Sunday, December 2, 2012

Fwd: UN Agenda 21 Vote Imminent In Senate



Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

From: Western Journalism <wcj@westernjournalism.com>
Date: December 2, 2012 10:02:09 AM CST
To: <Bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com>
Subject: UN Agenda 21 Vote Imminent In Senate
Reply-To: Western Journalism <wcj@westernjournalism.com>

The Senate Is About To Vote On A United Nations Treaty That Will Eradicate Your Parental Rights, Mandate Worldwide Abortion, Sexualize Your Children And Institute Population-Control... Not In Some Far-Off Land, But Right Here At Home.

UN Flag       It's no joke... no exaggeration and your sovereignty is in imminent jeopardy because this vote is days... or perhaps even hours... away.

       But to make matters worse, nine RINO Senators (Ayotte, Barrasso, Brown, Collins, Hatch, Lugar, McCain, Murkowski and Snowe) voted in lock-step with Barack Obama and Harry Reid, on Tuesday, to bring the deceptively titled United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) Treaty to the floor of the Senate for consideration.

      And a vote on ratification can happen at any moment... and we must not allow this sovereignty-stealing treaty to be ratified.

       Don't let the name of this treaty deceive you. CRPD has NOTHING to do with protecting the rights of those with disabilities and EVERYTHING to do with putting your very life under the control of UN thugs and bureaucrats.

       The Heritage Foundation tells us, CRPD "would subject the U.S. to untold threats against its sovereignty and invite further intrusion by UN officials into sensitive social and domestic policies."

       But you can stop CRPD. A sufficient number of Republican Senators are already inclined to oppose the ratification of this sovereignty-stealing treaty and these Senators need to hear from you right now.

Use the button or the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every one of the 47 Republican Members of the United States Senate.

If button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.



CRPD Is A Ploy To Trick Us Into Voluntarily Surrendering Our Sovereignty.

     Anyone familiar with the United Nations already knows that this tyrannical, international body of third-world despots typically hides its attempts to steal your sovereignty behind innocent-sounding programs and treaties.

       CRPD is no different.

       Perhaps that's why former Senator Rick Santorum, the father of a handicapped child, recently joined others in vigorously denouncing CRPD, saying it would "open a Pandora's box" that represents a "direct assault on us and our families."

       But there is good news. It only takes 34 votes in the Senate to stop the ratification of a treaty, and 36 Republican Senators voted in opposition to even considering this treaty on Tuesday.

       But these 36 votes against ratification ARE NOT certain... far from it.

       As you read this urgent appeal, these Republican Senators are probably being pressed, behind the scenes, to change their votes.

       And if we stay silent now, more betrayals will come.  That's why we must act now to secure the position of those Senators who are inclined to stand with the American people.

Use the button or the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every one of the 47 Republican Members of the United States Senate.

If button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.



CRPD Is A Ploy To Trick Us Into Voluntarily Surrendering Our Sovereignty.

     Specifically Heritage said that "ratification of the [CRPD] is more than merely superfluous; the [CRPD] threatens American sovereignty in a variety of ways. As with other human rights treaties, the [CRPD] established a treaty body composed of unelected 'experts' ... that evaluates the compliance of state parties to the treaty."

     Put another way, if we ratify this treaty, what actually constitutes your individual civil liberties will no longer be dictated by our Constitution, but by an unelected panel of a dozen of America-haters at the United Nations.

     There can be no mistake, CRPD is all about the surrender of our national sovereignty... but we're in no mood to surrender it... and we're not going to stand by a let it happen without a fight.

  Senator Jim DeMint said: "We don't need to go beyond our Constitution and federalist system by allowing our fundamental rights to be dictated by unaccountable and unelected international bureaucrats."

  John Bolton, the former-Ambassador to the United Nations, was making an obvious reference to the CRPD as the hat-trick to LOST and ATT (UN treaties that your calls and faxes helped to defeat) when he recently said: "I think there are a lot of threats to American sovereignty that the Obama administration has had cooking in the UN They've kept it kind of low key."

  And Bonnie Alba, an independent columnist, who served in various positions in the Department of Defense, said of the United Nations: "[I]f we acquiesce to the UN plan to run the world under the guise of helping the poor and weak, there is one guarantee. Over time all nations would lose their national sovereignty to the UN which would end up performing as a Banana Republic Dictatorship through enforced collection of taxes. And accountable to no one."

       And what is perhaps the ultimate irony is that this treaty, if ratified, would probably do nothing to safeguard the innate, inalienable (and yes, God-given) rights of people with disabilities.

       Instead, it WOULD erode (or even eradicate) the civil liberties of your children and grandchildren; and that's why we must speak out and make our voices heard at this very moment.

Use the button or the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every one of the 47 Republican Members of the United States Senate.

If button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.



But Just How Does Safeguarding The Rights Of The Disabled Erode Our Sovereignty?

       Mike Farris with the Home School Legal Defense Fund clues us in to the first bit of United Nations trickery on CRPD when he tells us that the "CRPD provides no specific definition of disability."

       Farris is not alone. This treaty NEVER defines the term "disability." Heritage concurs: "Other language in [the CRPD] is troubling... such as its lack of a clear definition of disability, which it defines as 'an evolving concept.'"

       Of course, neglecting to clearly define the term "DISABILITY" in the 50 distinct articles of the "Convention on the Rights of Persons with DISABILITIES" treaty WAS NO ACCIDENT. It's Standard United Nations Operating Procedure.

       And why did the UN neglect to define the key term of the treaty... a term that is in the title of the treaty?

       As Heritage put it, to permit "a treaty body composed of unelected 'experts,'" to define this "evolving concept" as they go.

       The definition of what constitutes "disabilities" and "rights" will constantly change, expand and morph to include greater numbers of people, and as more "rights" are allocated to an ever-increasing numbers of people who are deemed "disabled," others will demand these newly created special "rights" as well.

       Don't confuse the term "disability" with the term "physical handicap."

       In UN-speak there are many kinds of disabilities; social disabilities, economic disabilities, racial disabilities, gender disabilities... the list is endless.

      And as our enemies continually abuse this "evolving concept," they will impose unconstitutional and even sublimely ridiculous mandates upon you, your children and your grandchildren, under the guise of "securing the 'rights' of the 'disabled.'"  

Use the button or the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every one of the 47 Republican Members of the United States Senate.

If button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.



And This Erosion Of Our Sovereignty Will Be Totally Constitutional.

       We won't be able to close Pandora's Box once it is flung open.

       If this treaty is ratified, our own cowardly politicians will tell us that we are obliged to follow the DICTATES of this body of third-world thugs and America-haters (and tyrannically enforce OUR compliance on THEIR behalf).

       Article VI of our own Constitution requires compliance: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

       As for our enemies, they won't comply.  All the America-haters at the United Nations will simply turn their backs, wink at each other and look at us with feigned expressions of confusion on their faces.

      'What do you mean Iran is not complying with the provisions of the treaty... of course they're in compliance... however, the other member nations of the panel would like to address some more issues involving your compliance with you.'

       After all, THEY define the terms and THEY make the rules as they go.

      As with so many United Nations treaties and resolutions, CRPD will mean whatever THEY say it means on any given day, and our children and grandchildren will be left with no national sovereignty... no individual liberties... and a wreaked economy... reduced to serfdom under the iron fist and the autocratic rule of those who despise freedom, liberty, and most of all, us... but it doesn't have to be that way. We can put a stop this menace today.

Use the button or the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every one of the 47 Republican Members of the United States Senate.

If button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.



Did You Know That The Promotion Of The Radical Worldwide Abortion Movement Goes Hand In Hand With Safeguarding The Rights Of Persons With Disabilities?

     And just what do abortion and the rights of the disabled have to do with each other? We still don't know, but we DO KNOW that the United Nations has become infamous over the years, for constantly sneaking coded abortion advocacy language into treaties and resolutions that should have nothing whatsoever to do with abortion; and CRPD is no exception.

       Article 25 of the CRPD which addresses issues of "Health" states that the "State Parties" are mandated to "take all appropriate measures" to ensure those covered under the treaty have access to "gender-sensitive" health services... and "free or affordable health care and programmes... in the area of sexual and reproductive health..."  (that's UN-speak for state-mandated abortion).

       And if you believe that we're exaggerating; consider what happened when Senator Marco Rubio actually introduced an amendment to the CRPD in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee which simple stated:

     "The United States understands that the phrase 'sexual and reproductive health' in Article 25(a) of the Convention does not include abortion, and its use in that article does not create any abortion rights, cannot be interpreted to constitute support, endorsement, or promotion of abortion, and in no way suggests that abortion be promoted as a method of family planning."

       ALL HELL BROKE LOOSE.  Chloe Cooney with the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) probably shrieked as she wrote: "These extreme views in opposition to women's rights and U.S. participation in the global community only succeed in marginalizing a bipartisan effort like the [CRPD],"

       Senator Barbara Boxer hypocritically admonished Rubio: "No senator in my view should use any international treaty to push his or her views on an issue that isn't part of this treaty."

       Did you catch that? The United Nations is advancing a treaty that allegedly attempts to safeguard the innate and inalienable rights of persons with disabilities and interjects the promotion of abortion into the document THROUGH THE USE OF CODE WORDS; and when a Marco Rubio sought to clarify that the treaty on the rights of the disabled "in no way suggests that abortion be promoted as a method of family planning," Barbara Boxer and her denizens of the Left accused RUBIO of interjecting HIS "views on an issue" into the debate.

      By the way, the Democrats and the RINOs on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted Rubio's amendment down. That's why we need 34 Senators to stand firm in their opposition to this dastardly treaty.

Use the button or the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every one of the 47 Republican Members of the United States Senate.

If button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.



And Did You Know That Our Children Have The "Right" To Sexual Gratification From The Moment They Emerge From The Womb And This Disability Treaty Is Going To Enforce That "Right" Too?

     Senator DeMint and Mike Farris have very real and well-founded concerns when it comes to Article 7 of the CRPD, which mandates that states ensure that "the best interests of the child" shall be the primary consideration in all actions concerning the "rights" of the child.

       As Farris, one of the nation's leading homeschool advocate states: "Should the government's assessment of the child's best interests differ from that of the parents, the government gets to make the decision, not the parents."

       DeMint says: "We're afraid that if the language suggests that parental authority is not absolute, we're going to have an international body telling our parents they can't homeschool."

       But what DeMint and Farris don't address is that the dangers posed by this treaty to your children and grandchildren are far worse because the UN believes that children have "sexual rights."

       Article 23 of the CRPD, deceptively and ironically titled, "Respect For Home And The Family" mandates that children have "access to age-appropriate information, reproductive and family planning education are recognized, and the means necessary to enable them to exercise these rights are provided."

       And what the United Nations typically means when it uses the term "age-appropriate" in reference to "reproductive and family planning education," doesn't mean what you think it means... at least not to far too many United Nations officials and NGOs.

       One of the good-guys, Family Watch International, a NGO that attempts to prevent some of the more radical anti-family notions that come out of the United Nations from ever seeing the light of day, tells us about the term "age-appropriate:"

  "The International Guidelines on Sexuality Education," which is a "publication issued by UNESCO, UNICEF and the United Nations Population Fund "maintains that children have a right to receive instruction in sexual pleasure, masturbation and homosexuality..."

  Other UNESCO guidelines tell us that children as young as five-years-old should be taught "that they can touch their body parts for sexual pleasure" and;

  A significant number of activists connected to the United Nations assert "that children are sexual from birth, and as such, are entitled to experience sexual pleasure."

       Volumes have been written on this subject, but the vast majority of people have never read anything issued by the United Nations and United Nations' recognized NGOs; and if you are so ignorant as to believe that the sexualization of your child is not "age-appropriate"... well that's just too bad as far as the United Nations is concerned.

       Remember the reports of UN officials operating child sex rings in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Sudan and Guinea and other countries? Remember the reports of UN officials using a ship charted for 'peacekeepers' to traffick young girls from Thailand to East Timor?

       Well... under the terms of the treaty, the United States Government will be mandated to enforce the dissemination of "age-appropriate information" and "reproductive and family planning education" to your child, whether you, as the parent, like it or not. It's your child's "right."

       After all, your "age-disabled" five-year old child has a "right" to "sex education." Your five-year old has a right to gratifying relationships... and if you don't like it... tough.

       As Senator Boxer would probably say, you won't have a right to "push" your personal "views on an issue that isn't part of this treaty."

       We say "nuts" to that... our God-given liberties are non-negotiable and it's essential that we communicate that message to our elected officials.

Use the button or the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every one of the 47 Republican Members of the United States Senate.

If button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.



And Did You Further Know That Population-Control And The Rights Of The Disabled Go Hand In Hand Too?

     Article 25 of the CRPD, which has already been quoted in part, also MANDATES that "State Parties" provide access to "population-based public health programmes...." And just what is a "population-based public health" program?

       One example that may already be familiar to you is something called "Agenda 21." If not, a good, hard, look at Barack Obama's Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, John P. Holdren, should more accurately solidify what is meant by "population-based public health programmes" in your mind.

       As it turns out, Van Jones wasn't the only "nut" in Obama's inner-circle, and what is probably even more startling is that the United States Senate actually confirmed Holdren.

       In 1997, Holdren co-authored a textbook entitled "Ecoscience," which advocated mass sterilization, compulsory abortion, one-world government and the establishment of a global police force to enforce these population control measures... errrr... "rights."

       Here are several more of the "greatest hits" from Holdren's tome:

  "Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution [he's talking about the United States Constitution] if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society." - Page 837

  "If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization." - Page 917

  "... a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable... the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade... including all food on the international market." - Pages 942 and 943

  "The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries' shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits." - Pages 942 and 943

      Heard enough? If so, it's time to take kill this disastrous and tyrannical UN treaty once and for all.

Use the button or the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every one of the 47 Republican Members of the United States Senate.

If button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.

Floyd Brown

 

 

 

 

Floyd Brown

The  Western Center for Journalism is a 501©3 educational organization. Contributions are tax-deductible as allowed by IRS regulations. Personal and corporate contributions are allowed.

The Center for Western Journalism
 42104 N Venture Drive Suite B-122, Anthem, AZ 85086  (202) 370-6366






Sent to Bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com — why did I get this?
unsubscribe from this list | update subscription preferences
Western Journalism · 42104 N Venture Drive, Suite B-122 · Anthem, AZ 85086
Posted by at No comments:

Better get your guns, UN / BHO going to get them!!!!



Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Newsmax.com" <newsmax@reply.newsmax.com>
Date: December 2, 2012 2:16:46 PM CST
To: "Bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com" <Bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com>
Subject: Seven of 10 Richest Members of Congress Are Democrats
Reply-To: newsmax@reply.newsmax.com

Click here to view this email as a web page
Newsmax.com


Insider Report from Newsmax.com

Headlines (Scroll down for complete stories):
1. Seven of 10 Richest Members of Congress Are Democrats
2. National Review and The Nation Join Forces for Ad Sales
3. EPA Rejects Governors' Plea Over Ethanol
4. Warren Buffett Tax Plan Called 'Fiscal Joke'
5. Black Friday Gun Sales Set New Record
6. Miami Becoming the 'Russian Riviera'

1. Seven of 10 Richest Members of Congress Are Democrats

For the second year in a row, Republican Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas is the richest member of Congress, with a reported net worth of $305 million — the first time a Washington lawmaker has surpassed the $300 million mark.

Roll Call's annual list of the 50 richest members of Congress reveals that seven of the top 10 are Democrats — and four of the 10 owe their fortunes to wealthy spouses.

McCaul, a former federal prosecutor, reported in 2010 that his wife had received assets as gifts from her parents, boosting his net worth from some $73 million to at least $294 million that year. His wife Linda is the daughter of Clear Channel Communications Inc. CEO and founder Lowry Mays.

Roll Call determines the minimum net worth of members by subtracting the total minimum value of all liabilities from the total minimum value of all assets. Lawmakers do not have to report the value of personal residences as an asset.

The assets and liabilities are listed in broad ranges, making it difficult to calculate a lawmaker's exact minimum net worth, Roll Call pointed out.

Second on the 2012 list of richest members of Congress is Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., up from No. 3 last year with a net worth of $199 million. His wife Teresa Heinz Kerry is the widow of the late Sen. H. John Heinz III of the Heinz ketchup fortune.

At No. 3, down one place this year, is Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., at $141 million. Issa is the founder of Directed Electronics Inc., which makes car alarms.

Next on the list is Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., at $86 million. He made his fortune as co-founder of Nextel Communications Inc.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V., is No. 5, with $83 million. He is the great-grandson of Standard Oil Co. founder John D. Rockefeller.

He is followed by Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., at $79 million. His wife Cynthia Blumenthal is the daughter of New York real estate mogul Peter Malkin.

Another Democrat, Rep. Jared Polis of Colorado, is No. 7 with a net worth of $72 million. Much of his wealth comes from Blue Mountain Arts, his family's greeting card and publishing business.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, yet another Democrat, is No. 8 at $57 million. He is co-founder of Automatic Data Processing, a payroll processing company.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., No. 9 on the list, owes her fortune to her husband Richard Blum, president and CEO of the private equity firm Blum Capital Partners LP. Her net worth is estimated at $42 million.

Rep. Jim Renacci, R-Ohio, is No. 10 with a net worth of $37 million. He has significant investments in fast-food chains, electronics companies, pharmaceutical companies, and oil giants, according to Roll Call.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California is at No. 13, with a net worth of $26 million, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky is at No. 37 with $9 million.

The "poorest" member on the list is Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., with a net worth of $6.28 million.

Editor's Note:


2. National Review and The Nation Join Forces for Ad Sales

Publishing, like politics, can make for strange bedfellows.

The conservative National Review and the liberal magazine The Nation have teamed up for a combined sales effort, offering advertisers spots in both magazines at a steeply discounted rate.

"Both magazines have always targeted corporate marketers and have always come up short because of a brand's nervousness about being associated with distinct political views," Folio magazine observed.

Scott Budd, executive editor of National Reviews, said: "When we sell this audience to people separately, we run into the same hurdle. [Advertisers] love who these people are, but they can't put a publicly traded company into such partisan magazines."

By joining forces, Folio noted, marketers can buy both magazines, reach the desired demographics and "sufficiently neutralize any political backlash."

And Teresa Stack, president of The Nation, says advertisers are "skittish about advertising on one side or the other, and this mitigates it because they're talking to both sides."

The combination of the red National Review and blue The Nation is being called the "Purple Network."

The six-month-old program is focusing on the 2013 buying cycle, and Budd says the two publications may try a similar deal on the digital side.

Editor's Note:


3. EPA Rejects Governors' Plea Over Ethanol

The governors of seven drought-afflicted states petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency, asking for a suspension of rules requiring refiners to blend biofuel — mostly ethanol — into the nation's gasoline supply.

The governors of Georgia, Texas, Arkansas, North Carolina, Maryland, New Mexico, and Delaware contended that the renewable fuel standard (RFS) program requiring the use of biofuel, combined with the worst drought in 40 years, had pushed corn prices to record highs and harmed the states' meat and dairy producers, who use corn as an animal feed.

On Friday, Nov. 16, the Obama administration's EPA turned down the petition.

This year about 4.7 billion bushels, or 40 percent of the nation's corn crop, will be used for ethanol production, and ethanol production is set to increase next year.

The Clean Air Act authorizes EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to waive the RFS targets for ethanol production for one year if the requirements would "severely harm" the economy of a state or the nation as a whole, which the governors claimed they do.

Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe's petition to the EPA stated that "virtually all of Arkansas is suffering from severe, extreme, or exceptional drought conditions," and rising corn prices are "having a severe economic impact" on the state's livestock producers.

"While the drought may have triggered the price spike in corn," the fuel standards exacerbated the problem — the policy boosted corn prices 193 percent since 2005.

He also asserted that livestock producers hit hard by rising corn prices "represent nearly half" of the state's farm sales.

"However, the EPA stacked the decks against petitioners, establishing a burden of proof that was virtually impossible to meet," according to Mario Lewis, a senior fellow in energy and environmental policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

In an article on National Review Online, Lewis explained that the EPA in essence required the petitioners to show that the biofuel requirement was entirely responsible for the harm and not merely a contributing factor, and that waiving the requirement would "remedy" the hardship facing livestock producers.

"These criteria are ridiculous," Lewis declared.

"The Clean Air Act does not require the EPA to don analytical blinkers and ignore other factors that, in combination with the RFS, cause severe harm, nor does it say that any waiver granted must be a silver bullet."

But he adds: "This cloud may yet have a silver lining. Jackson's rejection of the waiver petitions exposes the RFS program as an arbitrary, inflexible system that provides corporate welfare to corn farmers at the expense of livestock producers, consumers, and hungry people in developing countries."

Administrator Jackson was designated for the post by President-elect Obama in December 2008, and she was confirmed by the Senate in January 2009.

Lewis observes: "The EPA's decision may very well build support for RFS reform — or repeal."

Editor's Note:


4. Warren Buffett Tax Plan Called 'Fiscal Joke'

Billionaire investor Warren Buffett has proposed a minimum tax of 30 percent on incomes of $1 million to $10 million and 35 percent on incomes above that.

But such a plan would not impact only the wealthy — it would hurt average Americans, according to Investor's Business Daily (IBD).

And it would do next to nothing to bring down the long-term budget deficit. The deficit last year was $1.1 trillion. According to a study by Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation, a Buffett-style 30 percent tax on millionaires would generate just $5 billion — less than half of one percent of the budget.

"In other words, Buffett's proposal is a fiscal joke," IBD observes.

Buffett maintains that tax increases on wealthy Americans are "fair." But the top 1 percent earn about 16 percent of all income yet already pay 37 percent of all federal income taxes.

In fact, the 400 richest Americans pay about as much in taxes as do the bottom 50 percent — 72 million Americans.

And as for Buffett's idea for a "minimum" tax on the rich, the country already has one. It's called the Alternative Minimum Tax, and was put in place in 1969 after it was revealed that 155 people with incomes over $200,000 had paid no taxes in 1967.

The bottom line is that Buffett's proposed tax increase would remove investment capital — the engine of economic growth — from the U.S. economy.

Writing in The New York Times, Buffett also stated that there is no need for concern if capital gains rates and ordinary incomes taxes are increased.

But when capital gains taxes were raised in 1986, total capital gains plunged 62 percent over the next four years.

"Every dollar in capital gains lost to the economy is a loss for business investment, productivity and worker income," IBD concludes.

"And since more than half of all Americans have 401(k)s or some other retirement vehicle that depends on capital gains, it's a loss for them as well."

Editor's Note:


5. Black Friday Gun Sales Set New Record

Gun sales on Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, hit an all-time record as buyers stocked up on weapons ahead of any new gun control laws following President Obama's re-election.

The demand for firearms was so great that it caused outages at the FBI background check centers.

The FBI fielded 154,873 background check requests, up from 129,166 calls on Black Friday 2011 and 97,848 calls in 2008.

The FBI call centers fielding required buyer background check requests experienced an 18-minute outage and another one for 14 minutes on Black Friday, Nov. 23, according to bureau spokesman Stephen Fischer.

The FBI doesn't track actual gun sales, but the number of weapons sold is surely higher than the number of requests because multiple firearms can be included in one purchase by a single buyer.

Dealers attributed the surge in sales in part to concerns that lawmakers in President Obama's second term could impose stricter gun laws, USA Today reported.

"With the recent election, some people are making buying decisions just in case something happens," Don Gallardo, manager of Shooter's World in Phoenix, told USA Today, referring to the possibility of tighter gun controls.

President Obama has indicated that he would pursue an assault weapons ban. According to Infowars.com, he also told gun control activist Sarah Brady last year that he was working "under the radar" on new gun controls, and Brady said Obama assured her gun control was "very much on his agenda."

Editor's Note:


6. Miami Becoming the 'Russian Riviera'

A new wave of buyers is flooding Miami and buying up super-pricey real estate — wealthy Russians.

"Russian millionaires are an increasingly common sight inside the giant homes for sale along the Miami Coast," CNBC reported in a story headlined "Why Miami Is Becoming the 'Russian Riviera.'"

"It's the rich Russians who are dominating the market for mega-mansions. They're spending hundreds of millions on waterfront palaces and launching the next big land grab by the world's super-rich."

The most expensive home ever sold in Miami, a 30,000-square-foot mansion on exclusive Indian Creek Island, was bought in August by an anonymous Russian buyer. Price tag: $47 million.

Russian vodka mogul Roustam Tariko recently bought a $25.5 million, 9-bedroom home on Star Island, The New York Times reported. Present and past homeowners on the island include Rosie O'Donnell, Gloria Estevan, and Shaquille O'Neal. Gangster Al Capone is often cited as a former resident, but in fact he lived on neighboring Palm Island.

A millionaire from Ukraine has paid $20 million for an entire floor of the St. Regis Bal Harbour.

Russians spent more than $12 billion on overseas real estate last year, including more than $1 billion in the United States, according to the National Association of Realtors.

Russians have a "particular attraction" to large Miami mansions and condos, CNBC observed.

"The weather is a welcome escape from Moscow winters. Russian millionaires and billionaires are also obsessed with security and protection, which they can easily find in Miami's large collection of gated communities, private islands with private police forces, and protected condo towers."

The Russians "are paranoid about security," said Jorge Uribe of Sotheby's International Realty in Miami.

The Miami real estate market is so hot for Russians that some brokers are opening business offices in Russia.

And Uribe is translating his website into Russian.

Note: Newsmax magazine is now available on the iPad. Find us in the App Store.

Editor's Note:


Editor's Notes:




Facebook Twitter YouTube Forward to a Friend

This email is never sent unsolicited. You have received this Newsmax email because you subscribed to it or someone forwarded it to you. To opt out, see the links below.
TO ADVERTISE
For information on advertising, please contact Newsmax Advertising Sales via email.
TO SUBSCRIBE
If this email has been forwarded to you and you would like to sign up, please click here.

Remove your email address from our list or modify your profile. We respect your right to privacy. View our policy.

This email was sent by:
Newsmax.com
1501 Northpoint Parkway, Suite 104
West Palm Beach, FL 33407 USA

1486660
10F09-1

Posted by at No comments:

Fwd: [New post] 40 Years Since Apollo 17: Part 2 – Unpicking the Men



Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

From: AmericaSpace <donotreply@wordpress.com>
Date: December 2, 2012 5:02:41 AM CST
To: bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com
Subject: [New post] 40 Years Since Apollo 17: Part 2 – Unpicking the Men

Ben Evans posted: "[caption id="attachment_27683" align="aligncenter" width="465"] Forty years after Apollo 17, Jack Schmitt remains the only professional geologist to practice his art on another world. Pictured in this view with Old Glory at Taurus-Littrow, he is backdropp"
Posted by at No comments:

Fwd: [New post] In Spite of October’s Mishap, SpaceX’s Computers Are a Go



Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

From: AmericaSpace <donotreply@wordpress.com>
Date: December 2, 2012 4:07:00 AM CST
To: bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com
Subject: [New post] In Spite of October's Mishap, SpaceX's Computers Are a Go

Amy Teitel posted: "[caption id="attachment_27831" align="aligncenter" width="500"] SpaceX's Dragon capsule at the end of the International Space Station's robotic arm. Photo Credit: NASA/AP[/caption] Two months ago, one of SpaceX's Dragon capsules lost one of its three f"
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)