Your blogger

My photo
When Roger West first launched the progressive political blog "News From The Other Side" in May 2010, he could hardly have predicted the impact that his venture would have on the media and political debate. As the New Media emerged as a counterbalance to established media sources, Roger wrote his copious blogs about national politics, the tea party movement, mid-term elections, and the failings of the radical right to the vanguard of the New Media movement. Roger West's efforts as a leading blogger have tremendous reach. NFTOS has led the effort to bring accountability to mainstream media sources such as FOX NEWS, Breitbart's "Big Journalism. Roger's breadth of experience, engaging style, and cultivation of loyal readership - over 92 million visitors - give him unique insight into the past, present, and future of the New Media and political rhetoric that exists in our society today. What we are against: Radical Right Wing Agendas Incompetent Establishment Donald J. Trump Corporate Malfeasence We are for: Global and Econmoic Security Social and Economic Justice Media Accountability THE RESISTANCE

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

NFTOS BREAKING: MICHIGAN PASSES RIGHT-TO-WORK LAWS

Numbers Under Right To Work States

Armed with tear gas canisters, pepper spray and batons, State Police officers guarded the Capitol as protesters shouted "No justice, no peace!" and "Shut it down!" Amid throngs of protestors Michigan’s House of Representatives passed the “right-to-work” law for public sector unions, 58-51. It is expected to vote on similar legislation applying to private sector unions later today. Gov. Rick Snyder (R) is also expected to sign the legislation into law today or early tomorrow.



Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy



Michigan Republicans [Michigan's version of "The American Taliban] claim the state needs the measure to stay competitive with Indiana, where lawmakers passed “right-to-work” last year. In reality, though, such laws have negative effects on workers and little effect on economic growth. Here is what you need to know about the state GOP’s campaign:


THE LEGISLATION: Both the state House and state Senate passed legislation on Thursday that prohibits private sector unions from requiring members to pay dues. The Senate followed suit and passed a different but similar measure that extends the same prohibition for public sector unions, though firefighters and police officers are exempt. The state House included a budget appropriations provision that is intended to prevent the state’s voters from being able to legally challenge the law through a ballot referendum. Due to state law, both houses are prevented from voting on legislation passed by the other for five days, so neither will be able to fully pass the legislation until Tuesday at the earliest.



Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy



THE PROCESS: Union leaders and Democrats claim that Republicans are pushing the legislation through in the lame-duck session to hide the intent of the measures from citizens, and because the legislation would face more trouble after the new House convenes in January. Michigan Republicans hold a 63-47 advantage in the state House, but Democrats narrowed the GOP majority to just eight seats in November. Six Republicans opposed the House measure; five of them won re-election in 2012 (the sixth retired). And Michigan Republicans have good reason to pursue the laws without public debate. Though the state’s voters are evenly split on whether it should become a right-to-work state, 78 percent of voters said the legislature “should focus on issues like creating jobs and improving education, and not changing state laws or rules that would impact unions or make further changes in collective bargaining.”




Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


THE CONSEQUENCES: While Snyder and Republicans pitched “right-to-work” as a pro-worker move aimed at improving the economy, studies show such legislation can cost workers money. The Economic Policy Institute found that right-to-work laws cost all workers, union and otherwise, $1,500 a year in wages and that they make it harder for workers to obtain pensions and health coverage. “If benefits coverage in non-right-to-work states were lowered to the levels of states with these laws, 2 million fewer workers would receive health insurance and 3.8 million fewer workers would receive pensions nationwide,” David Madland and Karla Walter from the Center for American Progress wrote earlier this year. The decreases in union membership that result from right-to-work laws have a significant impact on the middle class and research “shows that there is no relationship between right-to-work laws and state unemployment rates, state per capita income, or state job growth,” EPI wrote in a recent report about Michigan. “Right-to-work” laws also decrease worker safety and can hurt small businesses.

Union leaders are, of course, aghast at Snyder and the GOP’s right-to-work push. “In a state that gave birth to the modern U.S. labor movement, it is unconscionable that Michigan legislators would seek to drive down living standards for Michigan workers and families with a law that will do nothing to improve either the state’s economic climate or the quality of life for Michigan residents,” RoseAnn DeMoro, the executive director of National Nurses United, said in a statement.

Radical Tea Baggers obviously didn't get the message last November. These remaining douche bags in office need to be sent packing when it's time for their re-election! Make your voice heard readers!

 

 
NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Monday, December 10, 2012

VIRGINIA TEA BAGGER SAYS CHEAT TO WIN

Charles “Bill” Carrico Sr Says Cheat To Win

Virginia State Senator Charles “Bill” Carrico Sr. (R) has become the latest swing state-Republican to propose a scheme to rig presidential elections for future Republican candidates. Blue Virginia reports his proposed SB 723 would award the state’s electors based on which candidate gets the majority of votes in each gerrymandered Congressional district — rather than based on who gets the most votes statewide.

The Carrico bill would award one of Virginia’s 13 electoral votes to the presidential candidate who gets the most votes in each of the Commonwealth’s 11 Congressional Districts. The remaining two electors would go to the candidate who won the majority of Congressional Districts. With a Republican-controlled redistricting passed earlier this year, Virginia Democrats were heavily packed into three districts. Under these maps, Obama won Virginia by almost a 4 point margin, yet he carried just four Virginia Congressional Districts. Were Carrico’s scheme in place, Mitt Romney would have received seven of Virginia’s 11 electoral votes despite receiving just 47.28% of the vote statewide.

Carrico’s proposal is part of a troubling national trend by Republican legislators in GOP-controlled states won by President Obama in the 2008 and 2012 elections. The Pennsylvania Senate Majority Leader and Ohio Secretary of State have suggested similar schemes in those states. While constitutional, the scheme would make it far more likely that the popular choice for president would not be elected to that office. No such efforts have emerged in GOP-controlled states won by the Republican nominees.

Indeed, if this plan to rig the Electoral College had been law in several key Republican-controlled states that President Obama won last month, America would now be looking at a very different future. Had the Carrico plan been instituted for the 2012 elections in Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Virginia, and Wisconsin, it is quite likely Mitt Romney would be the president-elect despite President Obama’s 51-47 majority.

Sunday, December 9, 2012

INTELLIGENCE QUOTA INSTITUTE CONFIRMS THAT FAUX NEWS VIEWERS DUMBER THAN MOST

IQ INST SAYS FAUX NEWS VIEWERS A DUMB LOT

Study shows that the Americans who watch Fox News have an average IQ of 80, whereas the national average is 100. Researchers were not "shocked" by findings.

Birmingham, Alabama (PRWEB) December 04, 2012

The results of a 4 year study show that Americans who obtain their news from Fox News channel have an average IQ of 80, which represents a 20 point deficit when compared to the U.S. national average of 100. IQ, or intelligence quotient, is the international standard of assessing intelligence.

Researchers at The Intelligence Institute, a conservative non-profit group, tested 5,000 people using a series of tests that measure everything from cognitive aptitude to common sense and found that people who identified themselves as Fox News viewers and 'conservative' had, on average, significantly lower intelligent quotients. Fox Viewers represented 2,650 members of the test group.

One test involved showing subjects a series of images and measuring their vitals, namely pulse rate and blood pressure. The self-identified conservatives' vitals increased over 35% when shown complex or shocking images. The image that caused the most stress was a poorly edited picture of President Obama standing next to a "ghostly" image of a child holding a tarantula.

Test subjects who received their news from other outlets or reported they do not watch the news scored an average IQ of 104, compared to 80 for Fox News viewers.

Lead researcher, P. Nichols, explains:
"Less intelligent animals rely on instinct when confronted by something which they do not understand. This is an ancient survival reaction all animals, including humans, exhibit. It's a very simple phenomenon, really; think about a dog being afraid of a vacuum cleaner. He doesn't know what a vacuum is or if it may harm him, so he becomes agitated and barks at it. Less intelligent humans do the same thing. Concepts that are too complex for them to understand, may frighten or anger them."


He continues, "Fox News' content is presented at an elementary school level and plays directly into the fears of the less educated and less intelligent."

The researchers said that an IQ of 80 is well above the score of 70, which is where psychiatrists diagnose mental retardation. P. Nichols says an IQ of 80 will not limit anyone's ability to lead happy, fulfilling lives.

The study did not conclude if Fox News contributed to lowering IQ or if it attracts less intelligent humans.

P. Nichols concludes that he wasn't shocked by the studies' results, rather how dramatic their range:
"Several previous studies show that self-identified conservatives are less intelligent than self-identified moderates. We have never seen such a homogeneous group teetering so close to special needs levels."
 


NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Saturday, December 8, 2012

CHARLIE CRIST LEAVES THE DARK SIDE FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

 Charlie Crist signed papers changing to Democrat at a Christmas reception at the White House.


Former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, who was elected the state's chief executive as a Teapublican and then ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. Senate as an independent, announced on Twitter that he's switching to the Democratic Party.

The announcement Friday night fanned speculation that Crist would seek to regain his old job from TeapublicanGov. Rick Scott in 2014.

Crist sent out a tweet that said, "Proud and honored to join the Democratic Party in the home of President @Barack Obama!"

The tweet included a photo of a smiling Crist and his wife Carole as he held up a Florida voter registration application. Crist signed the papers changing his affiliation from independent to Democrat at a Christmas reception at the White House. President Barack Obama greeted the news with a fist bump.
"I've had friends for years tell me, `You know Charlie, you're a Democrat and you don't know it,'" Crist told the newspaper Friday night.

He cited the Teapublican Party's shift to the right on a range of issues, including immigration, education and the environment.

Crist was elected Florida governor in 2006 while in the GOP. As he moved to run for the U.S. Senate in 2010, he faced a tough primary challenge from the right and bolted the GOP to run as an independent. He lost a three-way Senate contest in 2010 to Teapublican Marco Rubio.

Crist, 56, spoke at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C., that nominated Obama for a second term and campaigned for his re-election.

Crist's decision to switch to a Democrat will increase speculation that he intends to challenge Scott, a former hospital chain CEO who has struggled with low favorability ratings since taking office. Crist has already criticized Scott for refusing to extend early voting despite pleas from U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson and other Democrats.

But it is unlikely that Crist would get a clear path to the Democratic nomination. Former State Sen. Nan Rich, D-Weston, has already jumped into the race and former Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink could run. Sink barely lost the 2010 governor's race to Scott. Some Democrats remain wary of Crist and even outgoing Florida Democratic Party Chairman Rod Smith has joked that just because someone joins the congregation, "you don't make them the preacher."

Steve Schale, a Democratic political consultant who worked on Obama's Florida campaign, called Crist a "viable Democrat."
"He earned his stripes when he supported the president," Schale said.

But Schale predicted that if Crist runs for governor, he would likely get a challenge from Sink and other Democrats and would have to endure a hard-fought primary.

Teapublicans in recent weeks have already ramped up their criticism of Crist and have pointed out that in the past he was critical of Obama and once described himself as a Teapublican in the mold of President Ronald Reagan and Crist's predecessor as governor, Jeb Bush.
"Charlie Crist's first official act as a Democrat was to tell a lie about why he is now pretending to be one," the Florida GOP said in a statement early Saturday. "The truth is that this self-professed, Ronald Reagan Teapublicanonly abandoned his pro-life, pro-gun, conservative principles in 2010 after he realized that Republicans didn't want to send him to Washington D.C. as a senator, especially after he proved he couldn't do the job as governor."

Rick Wilson, a Florida-based Teapublican consultant, predicted that Crist would have to spend the next 14 months explaining how his switch to Democrat was something beyond just his own political ambitions.
 
 
 
 
NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Friday, December 7, 2012

WAR ON CHRISTMAS


It's that most wonderful time of year when Fox News starts drumming up the case for a "War on Christmas," and Jon Stewart isn't putting up with it anymore. Host Gretchen Carlson asked on air whether she was "nuts" to think the war was real, and on last night's Daily Show, Stewart was happy to set her straight: "Yes, you're f--king nuts." Sure, Faux News can scrounge for isolated moments of anti-Christmas spirit, but "the rest of us can't swing a dead elf without knocking over an inflatable snow globe or a giant blinking candy cane," Stewart bellows.

And Christmas, which used to last just one day, "like birthdays do," is only growing: This year, Black Friday expanded into Black Thursday, "or as we used to call it, Thanksgiving. Christmas is so big now, it's eating other holidays," Stewart proclaims. "Watch your ass, Halloween, you're next!"









NFTOS
Editor-In Chief
Roger West

Thursday, December 6, 2012

THE AMERICAN TALIBAN DENIES UN TREATY

Jon Stewart on Wednesday had harsh words for Senate Republicans who blocked the ratification of a UN treaty to protect the rights of disabled people. Republicans voted against the treaty, citing concern over its impact on parents who home school their children.
“What is wrong with you people?” Stewart asked. “I guess it’s time for our new segment: ‘Please tell me this is rock bottom."

Stewart continued: “Oh, my God. It’s official. Republicans hate the United Nations more than they like helping people in wheelchairs.”





The treaty says all nations should work to ensure that disabled people enjoy the same rights and freedoms as other citizens.

The treaty was backed by Mr Dole, who was disabled in World War II, Arizona Senator John McCain, who sustained disabling injuries in the Vietnam War, Indiana Senator Richard Lugar, the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, and former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh.

The 61-38 vote on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities meant the treaty failed to reach the two-thirds majority needed.

The treaty was signed by 155 nations and ratified by 126, including Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia.

The 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act, which sought to protect equal rights for the disabled, became the basis of the UN treaty.

It was negotiated under former President George W Bush's administration and signed by President Barack Obama in 2009.

About 10% of the world's population - or 650 million people - are disabled, UN estimates suggest.

Let's be real here readers the American Taliban dislikes the UN just as much as they hate their own Government. So who loses here, once again those less fortunate.




NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Wednesday, December 5, 2012




Taxes on the wealthy are going up, House Speaker John Boehner conceded Wednesday in challenging President Barack Obama to sit down with him to hammer out a deal for avoiding the fiscal cliff.

Obama, however, continued to insist on Republicans first ensuring no tax hike for anyone but the top 2% of Americans as a first step toward a broader agreement on tackling the nation's chronic federal deficits and debt.

The statements reflected how negotiations on the automatic spending cuts and tax hikes set to occur on January 1 -- the fiscal cliff -- have evolved since Obama's re-election last month.



Republicans once opposed to any new revenue in their quest to shrink government now realize Obama's victory and public support for the president's campaign theme of higher taxes on the wealthy leave them with little negotiating leverage.

Less than four weeks from the fiscal cliff, GOP leaders face a choice: Agreeing to Obama's demand to hold down tax rates on most Americans while allowing higher rates on top earners, or being blamed for everyone's taxes going up in 2013.

The major unresolved question of negotiations involving the White House and congressional leaders is whether eliminating tax deductions and loopholes -- as proposed by House Republicans -- can raise enough revenue without hitting middle-class Americans too hard.
"We have got to cut spending and I believe it is appropriate to put revenues on the table," Boehner told reporters on Wednesday. "Now, the revenues that we are putting on the table are going to come from guess who? The rich."


He continued by saying "there are ways to limit deductions, close loopholes and have the same people pay more of their money to the federal government without raising tax rates, which we believe will harm our economy."

In remarks to business leaders on Wednesday, Obama said Boehner and Republicans have to take the first step.
"I think there is recognition that maybe they can accept some rate increases as long as it is combined with serious entitlement reform and additional spending cuts," the president said. "And if we can get the leadership on the Republican side to take that framework, to acknowledge that reality, then the numbers actually aren't that far apart."


He added that "we can probably solve this in about a week -- it's not that tough."

At the same time, Obama rejected tying the negotiations to the need to raise the federal debt ceiling, like the brinksmanship last year that led to an unprecedented downgrade in the U.S. credit rating.

Boehner has said a debt ceiling increase would require an equal amount of spending cuts or other deficit reduction.
"If Congress, in any way, suggests that they are going to tie negotiations to debt ceiling votes and take us to the brink of default once again as part of a budget negotiation, which by the way we have never done in our history until we did it last year, I will not play that game," Obama said. "Because we've got to break that habit before it starts."


Economists warn that the fiscal cliff's automatic tax hikes and spending cuts would invite recession.

Polls show that more Americans will blame Republicans, instead of Obama and Democrats, if there is no deal and the nation goes over the fiscal cliff.

A Washington Post/Pew Research Center survey released Tuesday put the margin at 53%-27% in citing Republicans or Obama. A CNN/ORC International poll released last week showed 45% would blame congressional Republicans compared to 34% who would hold Obama responsible.

Republican Rep. Raul Labrador of Idaho acknowledged Wednesday that his side was losing the messaging battle.
"We continue to talk about tax rate increases instead of how tax rate increases actually affect individuals," Labrador said, adding: "We're identified as a party that only cares about business. We should care about individuals."


All signs point to a continuing standoff, at least for now. No formal negotiating sessions are known to be scheduled, and congressional aides say no back-channel discussions are taking place.

The House is scheduled to adjourn for the year on December 14, but House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said Wednesday the chamber would remain in session until a fiscal cliff deal gets reached.

Boehner and other Republican leaders implored through the media for Obama to talk to them about the deficit-reduction plan they offered earlier this week, which the White House rejected as unrealistic.

Asked about Congress scheduling no further business this week with GOP members going home, Boehner said: "I'll be here and I'll be available at any moment to sit down with the president to get serious about solving this problem

Rep. Kevin McCarthy added a dramatic flair, calling the next 72 hours "critical" for the negotiations.

If Obama "sits back and continue to play politics, that'll give your answer of where we're going," he said, calling the moment "an opportunity for the president to lead."

At issue are competing proposals by Obama and House Republicans that coincide in some areas but differ on the tax-rate question.

Obama demands that the House immediately pass a measure already approved by the Senate to extend tax cuts for families making less than $250,000 a year while allowing rates to return to higher Clinton-era levels for wealthier households.

Both sides agree that the 98% of Americans making less than $250,000 a year should avoid a tax hike when the tax cuts from the Bush administration expire on December 31, Obama and Democrats argue. They call for the House to guarantee that outcome by passing the Senate measure now.

Once that happens, Obama and Democratic leaders promise, they will work out compromises on other deficit reduction steps sought by Republicans, such as reforms to the Medicare and Medicaid entitlement programs as part of further spending cuts.

In an interview with Bloomberg TV aired on Tuesday, Obama said Republicans need to accept the reality that deficit reduction requires higher tax rates on the wealthy.
"The issue right now, that is relevant, is the acknowledgment that if we're going to raise revenues that are sufficient to balance with the very tough cuts that we have already made and the future reforms in entitlements that I'm prepared to make, then we are going to have to see the rates on the top 2% go up, " the president said. "We will not be able to get a deal without it."

At the same time, Obama said negotiations next year on broader tax reform could bring lower rates.

House Republicans led by Boehner made a major proposal on Monday by offering a series of steps to reduce the nation's chronic federal deficits by $2.2 trillion over 10 years.

The GOP proposal includes $800 billion from tax reform, $600 billion from Medicare reforms and other health savings and $600 billion in other spending cuts, House Republican leadership aides said. It also pledges $200 billion in savings by revising the consumer price index, a measure of inflation.

While the Republicans gave ground by calling for more revenue through tax reform, the plan only mentioned unspecified elimination of some deductions and loopholes.

At the same time, they rejected the Democratic call for higher tax rates on wealthier Americans, contending the move would inhibit economic growth by raising taxes on small business owners, many of whom declare business profits on their personal income tax returns.

The White House and Democratic leaders immediately rejected the Republican approach, saying it lacked specifics and would require middle-class taxpayers to assume a greater burden while easing rates on the rich.

Jason Furman, an assistant to Obama on economic policy, told reporters Wednesday that the president wants to ensure additional revenue from higher taxes on the wealthy now to help avoid the fiscal cliff. He described the Republican proposal for more revenue as lacking specifics.
"Tell us what it is. Show us a score," Furman said. "Tell us how it locks in revenue because you're trying to actually pass a bill this year, not engage in some long process around tax reform, which we don't have time to do by the end of this year. "


On Tuesday, leading conservatives blasted the House Republican proposal that breaks with years of GOP orthodoxy by calling for more taxes to be paid by wealthier Americans.

Sen. Jim DeMint, R-South Carolina, said the "offer of an $800 billion tax hike will destroy jobs and allow politicians in Washington to spend even more." Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, said it would be "a huge mistake to raise taxes. It will cripple the economy."

However, some top Senate Republicans -- many of them conservatives -- withheld harsh criticism of the plan even as they refused to embrace it.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell sidestepped the question when asked directly if he backed the plan.

"I commend the House Republican leadership for trying to move the process along and getting to a point where, hopefully, we can have a real discussion," McConnell said.

Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, a senior Republican on the Finance Committee, said he would support Boehner's plan to raise revenue, but only if there is a "willingness on the part of Democrats to accept spending cuts that are three-to-one or four-to-one."

The current negotiations take place amid the lame-duck session of Congress before the newly elected legislators arrive in January. Possible outcomes include an agreement now to avoid the fiscal cliff and devise a framework for further negotiations in the new Congress on a broader deficit reduction deal.

While the White House has made clear Obama will veto any measure that fails to increase tax rates on the wealthy, aides have signaled a possible willingness to negotiate the specific rate increase.

Asked repeatedly Tuesday about whether Obama insisted on a return to the 1990s rates on income over $250,000 for families or $200,000 for individuals, White House spokesman Jay Carney responded by saying the president would refuse to sign any measure extending the current lower rates.

In the interview with Bloomberg TV, Obama said lower tax rates for the wealthy could be negotiated as part of broader tax reform in 2013, but only after those rates increase now.

Obama's deficit-reduction plan would increase taxes by almost $1 trillion over 10 years, a significant portion of a $4 trillion overall deficit-reduction goal.

It also would close loopholes, limit deductions, raise the estate tax rate to 2009 levels and increases tax rates on capital gains and dividends.

The Obama plan includes $50 billion in stimulus spending for programs intended to create jobs, such as repairing roads and bridges.

Experts have said failing to reach a fiscal cliff deal and devise a framework for a broader deficit reduction package to be negotiated when the new Congress is seated in January will cause economic turmoil.

The non-partisan Tax Policy Center estimates that middle-class families would pay about $2,000 a year more in taxes without action.

For now, the debate has the business community perplexed, said Fred Smith, the chief executive officer of FedEx Corp., considered a bellwether on the economy.

Smith told CNN Tuesday that he and other top business leaders "look at the situation in Washington with complete amazement and dismay."
"The problem is the ideological pinnings on both sides of this argument are so difficult to bridge," Smith said, adding it will "be hard for them to get a deal."




NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

The Republican Christmas Song

Christmas, as seen from the perspective of a tea bagger.






Homeless sleeping by an open fire

Making tea by melting snow

Snuggling in houses of cardboard and tape

And they dine on garbage rich folks throw

Health insurance? Please, you know they never have the dough

With used Kleenex they make due

If they’re hit with a case of the flu

The Pauper’s ward will have to do

When we drive by watching from our SUVs

We get so warm when we see red eyes all aglow

How absurd to say that homelessness makes people sad

It’s plain to see the frowns are just for show

So here’s the deal, you lazy parasites

If it’s 10 degrees or 22

You are free to decide if to freeze or to starve

Merry Christmas to you



NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Monday, December 3, 2012

THE FISCAL CLIFF IN TERMS YOU CAN UNDERSTAND



The White House estimates that the average American family will pay $2,200 more in taxes next year if an agreement is not reached. In fact, the final tally could be even higher.

So with rising Democratic opposition to cuts in social spending and teapublican leaders reiterating their opposition to raising taxes on the wealthy, talks on avoiding the fiscal cliff were at a standstill Thursday.

Officials on both sides of the debate say the political jockeying is likely to continue this week. But they warn that the details of a compromise must emerge next week if an agreement is to be reached in time.

Erskine Bowles, the co-chair of the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction task force, said on Wednesday that he was skeptical that a deal would be reached. Bowles put the chances of an agreement before the end of the year at roughly one in three.
"I believe the problem is that we are going over the fiscal cliff," Bowles told The New York Times, "and I think that will be horrible."


Bowles just happens to be right. While potential tax increases on the rich have dominated the political debate, a raft of taxes on the middle class will increase if an agreement is not reached. The scope will vary, depending on a person's income. White House officials estimate that the average American family will pay $2,200 more in taxes next year if an agreement is not reached. But, if an agreement is not reached at all, even after the January 1 deadline, the increase could be higher, particularly for households that make over $100,000 a year. Here's why:

Alternative Minimum Tax: An obscure tax created in the 1960s to ensure that the super-wealthy paid a minimum amount of tax, inflation and other factors have resulted in the AMT now applying to the four to five million Americans who make $200,000 to $1 million, according to the Washington Post. In recent years, Congress has enacted a "patch" that prevents the AMT from applying to Americans who make less. Unless an agreement is reached, no "patch" will be enacted, and another 31 million Americans will have to pay the tax.

The non-partisan Tax Policy Center estimates that over half of all married couples will owe an additional $4,000, the Post reported. And a third of families with children will have to pay the AMT as well, with parents of three or more children facing an extra tax of up to $4,700.

The center estimates that 84 percent of married couples that make a total of $75,000 to $100,000 and have at least two children will pay a significantly higher tax bill this year because of the AMT.

The impact would be much higher in some areas, with the number of AMT-paying taxpayers in New Jersey rising to 50.3 percent, the highest rate in the country, according to the Post. And the percentage of taxpayer paying the AMT in California, New York and Connecticut would rise to over 30 percent.

Given the breadth of the potential AMT increases, experts predict that Congress will enact a "patch" even if a broader agreement is not reached. For middle class families, let's hope they are right.

Payroll tax: A payroll tax holiday that was enacted in 2010 is set to expire, according to the Fiscal Times. The tax holiday cut employee Social Security contributions by two percent for households that make less than $11000 a year. The end of the measure could mean that the average American family pays another $1,000 in taxes per year.

Deductions: Increases in deductions that were part of the Bush tax cuts will expire. Marginal tax rates will change as well, as described in this Washington Post piece. Exactly how this will play out for families depends on multiple factors. One calculator that could help you estimate the impact on your family is here.

A short-term deal will likely be made to not increase middle class taxes. Allowing that to happen would be political suicide for both parties. But I think the chances of a long-term deficit-reduction deal are low. The failure of both parties to seize this post-election moment, show political courage, and compromise is tragic. This missed opportunity will haunt us and our economy for years.

If our elected leaders can't agree with this type of a political and economic gun to their head, I doubt there will be an agreement any closer to the 2014 midterm elections. Even if a short-term deal prevents middle class taxes from rising, our fiscal dysfunction is likely to continue.



NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Sunday, December 2, 2012

DEMS WILLING TO GO OVER CLIFF



Geithner: "We Will Go Off The Fiscal Cliff If Republicans Insist On Extending Tax Cuts For The Rich".

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said that Republicans will be to blame if Congress can’t pass a balanced plan to avert the so-called fiscal cliff and insisted that President Obama would not sign a proposal that extends President Bush’s tax cuts for the richest 2 percent of Americans.

Asked, during an appearance on Fox News Sunday, if the country would avert the mix of automatic spending cuts and tax increases that are scheduled to go into effect next year, Geithner insisted that it could, but only if Republicans allowed lower taxes on the wealthiest to expire:
CHRIS WALLACE (HOST): Last question, can you promise that we will not go over the cliff?

GEITHNER: No, I can’t promise that. That is a decision that lies in the hands of the Republicans, that are now opposing increases in tax rates, if they recognize the reality, that we cannot afford to extend the tax rates we have the basis for an agreement that would be good for the American people.

WALLACE: And the President bears no responsibility, it is all up to the Republicans?

GEITHNER: Chris, ask yourself this question, why does it make sense for the country to force tax increases on all Americans, because a small group of Republicans want to extend tax rates for 2% of Americans — why does that make any sense? There is no reason why it should happen, we can’t afford the tax rates, that is like the deep tragic lesson of the last decade, we and not afford them and will not get through it, to the end now, without a recognition of the Republicans to that basic reality and that will be the responsible thing to do and my judgment is, they are going to do it because there is no alternative to that.


The Treasury Secretary also laid out the administration’s proposal for averting the cliff, stressing that the mix of increased revenue and entitlement cuts are grounded in proposals the administration included in the President’s FY 2013 budget and offered during the 2011 budget negotiations.

Alongside the $1.6 trillion in tax increases and $80 billion in investments that Obama is offering, he is also agreeing to $600 billion in “reforms and savings, to our health care and other government programs.” The reductions, Geithner said, are on top of “the trillion dollars in spending cuts we agreed with republicans, last year, on defense and a range of other government programs.”

Republicans have demagogued the proposal. They oppose raising marginal tax rates, but are open to increasing revenue by closing loopholes and deductions, so long as those reforms are tied to unspecified “structural” changes to Medicare and Medicaid.

 

NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Saturday, December 1, 2012

YOUR REQUEST FOR SECEDING HAS BEEN GRANTED

 
Many tea bagging States have wanted to secede from the Union since the re-election of Barack Obama. Well POTUS has reviewed one States such request for leaving the USA.
  
 
 



Obviously this is satire, but wouldn't this be a great letter to send to the right wing nut jobs? I would bet the farm they would turncoat as quickly as they could.



NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Friday, November 30, 2012

WHAT FALLING OFF THE CLIFF COULD MEAN TO YOUR HEALTH



If President Barack Obama and Congress cannot reach an agreement on the fiscal cliff, economic experts agree it would be devastating.

It would likely send the country back into recession, according to the Congressional Budget Office, and some 3.4 million jobs would be lost. And ultimately, it could hurt your physical and emotional health.

That's because the part of the government that handles health-related programs -- Medicare, veterans' medical benefits, food safety inspectors -- all would be automatically cut starting January 2 if there is no agreement on the Budget Control Act. If not amended in time, the move would abruptly remove $1.2 trillion from the federal budget.

The BCA essentially forces Congress and the president to reach a budget agreement before the end of the year. If they do not and they do not amend the BCA, the Office of Management and Budget estimates each government division would see about an 8.2% budget cut. Medicare would face a 2% cut.

Many, including health care economist Ken Thorpe, are anxious to see that scenario avoided.
"I hope they will reach agreement quickly and do it in a thoughtful way," said Thorpe, a professor of health policy and management at Emory University. "Then next year we can really work on these important structural issues to slow growth in these programs, rather than these across-the-board cuts that would arbitrarily make cuts. It's not the smartest way to do it."


Ellie Dehoney, vice president of public policy and programs for Research!America, said her group has been hard at work visiting as many members of Congress as possible to stop across-the-board cuts. Her nonprofit is particularly concerned about cuts in medical research.

"Across-the-board cuts would put so many vital medical research programs at risk," Dehoney said. Her organization brought a handful of Parkinson's patients to meet with congressional officials. The patients told the representatives how medical advances made through research funded by the National Institutes of Health gave them hope for a cure for their Parkinson's and how much more research was necessary.
 "Many we met with were clearly moved by their stories," Dehoney said. "We have seen bipartisan support for medical research funding overall, but in a few offices we still heard about the need for more 'shared sacrifice.' That's why we are still working with such urgency."


The individual departments that will see their budgets cut aren't commenting on specifics. But clearly something would have to give if these departments have less with which to work.
"I don't think there is a lot of cushioning in these program's budgets to just move money around to cover all the demand for these services," said Ted Marmor, professor emeritus of public policy and management at Yale. "It is a real problem when you already have this serious buildup of pressure on state budgets and family budgets with the recession. A one-time sharp drop in the budget would be devastating for a lot of people who depend on these programs."



That means there would be a cut in health services, although it's unclear which specific services would be cut; agencies referred questions back to the OMB and its report.

What is known is the cuts would happen quickly, since under the law most budgets have to be cut in the first year of the act.
 "You wouldn't necessarily see the impact right at first, but agencies like the CDC will have to prioritize. Something will have to give, so you'd see a lab close here and a monitoring program end here, so down the road they won't able to monitor, say, a disease outbreak nearly as well as they can now," said Indivar Dutta-Gupta, who works with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

"The problem is, we already are seeing historic low spending on these types of programs, and even if the Congress and the president do reach an agreement and stop sequestration, the big worry is there may be even bigger cuts to these programs in the compromises they make."


If the country does go over the fiscal cliff and an agreement cannot be reached, here are general 10 ways it would hurt programs the government provides to help keep you and others healthy. The following budget estimates come from the latest OMB analysis:


Medicare

Some 50 million people rely on Medicare to cover their health care costs. The federal health insurance program, which is available to all people 65 and older and people with permanent disabilities, has seen a huge increase in people needing its help. Fewer companies offer retiree health benefits (down to only 25% of the population, according to the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation).

Automatically, 2% would be cut from this program's budget. While this is less than the general 8.2% across-the-board cuts for other federal programs, it would amount to a budget reduction of around $554.2 billion. That would mean payments to doctors, hospitals, long-term care facilities and nursing homes could be reduced significantly.

Health care providers already complain that the Medicare reimbursement rate is too low. Ultimately, those facilities could stop taking Medicare patients.

"Or there would be a cost shift," said Julie Barnes, director of health policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center. "That means, ultimately, they might have to charge private patients more. What else can they do? They've got to meet their expenses."


Food safety

The number of foods recalled because they were bad or dangerous hit one of the highest levels in four years in the fourth quarter of 2011, according to the Expert RECALL Index.

Listeria, botulism, E. coli, Salmonella -- deadly problems for the food supply -- have all been caught by government food inspectors. Yet even with those inspections, tens of millions of people get sick every year and more than 3,000 people die each year from food poisoning, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

An 8.2% cut would slash the budget for plant and animal health inspections by $1.08 billion. The budget for the Food Safety and Inspection Service agency would lose more than a billion dollars from its budget. An additional $38 million would have to come out of the budget for inspectors who monitor the safety of our grain supply and stockyards. That could mean fewer inspectors -- and fewer inspections, which ultimately could mean a food supply that isn't as safe as it is now.

CDC

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's work touches many health aspects of daily life. Its nurses and doctors, epidemiologists and technologists work to prevent the spread of food-borne illnesses, to stop the spread of the flu and monitor disease outbreaks, to reduce the number of hospital-acquired illnesses, to increase immunizations and to create tools to help communities protect public health, among many other health-related efforts. It would lose $6.8 billion from its budget.

NIH

Ultimately, this cut would impact academic labs and research institutions in every single state. The National Institutes of Health funds a wide variety of medical research. It spends millions to help scientists discover the root causes and cures for childhood diseases, cancer, autism, diabetes, lupus and many other illnesses.

Spending on biomedical and health research and development was already lower than it has been in years, according to Research!America. Cuts now could have a severe, long-term impact on research, which could lead to fewer cures and therapies to fight common diseases. This department would lose more than $30.7 billion from its budget.

Food for lower-income families

The Women Infant and Children Supplemental Nutrition Program, known as WIC, helps feed families who are considered a nutritional risk because they can't afford to buy food. The program also teaches people about nutrition and provides referrals for health services.

Some 16.4% of the U.S. population is considered "food insecure," according to FeedingAmerica.org. That's more than 48 million people.

About $6.6 billion would be taken out of this program's budget.

Separately, child nutrition programs would be cut by $19.7 billion. Commodity Assistance would lose $263 million. Other nutrition programs would lose $139 million. And the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program would lose $87.3 billion.

Maternal, Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program

This is a home visiting program that helps pregnant women or women with children younger than 5 who may need additional help with maternal and child health issues. It also works to prevent abuse, neglect or child injuries because of an unsafe environment in the neighborhood or home.

Studies show this program reduces crime and incidents of domestic violence. It also increases a family's economic self-sufficiency. This program would see a $400 million reduction in its budget.

Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes

Children in at least 4 million households are still being exposed to the dangers of lead, according to the CDC. Lead poisoning, which disproportionately hurts children, can curtail nervous system development, lead to behavioral disorders and cause headaches, anemia, seizures and even de

The Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control is a federal agency established to eliminate lead-based paint hazards in private homes and low-income housing. The Healthy Homes program also helps prevent disease and injuries that result from housing-related hazards such as radon, poor indoor air quality and even poor lighting that can lead to falls.

The CDC estimates more than 11,000 people die each year from preventable unintentional injuries, including falls, fires and poisonings in unsafe homes. This program would lose $120 million.

Department of Homeland Security, Office of Health Affairs

The Office of Health Affairs in the Department of Homeland Security is something Americans want to be fully operational if terrorists attack the country using chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear weapons. It serves as the department's authority for all medical and health issues. The office also provides experts to the department's leadership, builds national plans in case of terrorist attacks, helps first responders and protects the department itself from health threats. It would lose $167 million from its budget.

Veterans' health

An increasing number of people use services provided by the Veterans Health Administration. That's not a surprise when our nation has recently been involved in two major wars and Vietnam vets are at an age where they require more medical services.

About a quarter of the population is eligible for VA benefits and services. The VA managed some 80.2 million outpatient visits in 2010 alone. The department would lose $5.8 billion from its budget for Medical Support and Compliance and $45.5 billion for medical services. Some $581 million would be cut from medical and prosthetic research and $5.69 billion from its medical facilities budget. The Department of Defense-VA health care sharing incentive fund would lose $30 million.

 Social Security

Since the start of the recession, there has been a marked increase in the need for federal disability insurance as provided by Social Security. According to the last available census data, more than 8 million people are considered too disabled to work and receive this benefit from the government.

Automatic cuts would dramatically reduce these services. The federal disability insurance budget alone would be cut $2.9 billion for discretionary spending, and $144 billion for mandatory spending.

 
 

NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Thursday, November 29, 2012

LEADER OF THE PACK

Tea Bagger  Ken Cucci

Move over Joe Walsh, Steve King, Michele Bachmann, Allen West, Bobby Jindal, Todd Akin, Jan Brewer, Sarah Palin and Zombie Ronald Reagan. The far-right has a new national hero, and it's Virginia Republican Ken Cuccinelli. That crazy bastard is going places!

On the day his chief rival for the GOP gubernatorial nod dropped out of contention, Virginia Republicans rallied around Cuccinelli — their attorney general who spearheaded a lawsuit against Obamacare and ruled in 2010 that police officers are allowed to check the immigration status of those they stop or arrest.

Cuccinelli hasn't won the governorship yet, mind you, but he's got all the right fixins to become the newest Republican national darling and/or national embarrassment. He hates all the right things, and is willing to spend heaps of other people's money to screw with the things he hates:
As attorney general, Cuccinelli sued the Environmental Protection Agency over greenhouse gas regulations. He lost a court fight to release the emails of a University of Virginia professor who studies climate change. He pushed for building regulations that make it harder for abortion clinics to operate. He issued advisory opinions that made it harder for schools to prevent students from bringing guns onto campus.

He's Arizona-plus levels of crabby about immigration:
 
He then lists accomplishments on immigration such as seeking to use the office of the attorney general to implement E-Verify for state employers, opposition to in-state tuition for illegal immigrants and the fact that he sponsored a law that allows termination of state contractors who knowingly employ illegal immigrants.

He's got the requisite people saying that once you get to know him, he seems real nice for an anti---everything far-right aggressively mean asshole:

“He’s totally normal. That’s what gets me,” [Dave] Albo said. “When Ken was in the Senate, we’d play pool late at night and drink beer. He’s funny. He’s nice. … The problem is it’s very hard to have a personal conversation with eight and a half million people. … He’s really going to have to go out and meet people. I just don’t think we win this thing on the air.”

And the right establishment Republicans worrying that maybe putting an anti-Obamacare, anti-immigrant, pro-guns-in-schools anti-abortion climate-denier out as the fresh new face of their party is maybe, you know, stupid:
“If the attorney general is the nominee, we don’t yet know what themes he will run on,” [Former VA Gov. Jim Gilmore] said after Bolling’s announcement. “We don’t know whether his background is something he can run on. … There’s no way of answering that question yet.”.
All the elements are in place for the rise of a new tea party hero, so you'll be hearing a lot about Cuccinelli in the next year. It couldn't have come at a more opportune time, either. Conservative heroes tend to have a short shelf life, frequently losing their national appeal somewhere near the moment when people start actually paying attention to them. Let's watch, shall we?

Blog from Daily Kos.




NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

GUNS, GUNS, AND MORE GUNS

BUY GUNS AS OBAMA TO TAKE THEM SOON


Gun sales reached an all-time high on a record Black Friday shopping day, fresh off an election where conservatives claimed Obama harbors a secret plot to take away guns.

Firearm dealers swamped the FBI with 155,000 required background checks on Friday, 20 percent more than last year. The reasons why, dealers say, include a growing number of women buyers, as well as fears — promoted by the NRA during the campaign — that Obama may call for stricter gun laws in his second term, such as a renewed assault weapon ban. Though the NRA feared the same during Obama’s first term, he has yet to take action after several mass shootings. Obama has even weakened some gun regulation.



NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

OBAMA STOLE ELECTION....


...Says VA Tea Bagger Ken Cuccinelli


Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R) told a radio host he completely agreed with her assertion that investigations are needed to determine why President Obama lost “every one” of the states with photo identification requirements for voting, yet won re-election. Cuccinelli, who has lost most of the major legal cases he has brought since taking office in 2010, told the host she was “preaching to the choir.”

On WMAL radio, hosts Brian Wilson and Cheri Jacobus pressed Cuccinelli about why he has not opened a major investigation into what they suggested was wide-spread voter fraud in Virginia — an assessment they made based on receiving unproven allegations by email from listeners. Studies have shown Americans are more likely to be struck by lightning than to commit voter fraud. Cuccinelli endorsed the idea of such investigations, but noted that he lacks the statutory authority to do launch an investigation.

Cuccinelli backed Jacobus on her conspiracy theories:
JACOBUS: There needs to be a way for people to be able to report this stuff and have it looked into. I mean, just across the country, we’re hearing so many stories. And people can talk about it, but nothing seems to be done. And, in fact in these states where voter ID is required to vote…

WILSON: Photo ID.

JACOBUS: Photo ID. Voter photo ID. Obama lost every one of those states. He can’t win a state where photo ID is required. So clearly there’s something going on out there and until there’s a way to have something done about it where when you report it, you know it’s going to be looked into, the other side just says “Oh, well, you’re just poor losers,” and that sort of thing.

CUCCINELLI: Your tone suggests you’re a little upset with me. You’re preaching to the choir. I’m with you completely


 
 


Of course, real voter fraud can be reported to local police authorities for investigation. And while just four states had strict photo ID laws in effect in the 2012 election — deep red Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, and Tennessee — seven more had some photo ID laws in effect. Of those, Obama did carry four (Florida, Hawaii, Michigan, and New Hampshire).

Cuccinelli announced in December that he will run for governor in November 2013.

A spokesman for the Attorney General later appeared to walk-back his comments, telling the Virginian-Pilot, “There is no question that President Obama legitimately won re-election. Ken was simply talking about the fact that there were problems on election day which need to be addressed.”

 
NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Monday, November 26, 2012

FLORIDA TEA BAGGERS ADMIT TO VOTER SUPPRESSION



Floridians endured election chaos and marathon voting lines this year, largely thanks to reduced early voting hours, voter purges, and voter registration restrictions pushed by Republican legislators. In an exclusive report by the Palm Beach Post, several prominent Florida Republicans are now admitting that these election law changes were geared toward suppressing minority and Democratic votes.

Former governor Charlie Crist (R-FL) and former GOP chairman Jim Greer (R-FL), as well as several current GOP members, told the Post that Republican consultants pushed the new measures as a way to suppress Democratic voters. Crist expanded early voting hours in 2008 despite party pressure, but Gov. Rick Scott (R-FL) targeted early voting almost immediately when he took office in 2011. Scott’s administration claimed the new laws were meant to curb in-person voter fraud, despite the fact that an individual in Florida is more likely to be struck by lightning than commit voter fraud.

Current party members and consultants confirmed the motive was not to stop voter fraud but to make it harder for Democrats and minorities to vote:
Wayne Bertsch, who handles local and legislative races for Republicans, said he knew targeting Democrats was the goal. “In the races I was involved in in 2008, when we started seeing the increase of turnout and the turnout operations that the Democrats were doing in early voting, it certainly sent a chill down our spines. And in 2008, it didn’t have the impact that we were afraid of. It got close, but it wasn’t the impact that they had this election cycle,” Bertsch said, referring to the fact that Democrats picked up seven legislative seats in Florida in 2012 despite the early voting limitations.

Another GOP consultant, who did not want to be named, also confirmed that influential consultants to the Republican Party of Florida were intent on beating back Democratic turnout in early voting after 2008.


A GOP consultant who asked to remain anonymous out of fear of retribution said black voters were a concern. “I know that the cutting out of the Sunday before Election Day was one of their targets only because that’s a big day when the black churches organize themselves,” he said.

Though the state ultimately went to President Obama, the Republican effort to suppress votes was largely successful. A post-election report found that new voting restrictions led to a huge increase in provisional ballots, which are cast when there is some question of the voter’s eligibility.

While crying voter fraud, the Florida GOP had to confront its own scandal when a voter registration firm they hired turned in hundreds of fraudulent registration forms in several Florida counties. The GOP hastily cut ties with the group when the state opened a criminal investigation into their operations.

 
NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

WE ARE BACK

After a lengthy time off the air we are back. We apologize to our loyal readers for this inconvenience and we thankyou for your patience while NFTOS was off the air.

We shall have a blog up shortly.


NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Saturday, November 17, 2012

VA TEA BAGGER SAYS…………..

……..”OBAMA IS GOING TO HELL”


Virginia Republican party official Bob FitzSimmonds is by no means a fortune teller, but he feels confident guessing that President Obama is going to hell.

In a Facebook posting, FitzSimmonds, who is a close associate of Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, speculated that Obama would live a long life but when he died at 90, he would be going to hell:
 
 
 
 



FitzSimmonds stood by those comments, telling the Virginia-Pilot, “my Facebook post was not about Obama going to Hell. It was about his obsession with blame shifting and I don’t really see anything inappropriate about it.”

But a spokesman for Cuccinelli, who is running for Virginia governor, was quick to dismiss the comments, saying “Mr. FitzSimmonds does not speak for our campaign, and we don’t agree with his assessment.”


NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Thursday, November 15, 2012

DUMBFUCKISTAN, THE UNTED STATES OF CAUCASIA, THE UNITED FLAKES OF AMERICA


TEA BAGGERS TO SECEDE FROM THE UNION

Any day that you can repeat the famous “Don’t Eat The Brown Acid” line from the 1968 Woodstock festival - its a good day for NFTOS. Today, we can thank the Tea Party and its radical membership of Tea-Baggers for the opportunity. Unfortunately, the warning may be too late.

The whole idea of the often socially awkward, old, pasty white, conservative Americans gathering together to derail a black President is far more reminiscent of the early bird dinner hour at an AARP convention - rather than the batshit crazy idea of the current tea baggers to secede from the Union.

Then again, what could we expect? The Tea-Baggers have been tripping on some sort of hallucinogen since their creation - which is a blurred and warped perception of historical events. They have stripped the founding fathers from the history books. They think it is patriotic for their states to secede from the union. They deny that Medicare was created as and continues to be, a government program.

According to Red Alert Politics, less than a week after a New Orleans suburbanite petitioned the White House to allow Louisiana to secede from the United States, petitions from seven states have collected enough signatures to trigger a promised review from the Obama administration. Red Alert Politics is a site where links can be found to all the online petitions for secession for each state and the number of signatures obtained thus far.

 By 6:00 a.m. EST Wednesday, more than 675,000 digital signatures appeared on 69 separate secession petitions covering all 50 states, according to a Daily Caller analysis of requests lodged with the White House’s “We the People” online petition system.





Red Alert Politics comments that “these petitions serve more to make a point than to present a serious proposition, they are a physical symbol of the deep resentment for the direction in which the United States is moving under the Obama administration.” For many people, this is likely the case. For them, it is much more a bluff for flair’s sake. However, there are plenty of people who genuinely like the idea of seceding from an Obama administrated country. Now, some states who have petitioned have stated that should they secede they would remain allies of the US and would maybe consider returning to the Union if they desire to later. This baffles me. People genuinely believe that it is alright to go as far as SECEDING FROM THE UNION because they aren’t grown up enough to accept that the other guy won and think that should they secede they could come back whenever they feel like it? To paraphrase Einstein, either I am crazy or everyone else is, because I can honestly say I do not understand people to even the tiniest degree.





I say to those whom want to secede from the USA, Once you figure it out….please don’t delay! Um...idiots, party of dumb, your train is leaving!



NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

THIS IS HOW AMERICA WILL LOOK UNDER THE GOP RULE


Savita Halappanavar, a 31-year-old Indian woman living in Ireland, went to the hospital when she first began to miscarry — but thanks to Ireland’s stringent abortion ban, medical professionals denied her repeated requests to quickly terminate the pregnancy because they could still detect a fetal heartbeat. The Irish hospital required her to extend her miscarriage over three days until the fetus’ heartbeat officially stopped, and by that time, Halappanavar had developed serious blood poisoning. She passed away just a few days later.

Halappanavar’s death helps highlight the tragic effect of Ireland’s stringent abortion ban, but the impact of that type of restrictive legislation isn’t just limited to that country. In fact, lawmakers in Ohio are quietly pushing extreme anti-abortion legislation that would subject the women in that state to a situation incredibly similar to the one in Ireland.

During this year’s lame duck session, Ohio legislators are planning to revive HB 125, a so-called “heartbeat” bill that would ban abortions as soon as a fetal heartbeat can be detected — which can first occur as early as five or six weeks, before many women may even know they’re pregnant. The proposed legislation represents the most restrictive abortion ban in the United States. If HB 125 is passed, it would criminalize all abortions after the emergence of a fetal heartbeat without allowing even the narrowest exceptions in potential cases of rape, incest, or the mental health of the woman.

Even if Ohio’s bill includes some kind of provision that would allow women to seek abortions in life-threatening situations, Halappanavar’s death points to the fact that health risks aren’t always immediately apparent. A 1992 Supreme Court ruling in Ireland amended the country’s abortion ban to include an exception in cases where the woman’s life is in danger, but Irish hospitals don’t always know how far that medical exception can stretch. They are often reluctant to provide women with abortion services unless the situation is very clearly life-threatening — and for women like Halappanavar, that can already be too late.

And in cases where the fetus is not expected to survive — when women like Halappanavar are undergoing a miscarriage, or when doctors discover fatal fetal defects — anti-abortion legislation is often murky, even in this country. In Arizona, where a stringent abortion ban outlaws the procedure after just 20 weeks, women who discover fatal defects that will not allow their fetus to survive are forced to carry the fetus to term anyway.



NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY

 
A very dumb 22-year-old tea bagging woman has been fired from her job at Cold Stone Creamery after commenting on her Facebook page that President Obama might get assassinated during his second term.
 

 
Helms’ ignorant post raised some eyebrows, mostly from outraged Facebook folks who may already be familiar with the law forbidding anyone from making threats against the President’s life.


As word got around of the Helms’ indiscretion she was promptly fired from her gig at the local ice cream shop as well as being reported to Secret Service.
 


 







Ms. Helms is a racist, this is what a racist looks and sounds like. Pure unadulterated racist! Ms. Helms can evoke stupidity, better known as unlettered GOP "Plausible Deniability", but make no qualms about it, she is a f*&king racist. Hopefully this dumb bitch is all talk and no action, hopefully the Secret Service, her being fired, and her fiftenn minutes of fame - have given her a wake up call, a much needed wake up call.
 
 Let's not forget readers, "you can't be a racist if you have black friends"!
 
 
 
 
 
NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West 
 


Monday, November 12, 2012

POOPY- HEAD


Let the name calling begin. Grover Norquist, founder of Americans for Tax Reform, blamed Mitt Romney’s election loss on the Obama campaign’s painting the Republican candidate as a “poopy-head.”



I'm curious, is Grover Norquist a Senator, or Representative, or Governor? Has he Ever been elected into some political office? Rhetorical question, I know. The answer is NO. So, the more pertinent question is: why is this non-entity dictating fiscal policy?



It is generally accepted that the most powerful man in the world is the President of the United States. After all, he controls the largest military in the world and holds the highest office in the greatest superpower. However, one could argue that at this time in history the most powerful man in the world isn't even an elected official, but instead, a lobbyist. Sound a little crazy? Maybe, but consider for a moment that real power is money and when it comes to matters of the budget, the President has little more than veto power. It's the Congress who controls the purse strings and unfortunately this lobbyist controls 95% of the Republicans in Congress.

So who is this Svengali-like lobbyist? His name is Grover Norquist and besides being a lobbyist, he is a conservative activist, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and founder of Americans for Tax Reform. Most importantly, he is the promoter of the "Taxpayer Protection Pledge," which was signed by 95% of all Republican Congressmen and all but one of the 2012 Republican presidential candidates. The pledge basically demands the pledgers oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rate for individuals and business; and to oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates. That might not sound like such a bad idea in of itself, but the fact that 95% of our Republican leaders signed a pledge to follow a lobbyist is a little unnerving.

What power does he hold over them that they willingly pledge their obedience to him, even if it threatens the country's economic stability? This pledge leaves no room for compromise and is greatly responsible for the unprecedented gridlock. As we all know, the President wants' to let the Bush tax cuts expire for the wealthy. If the Republicans were to agree to that, it would certainly help reduce the budget deficit but would go against their pledge. They have a choice; compromise with the President, or keep their pledge to Grover. Their decision will inevitably tell us who has more clout with them, the President of The United States or a lobbyist. Personally, I 'm rooting that they side with our President because we can't risk another stalemate like the one that led to last years downgrading of America's credit rating. If our leaders can't come together to bridge the upcoming fiscal cliff we are surely headed for a more severe economic recession.

This is the man that the American Taliban is pinning all its hopes and dreams on, this non-whimsical troglodyte. President Bush41 said it best. "Who the hell is Grover Norquist". He could quite possibly be the first dictator that never held an office in this country


NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West