thank you for keeping us informed

Congress to Quadruple Gas Tax? ****BREAKING NEWS
So now on top of everything else, Congress may increase the FEDERAL Gas Tax (most gas taxes are state taxes, so this will make the Federal portion far and away the largest in most states, significantly increasing the cost of Gasoline & Diesel fuel for all Americans).

How many Americans do you know who will go along with yet another highway robbery? This is obscene! They spend $Trillions, commit us to TENS of $Trillions more, and our taxes are raising at a dizzying pace.

HOW CAN ANY AMERICAN REMAIN ASLEEP? The answer is to CUT SPENDING. I realize the Democrats have a vise-grip on the reins of power, but some of them HAVE to be good people! Why aren't they standing with Republicans and doing the right thing? How can ANYBODY think that ANY of this is sustainable, to use one of their favorite words?

It simply boggles the mind that ANYBODY, regardless of how high they are, how into American Idol they are, how many hours a day they spend gaming online, playing FarmVille on Facebook, or gossiping on the phone, is still asleep. Isn't 20% unemployment (26.8 Million Unemployed Americans) enough to awaken the rest of America? Well over $10 Trillion of federal debt, with $13 Trillion of debt, $55.7 Trillion of "total debt," $108.8 Trillion of unfunded liabilities, $5.6 Trillion of Government Takeovers/Bailouts, and an over 90% Debt-to-GDP ratio!?!?

Seriously, how much more 'hope & change' can we take? What will it take to wake the rest of America? Blood running in the streets? Cleared-out store shelves? Real, unavoidable hunger? The death of loved ones?

It is chilling to see how bold they're being. I realize this isn't nearly as bad as many things that have been done, and many more to come, but don't they realize that ENOUGH of us are awake to throw them out of office? Yes, I know many of them don't care, but ENOUGH of them certainly should! The only explanation is they don't fear us anymore. And that is a scary thought, indeed.

Oil spill...there's no reason to believe that the White House wants to see this fixed anytime soon. It is a crisis that cannot be wasted, from their point of view. The mask is almost off, for all to see. Those of us who already see it, and have seen it for quite some time, I hope we're all continuing to EDUCATE ourselves, INVITING our friends, neighbors, relatives, co-workers, clients/customers, church congregation members, and others, to join us, and going door-to-door in our neighborhoods to contact those we don't yet know, to spread the word and awaken all who are willing to be awakened!

Here's the story:


--------

Oil tax increase would help pay to clean up spills
FPRIVATE "TYPE=PICT;ALT=Associated Press"

May 24 04:20 PM US/Eastern
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Responding to the massive BP oil spill, Congress is getting ready to quadruple-to 32 cents a barrel-a tax on oil used to help finance cleanups. The increase would raise nearly $11 billion over the next decade.

The tax is levied on oil produced in the U.S. or imported from foreign countries. The revenue goes to a fund managed by the Coast Guard to help pay to clean up spills in waterways, such as the Gulf of Mexico.

The tax increase is part of a larger bill that has grown into a nearly $200 billion grab bag of unfinished business that lawmakers hope to complete before Memorial Day. The key provisions are a one-year extension of about 50 popular tax breaks that expired at the end of last year, and expanded unemployment benefits, including subsidies for health insurance, through the end of the year.

The House could vote on the bill as early as Tuesday. Senate leaders hope to complete work on it before Congress goes on a weeklong break next week.

Lawmakers want to increase the current 8-cent-a-barrel tax on oil to make sure there is enough money available to respond to oil spills. At least 6 million gallons of crude have spewed into the Gulf of Mexico since a drilling rig exploded April 20 off the Louisiana coast.

President Barack Obama and congressional leaders have said they expect BP to foot the bill for the cleanup.

"Taxpayers will not pick up the tab," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Monday.

BP executives told Congress last week they would pay "all legitimate claims" for damages. But the government needs upfront money to respond to spills, as well as money to pay for cleanups when the responsible party is unable to pay, or is unknown. Money spent from the fund can later be recovered from the company responsible for the spill.

The Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund has about $1.5 billion available. Under current law, only $1 billion can be spent from the fund on a single incident. The bill would increase the spending limit to $5 billion.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said the tax increase was hastily put together, without adequate study, to help pay for an unrelated bill. The tax increase was unveiled Thursday, without any congressional hearings to study its impact.

Even with the tax increases, the bill is projected to add $134 billion to the federal budget deficit.

"I have seen no analysis on how this would impact energy security, how this would impact domestic production, how this would impact the overall economics in the country," said Christopher Guith, vice president of the chamber's energy institute. "There hasn't been any sort of deliberation on this."

The American Petroleum Institute has not taken a position on the tax increase, though a spokeswoman said Congress should study the ramifications before acting.

"We understand we need to have an insurance policy in order to cover people in the event of a spill," said the spokeswoman, Cathy Landry. "At the same time we need to have a vital oil and gas industry."

The bill does not address a federal law that caps liability at $75 million for economic damages beyond direct cleanup costs. Democratic Senators tried to pass a bill last week that would have increased the cap to $10 billion, but they were blocked by Republicans.

The oil industry says such a high cap would make it difficult, if not impossible, to insure oil rigs.

BP said Monday its costs for responding to the spill had grown to about $760 million
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
did you know
Barack Obama is skipping the Memorial Day tradition of the President laying a wreath at the tomb of the unknowns. It is not unprecedented. George H. W. Bush was on the campaign trail in 1992 and scheduled to speak at an American Legions event in Maine on Memorial Day.
Ronald Reagan was in the midst of a contentious economic summit in 1983 and so sent George H. W. Bush on his behalf.
Barack Obama wants to go on vacation - the second vacation he has had since oil began spilling out of the gulf. That's okay though because the oil spilling is George W. Bush's fault, just like all the new dead soldiers are George Bush's fault too. Why should he care?
The problem for Barack Obama is simple.
The troops don't like him no matter how much the White House propaganda machine tries to gin up staged pictures of Obama voting soldiers fawning all over him.
But see the tepid response from cadets at West Point or talk privately with lots of soldiers and sailors and you get something else - they fundamentally do not respect their Commander in Chief.
There was no question they respected and loved Ronald Reagan. Same with George H. W. Bush, the last veteran of World War II to serve as President.
Obama? Not so much. And what does the left do when you point this out?
They equate dead soldiers to political props/ Seriously.
By suggesting this President, in the midst of a war, should probably be going to Arlington National Cemetery for Memorial Day instead of taking his second vacation in a month, conservatives are somehow suggesting he use dead soldiers as political props.
After eight years of the left demanding publicity of flag draped coffins returning to Delaware from overseas to use as political props against George W. Bush, it is more than a little humorous to have the left now accuse the right of doing the same.
It also ignores a fundamental point leftists too busy calling our soldiers "war criminals" and our dead soldiers "political props" miss - going to Arlington National Cemetery to lay a wreath at the tomb of the unknowns has nothing to do with using dead soldiers as political props and everything to do with a Commander in Chief who seems to not like the military showing some basic respect to the men and women, alive and dead, who have actually kept us free.
Obama may talk about the government in the first person, but the men and women lying at Arlington know differently.
Of course, Obama really doesn't like the military, does he. [A period there, not a question mark, is intentional]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulators Push for Global Rule on Bank Capital
Capital is the body fat of banking: too much is debilitating, too little is fatal. During the financial crisis, as large banks burned through their capital reserves, governments were forced to add padding at public expense.
Now one of the most consequential decisions about new restraints on the banking industry - how much more capital banks should hold in their rainy day reserves - is being decided not on Capitol Hill but far from Washington, by a committee based in Basel, Switzerland, The New York Times's Binyamin Appelbaum reports.
The Obama administration is pursuing an international agreement to make banks hold significantly larger reserves, which it regards as essential to increase the stability of the global financial system. It wants to complete the negotiations, which are being coordinated by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, by the end of the year.
The world's largest banks have responded with consternation, arguing that the proposed standards would tie up too much money that otherwise could be used for lending, a loss that would curtail economic growth.
The debate between regulators and banks is about the proper balance of growth and safety, but the implications are much broader. In fixing reserve requirements, governments are deciding how much horsepower belongs under the hood of the global economy.
"We need them to get the balance right," said Douglas J. Elliott, a Brookings Institutionexpert who has studied the Basel proposals. "More safety will make loans more expensive. We don't want to buy so much safety that the economy suffers."
There is tremendous political pressure to decide quickly. With the Senate's passage of financial regulatory legislation, Obama administration officials said that increasing capital and liquidity reserve requirements were the critical remaining piece in their efforts to overhaul financial regulation.
The Group of 20 nations affirmed the year-end deadline at its April meetings in Washington, notwithstanding divisions between the United States and some European nations on a range of banking issues.
"Reform is multifaceted, but at its core must be stronger capital standards," the group wrote in its communiqué. "We recommitted to developing by end-2010 internationally agreed rules to improve both the quality and quantity of bank capital and to discourage excessive leverage."
The rules governing capital are dry and technical, a subject that even bankers leave to specialists, but they have become the single most important tool that governments use to restrain and preserve financial institutions.
Banks are required to set aside capital in proportion to loans and investments. The rules shape behavior because banks must hold more capital against assets or loans that regulators consider more likely to lose value.
Capital is so important that the United States has pushed for international agreements on reserve requirements to avoid placing American banks at a disadvantage. As a result, the financial bills passed by both the House and Senate leave the issue largely untouched.
The first international agreement, known as Basel I, was reached in 1988. Work began almost immediately on a revision, but the standards known as Basel II were not completed until 2004. Now officials are racing to overhaul that framework in little more than a year.
"We're going to be pushing through this year to make sure that happens. That's an absolutely critical part of reform," said Michael S. Barr, assistant Treasury secretary for financial institutions.
The industry mostly is reconciled to an increase - many bankers regard it as necessary - but in comment letters to the Basel committee made public in mid-April, large banks across the world linked arms to argue that the initial proposals went much too far.
For instance, analysts for JPMorgan Chase estimated that banks would need to raise prices by 33 percent to maintain profits. They also predicted that the Basel proposals would reduce the gross domestic product of the United States by "a multiple" of $30 billion.
Banks also warned that governments were piling on proposals to tax and constrain the beleaguered industry.
"The cumulative financial impact represents a level of conservatism so extreme that it will harm the banking sector, banking customers and national economies," Wells Fargo's chief financial officer, Howard I. Atkins, wrote in a letter to the committee.
Most large banks held more capital than regulators required in the fall of 2008. But they did not hold enough to survive the financial crisis. As borrowers defaulted and the value of investments fell sharply, many banks failed or were fortified with public funds. The United States distributed more than $165 billion to nine of the largest American banks.
The Basel committee is still discussing how much to increase the minimum capital requirement. The amount will depend in part on the results of a study estimating the impact of the proposals on banks, scheduled for discussion at the next meeting of the G-20 in June.
Already on the table, however, are an overhaul of the risk-weightings, and a tighter definition of capital, closing loopholes that allowed banks to count borrowed money and projected profits as part of their reserves.
Separately, the proposals would create a new reserve requirement, mandating that banks keep enough cash on hand - or assets sold easily for cash - to pay their bills for 30 days. Some banks ran out of cash during the crisis as depositors withdrew, investors fled and the borrowing markets shut down. The new rule, called a liquidity requirement, is intended to ensure that banks can survive such a financing drought.
A central point of international disagreement is whether banks should be allowed to hold smaller reserves because it is understood that central banks will provide loans during times of crisis.
Financial analysts say that some nations, including France, are reluctant to make banks duplicate the safety net that the government provides already.
"Trying to get global buy-in is going to be hard to achieve," said Frederick Cannon, a banking analyst at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods.
Banks argue more broadly that the initial Basel proposals are based on the extremes of recent experience, and that the cost of preparing for such extremes is too high in terms of lost lending and growth.
The liquidity standard, for example, directs banks to prepare for the loss of 15 percent of deposits. A study of 121 recent bank failures by the American Bankers Association found the average institution lost 2.1 percent of its deposits. Only one bank lost more than 15 percent.
"The committee is putting in place a regulatory environment that will overstate the risks faced by financial institutions, and understate these institutions' ability to absorb losses," Aleem Gillani, treasurer of SunTrust Banks, wrote the Basel committee. "This will impact not just shareholders, but will result in less credit in the economy as a whole."
Officials say that the initial proposals will be adjusted based on the results of the impact studies. But in the wake of the financial crisis, analysts say that governments are ready to trade growth for safety.
"The benefit you get is that there will be more stable G.D.P. growth," said Fernando de la Mora, lead partner in the banking and capital markets risk practice atPricewaterhouseCoopers. "You will not have as many financial crises."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am posting this before Memorial Day for a reason; I do not want any PATRIOT to have guilt after the holiday.
When I was growing up, there was strong patriotic sentiment, reinforced in our schools and in the public square. Patriotic holidays were more than just a special sale for the malls, or huge flags on the car lots. Patriotic hymns were sung in churches and taught in public schools. Almost everywhere was the reinforcement of love of God and Country. The two went together.
I believe that most of us grew up in families that flew the flag on special days, especially the ones that honored those that fought and died for our nation, and of course, the birthday of our Declaration of Independence. We honored America and her people, the surrounding culture supported and reinforced this. That is what culture and society is supposed to do, reinforce the foundational precepts upon which a nation exists. We celebrated America. Isn't that a beautiful thought, to honor and express support and affection for a land that gives us all opportunity?
What happened?
The upheaval of the sixties brought severe societal and cultural changes, not so obvious then, but the gradual long term effect of those times have finally borne fruit. Unfortunately, some of this is rotten fruit. The secular socialists in society have taken hold of our core societal institutions - academia, government, schools, and even our churches.
In 1962, they managed to remove God from public schools, laying the groundwork for taking God out of the public square. There has always been an entwined relationship between the founding principles of this nation and a belief in our Creator. The Founding Fathers wove it throughout their documents, and anyone who reads their works can see the connection and the threads of the fabric they laid out for us, to take us through the ages.
What has the secular Left brought us? While they seek to take God out of the public consciousness, with diligent relentless efforts, they have also been marginalizing patriotism and love of America. In fact, today we are seeing blatant anti-Americanism, and A chance recently gave us some background on this here.
The schools don't teach the patriotic songs like they used to, the churches don't even sing them, though they remain in the hymnals.
Yes, I know some of this is anecdotal, but there have been enough news stories that support what we see locally in our own school systems and churches.
Kids are sent home for wearing a t-shirt with an American flag on it, and the assistant principle says he sent them home to avoid inciting violence.
Ever since a Leftist administration came into power, the efforts to undermine traditional American support and loyalty has accelerated, but the groundwork was laid decades before. There is an unrestrained assault on traditional America, no holds barred. We read about it everywhere.
Traditional Americans are marginalized, disparaged and treated as if they are the perpetrators of some horrible crime. Arizona has been excoriated since passing a law that is a duplicate of Federal Law, and simply says they are going to begin to enforce the law that protects their sovereign borders.
Where have all the flags gone?
The American flag is strictly a symbol, an emblem that represents a nation founded on Judaic-Christian principles, a land of freedom and opportunity. The American Revolution was fought and blood spilled to bring about her birth. Blood spilled for the 1st Amendment that allows one to burn the flag as free speech. Wars have been fought to maintain this nation, from within and without.
Countless Americans (and others) have died to keep this land free, and the spirit of American Exceptionalism, alive. I see the flag as representative of her people. The American people have character, strength, durability and a can do willingness that has yet to be surpassed by other nations. When catastrophe strikes, it is the United States that responds; our military is the best in the world, made up of the Americans who get down in the trenches, they bring humanitarian aid, and they also fight tyrannical genocidal enemies, while assisting others to survive and be free.
Where have all the flags gone?
Until recently, citizens of this country, from both parties, lived their patriotism and flew their flag and spoke positively about their country. The passing decades have brought a distinct change in the culture, and genuine expressions of patriotism and respect for our nation and the flag have decreased.
Been to some recent sporting event or something similar, and seen how many pay no attention to the National Anthem. Don't place their hand over their heart? Well, as the years have gone by, stop and think about it, the flag isn't in abundance either, some end up in the trash.
As the veterans of past wars die off, and society has separated itself from God and Country, there is a sorrowful loss of cherishing and honoring that which is symbolic to this great nation. Yes, we saw a resurgence of patriotism and flag waving after 9/11, but it did not seem to stay with us as it should have.
Each passing year our people are succumbing to the assault from the Left. Call it secularism, socialism or Communism - all of it is designed to separate the American people from their heart and character.
But we can have a resurgence. As we are seeking to take back our country and government, we can fly 'Old Glory' with love and affection, and yes, a hint of defiance, because that is what keeping that beautiful flag flying means; it means our nation is still standing and supported by those that love her. Men and women have died so that, "long may she wave" - we'll not yield the colors now.
Think about that when you go to your closet and dust off that banner, or replace a worn one. Or consider a family member who might appreciate hoisting their first America flag, or an elderly neighbor who used to have one out, but may need assistance to put it up. Much like Cold Warrior and his Precinct Committeeman Project, RedStaters can fly their flags, and influence someone, somewhere, one flag at a time.
Whenever I put up my flag, I allow the sentimental feelings to flow and make no apologies, neither did Johnny Cash when he sang this. After all, what we are doing at RedState is fighting for the right to fly that beautiful symbol that represents freedom, and love of God and Country. We do it for this, "Sweet Land of Liberty."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------