The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2004

The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA) (Pub.L. 109-8, 119 Stat. 23, enacted April 20, 2005), is a legislative act that made several significant changes to the United States Bankruptcy Code. Referred to colloquially as the “New Bankruptcy Law”, the Act of Congress attempts to, among other things, make it more difficult for some consumers to file bankruptcy under Chapter 7; some of these consumers may instead utilize Chapter 13. Voting record of S. 256 [1].
It was passed by the 109th United States Congress on April 14, 2005 and signed into law by President George W. Bush on April 20, 2005. Most provisions of the act apply to cases filed on or after October 17, 2005. It was hailed at the time as the banking lobby’s greatest all-time victory.

Lyndon Baines Johnson

Lyndon Baines Johnson (August 27, 1908 – January 22, 1973), often referred to as LBJ, was the 36th President of the United States (1963–1969), a position he assumed after his service as the 37th Vice President of the United States (1961–1963). He is one of only four people[1] who served in all four elected federal offices of the United States: Representative, Senator, Vice President, and President.[2] Johnson, a Democrat from Texas, served as a United States Representative from 1937–1949 and as a Senator from 1949–1961, including six years as United States Senate Majority Leader, two as Senate Minority Leader and two as Senate Majority Whip. After campaigning unsuccessfully for the Democratic nomination in 1960, Johnson was asked by John F. Kennedy to be his running mate for the 1960 presidential election.
Johnson succeeded to the presidency following the assassination of John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963, completed Kennedy’s term and was elected President in his own right, winning by a large margin in the 1964 election. Johnson was greatly supported by the Democratic Party and as President, he was responsible for designing the “Great Society” legislation that included laws that upheld civil rights, public broadcasting, Medicare, Medicaid, environmental protection, aid to education, and his “War on Poverty.” Johnson was renowned for his domineering personality and the “Johnson treatment,” his coercion of powerful politicians in order to advance legislation.
Meanwhile, Johnson escalated American involvement in the Vietnam War, from 16,000 American advisors/soldiers in 1963 to 550,000 combat troops in early 1968, as American casualties soared and the peace process bogged down. The involvement stimulated a large angry antiwar movement based especially on university campuses in the U.S. and abroad.[3] Summer riots broke out in most major cities after 1965, and crime rates soared, as his opponents raised demands for “law and order” policies. The Democratic Party split in multiple feuding factions, and after Johnson did poorly in the 1968 New Hampshire primary, he ended his bid for reelection. Republican Richard Nixon was elected to succeed him. Historians argue that Johnson’s presidency marked the peak of modern liberalism in the United States after the New Deal era. However, Johnson is ranked favorably by some historians because of his domestic policies.[4][5]

Hay and Hell and Booligal by Andrew Barton “Banjo” Paterson

Hay and Hell and Booligal
by Andrew Barton “Banjo” Paterson

“You come and see me, boys,” he said;
“You’ll find a welcome and a bed
And whisky any time you call;
Although our township hasn’t got
The name of quite a lively spot —
You see, I live in Booligal.
“And people have an awful down
Upon the district and the town —
Which worse than hell itself the call;
In fact, the saying far and wide
Along the Riverina side
Is ‘Hay and Hell and Booligal’.

“No doubt it suits ’em very well
To say it’s worse than Hay or Hell,
But don’t you heed their talk at all;
Of course, there’s heat — no one denies —
And sand and dust and stacks of flies,
And rabbits, too, at Booligal.

“But such a pleasant, quiet place —
You never see a stranger’s face;
They hardly ever care to call;
The drovers mostly pass it by —
They reckon that they’d rather die
Than spend the night in Booligal.

“The big mosquitoes frighten some —
You’ll lie awake to hear ’em hum —
And snakes about the township crawl;
But shearers, when they get their cheque,
They never come along and wreck
The blessed town of Booligal.

“But down to Hay the shearers come
And fill themselves with fighting-rum,
And chase blue devils up the wall,
And fight the snaggers every day,
Until there is the deuce to pay —
There’s none of that in Booligal.

“Of course, there isn’t much to see —
The billiard-table used to be
The great attraction for us all,
Until some careless, drunken curs
Got sleeping on it in their spurs,
And ruined it, in Booligal.

“Just now there is a howling drought
That pretty near has starved us out —
It never seems to rain at all;
But, if there should come any rain,
You couldn’t cross the black-soil plain —
You’d have to stop in Booligal.”

“We’d have to stop!” With bated breath
We prayed that both in life and death
Our fate in other lines might fall;
“Oh, send us to our just reward
In Hay or Hell, but, gracious Lord,
Deliver us from Booligal!”

FBI asked to probe Obama “vote-changing” machines




State lawmaker says she has concerns over election tampering

author-imageby BOB UNRUHEmail Archive

Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after nearly three decades with the Associated Press, as well as several Upper Midwest newspapers, where he covered everything from legislative battles and sports to tornadoes and homicidal survivalists. He is also a photographer whose scenic work has been used commercially.More ↓

A state lawmaker in Maryland has asked the FBI to impound two voting machines used in the 2012 election to determine whether there was a malfunction or something nefarious going on.

“I just feel it is my duty to try to get to the bottom of this,” state Delegate Kathryn Afzali told WND today.“We’re not making any accusations. The Board of Elections are good people. They have checks and balances … but we want to make sure everything is fair

She said a number of people contacted her after the Nov. 6 election to report that they pressed a touch-screen button for GOP candidate Mitt Romney, but the vote registered for Barack Obama.

WND has reported a number of first-hand accounts of similar anomalies during the election. One touch-screen technician reported that voters in another state were getting error messages on their touch-screens when they tried to vote for Romney.

Also, suspiciously, a number of precincts reported a 100-percent vote for Obama, and some even reported beyond 100 percent.

“My request [to the FBI] is … I want them to take these machines. Let an FBI computer expert analyze them,” she said.

She said that among those who contacted her with concerns were two  officials, including a state lawmaker who personally experienced a vote machine changing his vote three times to the party whose agenda he opposed.

The lawmaker told her that his computer background left him confident that the problem was beyond a technical glitch, and he insisted that the election judge take the machine out of service and lock it up.

Another concern was raised by Carroll County Commissioner Richard Rothschild. who said it’s critical that the machines be analyzed properly to determine what happened.

“We need to freeze them in their current state, not wipe out data,” he said.

He said his constituent reported the same scenario as has been reported: hitting the touch-screen button for Romney but finding that that it registered for Obama.

Rothschild said it’s a major problem that has to be addressed in order for Americans to continue trusting their election system.

He said the constituent noticed the vote changes on the summary screen.

“It showed Obama as being selected,” Rothschild told WND, even though his constituent reported voting for the GOP ticket.

“After talking with a few other people, this concern seems to be increasing,” Rothschild told WND. “There are just two possible answers. Either he made a mistake, or something caused that machine to switch the vote.”

He said given that his constituent has experience with computers, the contention that he didn’t know how to use the machine seems a stretch.

“I know how easy it would be to introduce a single spurious line of code,” Rothschild told WND, noting a programmer could easily instruct the machine to change the vote periodically, so a routine test wouldn’t reveal any problems.

He said he was told the county had no jurisdiction over the issue and that it would be up to the state, which is why he discussed the concerns with Afzali.

“It’s very scary,” Rothschild told WND. “It creates a sense of helplessness and hopelessness.”

That, in turn, he said, results in people feeling desperate about their failure to impact government.

“If American people feel they cannot trust their voting system, there’s the possibility of more desperate action,” he said. “There are a number of possibilities [for reaction] in nullifications, secession, including throwing off such governments.

“If people think their voting processes do not work, [if] they conclude they are not being afforded constitutional protections, they may conclude their only option is to throw off such government,” he said.

He said the forensics of voting machine examination would be very important, but a good investigatory review could provide a lot of answers.

“We have all seen little pieces of the problem,” he said.

But to determine what is a problem, he said some sort of overview perspective would be needed.

Not only do authorities need to do a review, future elections need to be done so that every voter is given a printed copy of his or her own vote. The copies could be compiled by clerks to provide a point of reference if questions arise, he said.

Afzali told WND that because she’s on the state elections committee, a number of people came directly to her with their complaints.

She said the two machines that were identified now are locked up with all the other equipment, but she’s asked the FBI step in and take custody of them.

WND previously reported in U.S. Rep. Allen West’s re-election fight in Florida, a surge of thousands of votes went to his opponent late in the evening.

“If we do not have integrity in our election process then we don’ t have the exceptionalism as a constitutional republic, we don’t have a rule of law,” West said.

US National Debt Clock

U.S. NATIONAL DEBT CLOCKThe Outstanding Public Debt as of 27 Nov 2012 at 06:18:05 PM GMT is:

$ 1 6 , 3 2 2 , 3 9 8 , 3 2 9 , 3 3 8 . 0 8

The estimated population of the United States is 313,948,645
so each citizen’s share of this debt is $51,990.66.

The National Debt has continued to increase an average of
$3.88 billion per day since September 28, 2007!
Concerned? Then tell Congress and the White House!


Commentary: More fun with secession and states rights

Tuesday, Nov. 27, 2012

Commentary: More fun with secession and states rights

Glenn Garvin – The Miami Herald

Trying to lend one of his 2008 campaign speeches a little literary heft, Barack Obama borrowed a phrase from William Faulkner: “The past isn’t dead and buried. In fact, it isn’t even past.” Four years later, the president may be considering himself, however ruefully, a prophet. For it looks like much of his second term may be framed by one of America’s oldest, most persistent political debates — the one over states’ rights.

The most direct, most publicized and least likely to succeed challenge to federal authority is, amusingly, the result of a White House public-relations misfire. The Obama administration, in a fit of populist preening, set up a website called We the People that encourages Americans to exercise “the right to petition your government” and promises an official response to any petition that gets 25,000 signatures.

The result: petitions to secede from the union filed from all 50 states. By early this week, seven had reached the White House’s 25,000-signature threshold, including Florida’s. Imagine the thrill of a referendum in which Florida’s statehood was on the ballot! Between hanging chads, butterfly ballots and ballot brokers, we’d probably wind up accidentally voting ourselves into Czechoslovakia, even though it doesn’t exist anymore, or maybe especially because it doesn’t exist anymore.

Video from around the world

The secession petitions have several hundred thousand signatures, which sounds like a lot until you consider that about 118 million people turned out for the election a couple of weeks ago. Nonetheless, the petitions have provoked frenzied accusations of racism and even treason from progressives, who’ve conveniently forgotten that they were the ones talking about leaving the union after John Kerry’s decisive defeat in 2004.

Redrawn maps of America ricocheted around the Internet, showing Democratic strongholds on the coasts joined in something called The “United States of Canada” while those that went for George W. Bush were consigned to “Jesusland” or “Redneckistan.” In a distraught television appearance, Lawrence O’Donnell (who soon after would get his own show on MSNBC), predicted “a serious discussion of secession over the next 20 years” because “the segment of the country that pays for the federal government is now being governed by the people who don’t pay for the federal government.” (Now you know where Mitt Romney got the idea for his famous “47 percent” rap.)

Curiously, nobody called O’Donnell’s statement treasonous. That’s because it wasn’t. The Constitution doesn’t contain a single word about secession, one way or the other. But many of the Founding Fathers (including James Madison and John Marshall, whose opinions as chief justice created the foundation of constitutional law) believed it a right. Even Abraham Lincoln, who went to war to block Southern secession in 1861, was of two minds on the subject; he applauded the decision of a substantial portion of Virginians to break away from their own state and spearheaded their entry into the union as West Virginia.

Ultimately, just as its liberal counterpart did a decade ago, the conservative movement for secession will fizzle out, even in Texas where it’s strongest. (If Texans really want to mess with Obama, they have a much more potent tool. The 1845 agreement by which Texas gave up its status as an independent nation to join the United States contains a provision giving Texans the unilateral right to divide themselves into up to five states. Add eight Republicans to the U.S. Senate and the president’s entire second-term agenda is dead on arrival.) But there are more serious states’ rights threats to the White House lurking out there, and not all of them come from the right.

Voters in four states — Alabama, Missouri, Montana and Wyoming — approved referendums blocking enforcement of various provisions of Obama’s healthcare law. If their state officials honor voters’ wishes, they can delay Obamacare’s implementation for years with legal wrangling and foot-dragging. And the more successful they are, the more company they’re likely to have; despite the Democratic triumphalism, Republicans still control the governor’s office in 30 states and the legislature in 27.

Even more potentially threatening are the votes in Washington and Colorado to legalize marijuana. Obama has been a relentless foe of any challenge to harsh federal drug laws, authorizing scores of Justice Department raids on medical-marijuana dispensaries in states that have approved them. But the voters in Washington and Colorado (and their governors, who’ve pledged their support for the laws) are basically his own supporters.

So is California Gov. Jerry Brown, who — anticipating a similar vote soon in his state — last week said Obama and his Justice Department minions must “recognize the sovereignty of the states” and stop trying to “nullify a reasonable state regulation.” A speech on nullification from a governor of California in 2012! The past isn’t dead, it doesn’t even need Viagra.

Read more here: