disagree with Trump it is okay to destroy both public and private property because you do not hear or see either Hillary or Bernie asking their followers to stop the rioting it’s more of a wink and nod to those who riot.

Just because Trump is making speeches that people disagree with that does not give them the right to riot in the first place.  Demonstrate peacefully to get your point across, is more effective than rioting, Dr. Martin Luther King had the right approach. Demonstrate peacefully and let the other side commit the violence, during the civil rights marches you had the democrats fighting back with the police and national guard against peaceful demonstrators.  Dr. Martin Luther King had all peace marchers sign pledge cards not to respond with violence no matter what happens.

It’s time for those that are here illegally to go home demonstrate against their own governments, instead of demanding the right to vote and live in a country where they are living illegally.

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

C.L. Bryant Speaks The Truth…………..

October 31, 2011

 

Okay I will try and repost this for some reason my last posting of these two movie trailers have vanished

The gentleman in the movie called runaway slave is C.L. Bryant he was a former NAACP chapter president

who woke up and just saw exactly what the democratic party was doing to all blacks and people of color

to keep them in their place aka the plantation, for the past 35 years the democrats have as Mr Bryant put

it have the blacks trained in economic slavery and set up to fail once they get you into the govt system…………..

h1

THE REAL MESS

August 10, 2011

What many people do not know is the real history of the problems we are having today and it was signed into law by jimmy (peanut farmer) carter in 1977 here’s the first link and on the right side is a map that the law was based out that is how the term red lining was created it was showing banks where the safe loans could be repaid and the red areas were showing much riskier areas.

Thus created the first banking crisis back in the late 1980’s the S&L’s debacle the community activists boycotted and attacked the S&L’s banks to charge them with red lining and deceit and deceptive loan process.  Because the S&L’s banks were receiving insurance money from the FDIC  that made the banks liable if they were ever sued in court.

Timeline of the Housing Crisis

 
These are the leading culprits who actually caused the subprime

mortgage collapse which then caused the current worldwide deep recession

1. Jimmy Carter pushed for and signed into law the
Community Reinvestment Act which forced banks to
lower their standards so that previously unqualified
people could get a mortgage.

2. Bill Clinton then doubled-down on the Community Reinvestment
Act and greatly lowered mortgage standards to
allow a lot more unqualified borrowers to get loans.

3. Bill Clinton’s Attorney General, Janet Reno, then intimidated
banks with threats of legal action if they
did not give loans to unqualified borrowers who
would not have the income to pay the loans back.

4. A member of the Clinton administration, Franklin Raines
was then put in charge of Fannie Mae by Bill Clinton. Fannie
Mae bought up a majority of the bad loans made by
banks to unqualified borrowers. Raines then falsified Fannie
Mae financial reports so he could collect bonuses
which totaled over $90 million for 5 years.

5. Senator Chris Dodd, head of the Senatorial Financial
Committee, suppressed efforts by President
George W. Bush and congressional Republicans to
rein in the corruption at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
He got a very favorable loan by a bank associated
with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. He got large political
campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac.

6. Barney Frank, head of the House of Representatives
Banking Committee, also suppressed efforts by President
George W. Bush and Congressional Republicans to
investigate corruption at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

7. Barack Obama, while he was an attorney, filed lawsuits
against banks on behalf of ACORN in order to
force banks to give loans to people who could not afford
to pay them back. Obama, while he was a U.S.
Senator, also suppressed efforts by President George
W. Bush and Republican Congressmen to investigate
and rein in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.