Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Back Where We Started Nov 2014, Senate Wants To Raise Gas Tax By 15 Cents


Last November the Michigan House and State Senate started pushing through a bill that would raise the Michigan Gas Tax by 15 cents, making Michigan the highest taxed state in the Country with  50 cents of every gallon going to the State of Michigan as tax.  This doesn't include the additional federal tax.  This proposal was so unpopular that it lead to a state wide ballot proposal called Proposal 1 which was also just as unpopular.


Now the Michigan State Senate is trying to push the same on a  rejected bill on us again. The Senate's tax version would include 15-cent increase in the tax on gasoline, phased in over three years.  This is the key component to the Republican 27-11 majority in the State Senate.

The increase would raise up to $800 million a years.

The question is why do we have to pay more in taxes if the unemployment rate went down from over 14% to just over 5% today?  Shouldn’t the new revenue from Income tax  lead to less taxes?

Senator Patrick Colbeck and State Representative Pete Lucido have both offered plans to fix the roads without raising taxes.  Michiganders have resoundingly voted for no new taxes and we expect our representatives to fix our roads making the necessary cuts.


Monday, June 29, 2015

Wayne County Tennessee Halts All Marriages In Light Of Supreme Court Ruling On Gay Marriage

Wayne County Clerk's Office says no marriage ceremonies will be performed by Clerk Stan Horton or by deputy clerks. 

The letter reads: "This decision not only reflects the inside of the office, but outside the boundaries of the office.


See related story:  Texas Attorney General: Ken Paxton Says State Workers Can Refuse to Issue Marriage Licenses to Gays

Notorious Republican Bad Boy Dennis Lennox Fired

Breaking news from various sources have advised that notorious Republican Bad Boy Dennis Lennox has been fired from his columnist spot on the Mount Pleasant Morning Sun due to alleged ethical violations. 

It appears every column that Dennis Lennox has written with the Morning Sun has been scrubbed from their website.  


Pedophiles Call for Same Rights as Homosexuals

Excerpted from the Northern Colorado Gazette:

Using the same tactics used by “gay” rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek similar status arguing their
desire for children is a sexual orientation no different than heterosexual or homosexuals.

Critics of the homosexual lifestyle have long claimed that once it became acceptable to identify homosexuality as simply an “alternative lifestyle” or sexual orientation, logically nothing would be off limits. “Gay” advocates have taken offense at such a position insisting this would never happen. However, psychiatrists are now beginning to advocate redefining pedophilia in the same way homosexuality was redefined several years ago.

In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. A group of psychiatrists with B4U-Act recently held a symposium proposing a new definition of pedophilia in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders of the APA.

B4U-Act  calls pedophiles “minor-attracted people.” The organization’s website states its purpose is to, “help mental health professionals learn more about attraction to minors and to consider the effects of stereotyping, stigma and fear.”

In 1998 The APA issued a report claiming “that the ‘negative potential’ of adult sex with children was ‘overstated’ and that ‘the vast majority of both men and women reported no negative sexual effects from  childhood sexual abuse experiences.”

Pedophilia has already been granted protected status by the Federal Government. The Matthew Shephard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act lists “sexual orientation” as a protected class; however, it does not define the term.

Republicans attempted to add an amendment specifying that “pedophilia is not covered as an orientation;” however, the amendment was defeated by Democrats. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fl) stated that all alternative sexual lifestyles should be protected under the law. “This bill addresses our resolve to end violence based on prejudice and to guarantee that all Americans, regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability or all of these ‘philias’ and fetishes and ‘isms’ that were put forward need not live in fear because of who they are. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule.”

The White House praised the bill saying, “At root, this isn’t just about our laws; this is about who we are as a people. This is about whether we value one another  – whether we embrace our differences rather than allowing them to become a source of animus.”

Earlier this year two psychologists in Canada declared that pedophilia is a sexual orientation just like homosexuality or heterosexuality.

Van Gijseghem, psychologist and retired professor of the University of Montreal, told members of Parliament, “Pedophiles are not simply people who commit a small offense from time to time but rather are grappling with what is equivalent to a sexual orientation just like another individual may be grappling with heterosexuality or even homosexuality.”

He went on to say, “True pedophiles have an exclusive preference for children, which is the same as having a sexual orientation. You cannot change this person’s sexual orientation. He may, however, remain abstinent.”

When asked if he should be comparing pedophiles to homosexuals, Van Gijseghem replied, “If, for instance, you were living in a society where heterosexuality is proscribed or prohibited and you were told that you had to get therapy to change your sexual orientation, you would probably say that that is slightly crazy. In other words, you would not accept that at all. I use this analogy to say that, yes indeed, pedophiles do not change their sexual orientation.”

Dr. Quinsey, professor emeritus of psychology at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, agreed with Van Gijseghem. Quinsey said pedophiles’ sexual interests prefer children and, “There is no evidence that this sort of preference can be changed through treatment or through anything else.”
In July, 2010 Harvard health Publications said, “Pedophilia is a sexual orientation and unlikely to change. Treatment aims to enable someone to resist acting on his sexual urges.”

Linda Harvey, of Mission America, said the push for pedophiles to have equal rights will become more and more common as LGBT groups continue to assert themselves. “It’s all part of a plan to introduce sex to children at younger and younger ages; to convince them that normal friendship is actually a sexual attraction.”

Milton Diamond, a University of Hawaii professor and director of the Pacific Center for Sex and Society, stated that child pornography could be beneficial to society because, “Potential sex offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex against children.”

Diamond is a distinguished lecturer for the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco. The IASHS openly advocated for the repeal of the Revolutionary war ban on homosexuals serving in the military.

The IASHS lists, on its website, a list of “basic sexual rights” that includes “the right to engage in sexual acts or activities of any kind whatsoever, providing they do not involve nonconsensual acts, violence, constraint, coercion or fraud.” Another right is to, “be free of persecution, condemnation, discrimination, or societal intervention in private sexual behavior” and “the freedom of any sexual thought, fantasy or desire.” The organization also says that no one should be “disadvantaged because of  age.”


Sex offender laws protecting children have been challenged in several states including California, Georgia and Iowa. Sex offenders claim the laws prohibiting them from living near schools or parks are unfair because it penalizes them for life.

Texas Attorney General: Ken Paxton Says State Workers Can Refuse to Issue Marriage Licenses to Gays

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton today made the following statement and issued an opinion in response to questions about the impact of Obergefell v. Hodges, the case that redefined marriage:
 “Friday, the United States Supreme Court again ignored the text and spirit of the Constitution to manufacture a right that simply does not exist. In so doing, the Court weakened itself and weakened the rule of law, but did nothing to weaken our resolve to protect religious liberty and return to democratic self-government in the face of judicial activists attempting to tell us how to live. “Indeed, for those who respect the rule of law, this lawless ruling presents a fundamental dilemma: A ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court is considered the law of the land, but a judge-made edict that is not based in the law or the Constitution diminishes faith in our system of government and the rule of law. “Now hundreds of Texas public officials are seeking guidance on how to implement what amounts to a lawless decision by an activist Court while adhering both to their respective faiths and their responsibility to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution. Here is where things currently stand: “Pursuant to the Court’s flawed ruling, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas issued an injunction against the enforcement of Texas marriage laws that define marriage as one man and one woman and therefore those laws currently are enjoined from being enforced by county clerks and justices of the peace. There is not, however, a court order in place in Texas to issue any particular license whatsoever – only the flawed direction by the U.S. Supreme Court on Constitutionality and applicable state laws. “Importantly, the reach of the Court’s opinion stops at the door of the First Amendment and our laws protecting religious liberty. Even the flawed majority opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges acknowledged there are religious liberty protections of which individuals may be able to avail themselves. Our religious liberties find protection in state and federal constitutions and statutes. While they are indisputably our first freedom, we should not let them be our last.” “In the Attorney General’s opinion my office issued in response to Lt. Governor Patrick’s request for guidance, we find that although it fabricated a new constitutional right in 2015, the Supreme Court did not diminish, overrule, or call into question the First Amendment rights to free exercise of religion that formed the first freedom in the Bill of Rights in 1791. This newly invented federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage should peaceably coexist alongside longstanding constitutional and statutory rights, including the rights to free exercise of religion and speech. This opinion concludes that:
•“County clerks and their employees retain religious freedoms that may allow accommodation of their religious objections to issuing same-sex marriage licenses. The strength of any such claim depends on the particular facts of each case.•“Justices of the peace and judges similarly retain religious freedoms, and may claim that the government cannot force them to conduct same-sex wedding ceremonies over their religious objections, when other authorized individuals have no objection, because it is not the least restrictive means of the government ensuring the ceremonies occur. The strength of any such claim depends on the particular facts of each case.” “It is important to note that any clerk who wishes to defend their religious objections and who chooses not to issue licenses may well face litigation and/or a fine. But, numerous lawyers stand ready to assist clerks defending their religious beliefs, in many cases on a pro-bono basis, and I will do everything I can from this office to be a public voice for those standing in defense of their rights. “Texas must speak with one voice against this lawlessness, and act on multiple levels to further protect religious liberties for all Texans, but most immediately do anything we can to help our County Clerks and public officials who now are forced with defending their religious beliefs against the Court’s ruling" 
See related story: Wayne County Tennessee Halts All Marriages In Light Of Supreme Court Ruling On Gay Marriage 

Sunday, June 28, 2015

God Expects Us To Judge One Another

How many times have you heard someone whine, "Judge not, that ye be not judged?" This verse of Scripture from Matthew 7:1 is often quoted out of context by people who are terrified at the idea of someone preaching against sin or pointing out any form of error in anyone, especially in themselves.


Those people who call for tolerance and quote “judge not” out of context are not using sound thinking. Their call for tolerance is impossible because as Christians, we are called to judge righteously, and judging between right and wrong is something we do every day—and it should be a part of biblical discernment in every believer’s thinking. It is God’s Word that makes the judgment on morality and truth, not our own opinions or theories it is up to us to defend His Word.

Here are a few examples of why we as Christians need to judge :

 "The mouth of the righteous speaketh wisdom, and his tongue talketh of judgment." (Psa. 37:30) A righteous person will talk of judgment. He will not REFUSE to judge. He will talk judgment.

"Seek good, and not evil, that ye may live: and so the LORD, the God of hosts, shall be with you, as ye have spoken. Hate the evil, and love the good, and establish judgment in the gate: it may be that the LORD God of hosts will be gracious unto the remnant of Joseph." (Amos 5:14-15) How can you hate the evil and love the good if you refuse to judge? You can't. You are SINNING when you refuse to judge.

Our generation is well described in Isaiah 59:8: "The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace." People have refused to judge, so there is no peace.

Paul said in I Corinthians 1:10 to ". . . be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." Why would Paul make such a statement if judging is wrong? In I Corinthians 2:15 Paul says, "But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man." Judging is not a sin; judging is a characteristic of being a spiritual person! Satan has been lying to us, hoping that we will NOT judge, because he knows that the right kind of judgment PLEASES God and betters our lives and Christian service.

Someone says, "But should we judge PEOPLE?" Yes, we certainly should. Paul actually REBUKES the Corinthians for NOT judging: "Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?" (I Cor. 6:1-5) If judging is wrong, then Paul needs to confess and repent for misleading these Christians! He clearly told them to JUDGE PEOPLE.



What’s the purpose of judging error in a biblical manner? The church is to be built on the foundation of Christ and the authority of His Word (Ephesians 2:20)—and that means believers should examine their own lives regularly and also lovingly challenge Christian brothers and sisters who are in error or commit sin. To do this, believers must be bold for Christ, but they also have to be humble, loving, and kind. 

Saturday, June 27, 2015

It Is Time Churches Take Back Marriage and Cut The Government's Shackles

Shrine of the National Little Flower Basilica
Royal Oak Michigan
Pastors of churches of all denominations need to work together to tell the Federal Government and State Governments that they will no longer comply with their licensing of marriages.   Through protection under the 1st amendment of the Constitution marriage is a a covenant between God and the man and woman joining in holy matrimony.  Churches also need to throw away their 501 3 (c) it is not needed.  The government will try to bully churches by saying they will take away your 501 3 (c) tax exemption but Churches are exempt from taxes both under the Constitution and natural law.

Churches were only added to section 501c3 of the tax code in 1954. We can thank Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson for that. Johnson was no ally of the church. As part of his political agenda, Johnson had it in mind to silence the church and eliminate the significant influence the church had always had on shaping "public policy."

Although Johnson proffered this as a "favor" to churches, the favor also came with strings attached (more like shackles). One need not look far to see the devastating effects 501c3 acceptance has had to the church, and the consequent restrictions placed upon any 501c3 church. 501c3 churches are prohibited from addressing, in any tangible way, the vital issues of the day.

For a 501c3 church to openly speak out, or organize in opposition to, anything that the government declares "legal," even if it is immoral (e.g. abortion, homosexuality, etc.), that church will jeopardize its tax exempt status. The 501c3 has had a "chilling effect" upon the free speech rights of the church. LBJ was a shrewd and cunning politician who seemed to well-appreciate how easily many of the clergy would sell out.

Did the church ever need to seek permission from the government to be exempt from taxes? Were churches prior to 1954 taxable? No, churches have never been taxable. To be taxable a church would first need to be under the jurisdiction, and therefore under the taxing authority, of the government. The First Amendment clearly places the church outside the jurisdiction of the civil government: "Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Religion cannot be free if you have to pay the government, through taxation, to exercise it. Since churches aren't taxable in the first place, why do so many of them go to the IRS and seek permission to be tax-exempt? It occurs out of:
  • Ignorance ("We didn't know any better")
  • Bandwagon logic ("Everyone else is doing it")
  • Professional advice (many attorneys and CPAs recommend it)
Does the law require, or even encourage, a church to organize as a 501c3? To answer that question let's turn to what the IRS itself has to say.
Churches Need Not Apply
In order to be considered for tax-exempt status by the IRS an organization must fill out and submit IRS Form 1023 and 1024. However, note what the IRS says regarding churches and church ministries, in Publication 557:
Some organizations are not required to file Form 1023. These include:
Churches, interchurch organizations of local units of a church, conventions or associations of churches, or integrated auxiliaries of a church, such as a men’s or women’s organization, religious school, mission society, or youth group. These organizations are exempt automatically if they meet the requirements of section 501(c)(3).

Churches Are “Automatically Tax-Exempt”
According to IRS Code § 508(c)(1)(A):
Special rules with respect to section 501(c)(3) organizations.
(a) New organizations must notify secretary that they are applying for recognition of section 501(c)(3) status.
(c) Exceptions.
(1) Mandatory exceptions. Subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply to—
(A) churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches.
This is referred to as the "mandatory exception" rule. Thus, we see from the IRS’ own publications, and the tax code, that it is completely unnecessary for any church to apply for tax-exempt status. In the IRS’ own words a church “is automatically tax-exempt.”

Churches Are “Automatically Tax-Deductible”
And what about tax-deductibility? Doesn’t a church still need to become a 501c3 so that contributions to it can be taken as a tax deduction? The answer is no! According to IRS Publication 526:
Organizations That Qualify To Receive Deductible Contributions
You can deduct your contributions only if you make them to a qualified organization. To become a qualified organization, most organizations other than churches and governments, as described below, must apply to the IRS.
In the IRS’ own words a church “is automatically tax-deductible.”

Churches Have a Mandatory Exception To Filing Tax Returns
Not only is it completely unnecessary for any church to seek 501c3 status, to do so becomes a grant of jurisdiction to the IRS by any church that obtains that State favor. In the words of Steve Nestor, IRS Sr. Revenue Officer (ret.):
"I am not the only IRS employee who’s wondered why churches go to the government and seek permission to be exempted from a tax they didn’t owe to begin with, and to seek a tax deductible status that they’ve always had anyway. Many of us have marveled at how church leaders want to be regulated and controlled by an agency of government that most Americans have prayed would just get out of their lives. Churches are in an amazingly unique position, but they don’t seem to know or appreciate the implications of what it would mean to be free of government control."
 

We all need to fight this together all the way to the Supreme Court.  It is time to fight for the 1st Amendment of our Constitution as well as God's Law.

Wednesday, June 24, 2015

Instead of using funds for road repairs openly gay Seattle Mayor uses $100,000 for rainbow crosswalks

This should be something you read on the satirical news rag  "The Onion" but unfortunately this story is true.



Openly gay Seattle Mayor Ed Murray unveiled new rainbow cross walks at several Capitol Hill intersections Tuesday morning.

There are 11 crosswalks on Capitol Hill getting the rainbow treatment -- for a total cost of more than $100,000 according to the city's transportation director. Seven of those were painted and treated overnight and four others will be finished Tuesday night.

The idea has been discussed for some time, but was delayed by logistics and cost. It was initially said that the colorful crosswalks cost about  $100,000 for all 11.

This money could have been used to fix pot hole or other road repairs instead 100,000 was wasted to paint rainbows at 11 crosswalks. 


Friday, June 19, 2015

Dane: We are not happy! Denmark is an overtaxed nanny state!


By H. Roland J.
Denmark Citizen
I have noticed a lot of well-meaning Americans praising Denmark for our happiness and our welfare system. We’re praised for our free education, free healthcare, free childcare, short workweek and all the other things that the goodness-industry is proclaiming to define us Danes.
People Are Not Happy They Are Over Taxed


Well, think again, please. We are no more happy than Germans, Turks, Americans or any other country in the world. We might just be a little more complacent and have probably fallen prey to the comfort of our concept of ‘Hygge’. We’re not happy; we’re comfortable in our complacency.

Unlike the United States, which is a very young country with a very short history, Denmark is one of the oldest existing nations in the world. You would think the young nation would be full of great, new ideas, but no; some Americans look to an old, stagnant nation such as Denmark for guidance.

Nothing is free
“Child- and healthcare is free and students are paid to study in Denmark!”. That’s a line I’ve heard a lot. It’s a truth that needs a lot of modification. A lot!

If by ‘free’ you mean ‘paid for by someone else’ you are right in the assumption that healthcare, childcare and education are almost free of charge.

In order to pay for all this ‘goodness’ the Danes pay a lot of taxes. Not just income tax but tax on everything! In some cases even tax on the taxes, and we have what we call a ‘Nanny-state’. Indeed, the very reason we Danes are so happy is because we are constantly under the watchful eye of Mother State. I’ll get back to that later.

You need to understand something about Danes. We were Vikings once. We spend our spare time seeing the world, making our mark on it and inviting people to come home and live with us. Yeah, we sailed forth, ravaged the world and brought back slaves, but the first version sounds better.

We became rich. Filthy rich. Which is the base of the wealth we have today. We were never conquered by other nations – except for 5 years of World War II – and therefore have had about a thousand years to amass wealth and become complacent in our ways of life.

The people of the United States have a very different history. You are from a lot of different places and your nation of little more than 200 years old. You had a massive Civil War and you act as if you are the “police of the world”. You are constantly at war somewhere in the world – never at home – but you spend an awful lot of money on ‘defending’ yourselves.

Also, there is a lot more Americans in the world than there are Danes. Danes are few in number and the kingdom is very small compared to the United States. (if we subtract the vast emptiness of Greenland)

You, as Americans, can never be like us Danes; mainly because you’re not even one people. You identify as African-American, Hispanic-American, German-American, Native-American and all sorts of blank-American. In order to have a welfare state you need to be one people and identify as such.

And you shouldn’t have the welfare state to begin with…

What money can buy
If you want free healthcare, free childcare and free education someone else needs to pay for it. Nothing in the world is free and these things are very expensive. Free stuff never comes cheap and least of all when it comes from the state.

Imagine being an ordinary working-class Dane with a monthly salary of 25.000,- dkk. That’s about 4.000,- USD, but there is a vast difference between our two nations and it is impossible to compare USD as used in Denmark.

First you pay you income tax. This is done automatically because in Denmark we have SKAT (TAX) which handles these things for us. The company you work for registers you with SKAT and by magic this huge part of Danish government handles your tax-payment.

Arbejdsmarkedsbidrag – which is impossible for me to translate – is set at 8% – and it’s the first tax you have to pay. 8% of 25.000,- dkk is 2.000 dkk, which means you have 23.000,- left of your income, and still have taxes to pay. But first, some good news!

We all have our ‘bundfradrag’, translates into ‘bottom deduction’. It’s a deduction of non-taxed money! You simply don’t pay taxes of this amount! Yay, free money!

In 2015 this Bundfradrag is 41.400 annually. Divided by 12 to get a monthly Bundfradrag makes it 3.433 dkk. Take that away from the amount we had left after the state tax makes it 23.000,- minus 3.433,-.

19.567,- dkk left and now we move on to the big taxes. Kommuneskat, or county tax – is different from county to county. In this example I will use the average county-tax which is 24,9%.

So, we’re left with 14.694,81. No rounding up! We still have taxes to pay!

If we in this example made more than 37.000 dkk per month there would be ‘Topskat’ now. Yes, indeed, the more money you make the more taxes you have to pay. Not just percentagewise, but all the money you make more than 449.100 annually is taxes with yet another 15%!

Luckily we don’t make that much money in this example.

We have yet another tax to pay and they named it Sundhedsskat – or Health-tax! It’s an odd little tax that is lowered by 1% each year while Bottom Tax is raised 1% per year. This year Sundhedsskat is at 4%. We need to pay that too.

We take our income of 19.567,- and take 4% off that. Say goodbye to another 782,68. We take that amount from what we are left with which make our entire income of the 25.000,- dkk new 13.784,32.

We have paid 11.215,68 in income taxes but are we done yet? By no means!

Taxes, taxes, taxes everywhere!
Let’s take our 13.784,32 dkk out of the bank. Let’s pay some bills, shall we?

Every time we pay a bill we must pay the government sales tax. It’s at a staggering 25%! Yes, indeed, every time you buy anything from your local vendor 20% goes to the government. If something would have cost 20,- dkk, like an ice-cream or a soda, the government puts on an extra 5,- (25% of the price) and takes that money from the vendor, who is nice enough to price it at 25,- dkk for us.

He has the hassle of collecting the sales tax on the behalf of the government. He gives it to them quarterly and subtracts what he has paid for things that are sales tax-deductible for companies. Companies are given back the money they spend on stuff they need to run their business once every quarter.

This is of course very confusing, but all the sales taxes end up with the government. So, we pay yet another 25% of our income in indirect sales taxes!

Taxation on Tax
Let’s give that money to the government from our disposable income. That makes our money 10.338,- (now we can round up)

There are much more expensive bills to pay, and ‘A gift’, which is just another word for tax, is used instead of Skat, which means the same.

When you pay you utility-bill you pay a lot in Afgift. I have my most recent electrical bill on hand. Let’s use that one. It’s says 994,64 dkk for a three month period. Electricity-Afgift – yes, there is such a thing – is where you pay for the privilege of being able to use electricity in your home.

The Electricity-company charges 111,06 for my use of 358 kilowatt/Hour and 30,- dkk for membership. With sales tax imposed on this it comes to 176,33 dkk.

The electricity-company charges 0,37 dkk pr Kilowatt/Hour, and the state imposes an ‘electricity transportation Afgift’ of 0,21 dkk. According to the electricity-company I used 358 kWh last period which makes this Afgift 80,89 dkk for the period.

No, we’re not done with the taxation yet. Calm yourself down.

EL-Afgift is the main portion of taxation here. It’s a staggering 0,88 dkk pr kWh! That makes it 331,88 dkk in EL-Afgift!

All combined the state takes 412,77, but hey, those numbers don’t add up, now do they? Of course not. There’s more!

When all combined the company gets 241,88 from me every quarter, but this still doesn’t add up. 241,88 plus 412,77 only makes 654,65 dkk and even with the company’s charges (with sales tax) of 176,33 it still only makes 830,98 dkk, doesn’t it?

It would if the government didn’t have the gall to tax the Afgift. The Afgift-ridden amount of 654,65 of course needs a sales tax! Sales tax is different from Afgift and of course no money can change hands unless the state gets it 20%!

The final bill for three months of electricity looks like this:

Company charges 141,06 dkk and with sales tax that’s 176,33. The state gets 35,27 dkk from this part of the process.

Now Afgift on transport and use of the state-owned network, Afgift on electricity because it is something we need and want comes to 654,65 and slam! Here comes sales tax on the Afgifts which comes to 163,66.

Confused? Well, I am, so here comes everything a little more simplified. Out of the 994,64 I paid for electricity the company gets 141,06 dkk – and the rest, a staggering 853,58 goes to the government. Some of it is Afgift and some of it is even sales tax on Afgift!

I can’t afford to watch TV
Wanna buy a TV in Denmark? Maybe a phone? Maybe a computer for internet access? Want to own a radio? You can, and buying it will, of course, cost you 20% extra in sales tax, but that’s not all.

If you own any device that can pick up a TV- or radio signal or have internet access you have to pay for ‘License’! Yes sir, you have to pay a license-fee to own one such device because you have the opportunity to watch or listen to something aired by Denmark’s Radio, or DR as it is known.

I know you’re confused here, but DR is a huge government media company that doesn’t operate on market-terms. If you own anything that can pick up DR you have to pay.

As a matter of fact, a representative of Licens-kontoret – The License Office – will come to your door if you’re not registered with them because everyone owns something that can pick up that damn TV-channel, go on the internet or pick up a radio signal.

The cost for such a license is 205 dkk per month. Yeah, that’s right, you own something and have to pay a fee for it. That’s state logic for you.

I have personally chosen not to own a TV or a radio. My computer actually belongs to my mother and my phone belongs to a close friend of mine. Therefore I do not own anything that needs to be licensed, because I fully reject the notion that I have to pay this license-fee.

When all is said and paid for
Tell me again how everything is free in Denmark? Tell me again, that we are so lucky to have free education, free healthcare, free childcare and free whatnot.

We are paying for it. We pay a lot for it. More than you can ever imagine as an American. I have no idea how much you pay in taxes or what you can deduct from them, but in Denmark – where the people are happy and comfortable – we pay dearly for that.

Not only do you pay in terms of money but also as individuals. The state has taken over our lives by making us believe that we are so well of, that we are free and that we are ever so happy.

This is my advice to Americans who wants ‘free’ this and that, and who are willing to raise taxes to such an extend as we have in Denmark.

Stop. Look at yourself in the mirror. Are you that much better than everyone else? Are you so self-centered that you think taking from others to give to others and yourself is right? Are you the kind of person who is willing to make some else pay for your life?

If so, I suggest you create a community of your own. It doesn’t have to be somewhere but someone. Find likeminded people who are willing to give up their freedom for this community. Make your own government and impose taxation on that membership.

Just don’t use force to make others pay for your ideal society. You don’t have that right. You don’t have the right to impose your moral values upon others for ‘the greater good’. You, as a people born of the desire for freedom, should understand this.

Your ancestors left their homes to find freedom. Your ancestors fought the War of Indepence to assure that freedom. You had a civil war that was all about freedom. You helped, albeit reluctantly, when freedom was threatened in Europe and Asia during World War II. You still fight for freedom, but rather perversely I might add, but some of you still believe it’s about freedom.

Why would you go back on the very essence of America by taking away freedom from others and force them to pay for ‘free’ things? You are going in the direction of Denmark and as shown above that is an expensive route to take. You should go back to freedom, not away from it!

I see The United States as sort of a grandchild of older nations, such as Denmark, who have ‘been there, done that and made the mistakes’. This is of course my very personal view, which is not shared by many Danes, but as a true Viking I can only give you one advice.


Don’t give up your freedom for ‘free stuff’. There is no such thing as ‘free’ when it comes to governments. Everything comes at a price and you should never be willing to pay a price that includes your fellow man paying the same price against his will.

Do You Know About African American Emancipation Day

Today is the 150th African American Emancipation Day also known as Juneteenth. Juneteenth is the oldest nationally celebrated commemoration of the ending of slavery in the United States.

From its Galveston, Texas origin in 1865, the observance of June 19th as the African American Emancipation Day has spread across the United States and beyond .In 1865, enslaved Africans on Galveston Island, Texas, had been declared free two years earlier but didn’t know it. With the United States still divided over the institution of slavery and recovering after the Civil War, members of the Confederacy weren’t eager to spread the word.

 Only after Union soldiers, led by Major Gen. Gordon Granger, worked their way South for more than two years after President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation did word reach Galveston Island. On June 19, 1865, known as Juneteenth—a melding of the day’s month and date—the last remaining slaves in America were declared free.


Juneteenth, America’s “second Independence Day,” is now celebrated around the country. It is officially observed in 43 states and is a state holiday in Texas, home of the last to know.

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

Is A New Poll Favoring LGBT, Marijuana and Gov Snyder Legit?

The propaganda machine is out and is fully fueled and WDIV  TV
Mi Gov Rick Snyder
and The Detroit News are the mouth pieces. 

A new poll conducted by the Glengariff Group says Michigan voters approve of gay rights, legalized marijuana and Gov. Rick Snyder. 

Who is the Glengariff Group?  And who do you think they polled?  I will tell you in a little bit but first here is the poll WDIV TV in Detroit and The Detroit News is posting


The 600-person representative sample of state voters, Lansing leaders and Michigan residents found that participants have different views on gay rights.

 Voters support same sex marriage by a margin of 55.5 percent to 32.5 percent. This support level is statistically identical to levels in surveys conducted in 2012 and 2014. By a margin of 61.4 percent to 27.3 percent, Michigan voters support recognizing same sex marriages in Michigan if they are performed in other states and the couple were to move to Michigan.

  Michiganders also overwhelmingly support expanding the Elliot-Larsen Act to include protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgendered residents for housing and employment by a 77 percent to 17.9 percent margin. Even Strong Republican voters support expansion by a margin of 70.8 percent to 22.0 percent. Voters over the age of 65 support expansion by a margin of 76.9 percent to 18.0 percent.

 Michigan voters unequivocally oppose ‘Religious Freedom’ legislation that would allow a business to deny service to a customer based on their religious beliefs by an overwhelming 18.5 percent to 76.5 percent margin.

 A solid majority, 56.1 percent, of Michigan voters support legalizing and taxing small amount of marijuana for adults over the age of 21 years old, while 35.7 percent oppose legalization.

 The Glegariff poll also exposed generational disagreement on the issue. While voters under 30 years old support passage by a margin of 73.7 percent to 15.1 percent, voters over the age of 65 oppose passage by a margin of 39.2 percent to 51.3 percent.

 Voters also approve of the performance of Governor Rick Snyder by a margin of 55.1 percent to 39.3 percent, representing Snyder’s highest job approval performance to date.

 However, the state legislature remains unpopular. By a margin of 34.3 percent to 50.0 percent, Michigan voters disapprove of the performance of the State Legislature.
 
So who is the Glengariff group?  Well here is who they are based on their basic website and this information is quite telling as to why you cannot trust the above poll:

The Glengariff Group, Inc. specializes in strategic planning and market research.

 Founded in December 1998 by President and owner Richard Czuba, the Glengariff Group, Inc. offers the spectrum of marketing and public affairs services - all based on market research, analysis, and strategy.

 Our specialty is disciplined, intense planning that delivers results.  We do the special projects that other companies won't touch.
 The Glengariff Group,Inc. has offices in Chicago, Illinois and  St. Joseph, Michigan.

 In 1983 Richard began work with the Michigan Republican State Committee where he quickly rose to Director of Research overseeing survey research and campaign research for Michigan’s Republican Party.

 In 1987 Richard became Director of Research for the Pete Dawkins for U.S. Senate campaign in New Jersey. As Director of Research for the nation’s most hotly contested race, Richard oversaw the campaign’s research functions including coordination and writing of all candidate position statements, survey research work, and all campaign research.

  In 1989 Richard returned to the Michigan Republican State Committee and soon became the Director of Research and Communications, melting his research background with marketing and communications strategic planning.

 In 1990 Governor-Elect John Engler named Richard as the Transition Team Leader for the Michigan Department of Social Services. Upon completion of this assignment, Richard was asked to complete the transition team report for the Michigan Department of Transportation.

 In 1993 Richard was named Advisor to Governor John Engler for Research and Planning. In addition to handling the research needs of Governor John Engler, Richard coordinated the administration’s policy statements and was responsible for message and communication strategy for the Lieutenant Governor and the Governor’s Cabinet most notably during the campaign to pass Proposal A.

In 1997 Richard was the Director of Planning and Public Affairs for the State of Michigan. During his tenure with the Michigan Jobs Commission, Richard was instrumental in creating the nationally recognized Tax Free Renaissance Zones including moving the idea from concept to legislation. He was responsible for the community review process and creation of a nationwide publicity campaign for Renaissance Zones.

 Also as Director of Planning and Public Affairs, Richard was responsible for executing communication efforts for significant administration initiatives such as the funding of Tiger Stadium, the state of Michigan’s first nationwide economic marketing campaign, and all economic development publicity for the state of Michigan.

 In 1999 Governor Engler named Richard the Director of Travel Michigan, where he created a new image and public relations campaign for the State of Michigan.

 Even more troubling is that the Glengariff Group is the go to polling company for the ultra liberal Daily Kos.

Based on the connections to the old guard in the Michigan Republican Party that are looking to push the LGBT Agenda as they do not know how to fight it and would rather concede to win rather than stick up for values and the fact that the poll favors Gov . Snyder  one has to wonder if the marijuana question was put in to try to make this poll legit.  

The poll just says 600 were surveyed but yet who were the ones surveyed?  Was it the old guard establishment Republicans and their minions?  What where the demographics and occupations of those polled?

Could this poll be two fold, to try to make people believe that the majority support the Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual,  Transgender crusade  and to prop Gov Snyder back up after the embarrassing Proposal 1 road tax defeat so he can make another attempt at President or be a presidential vice president candidate?  Perhaps for his rumored favorite Jeb Bush?


***Update*** This in from a reader of Setting The Record Straight***

Matt Marsden, spokesman for the Michigan Cannabis Coalition sited in that article "Legalize pot, 56% in Mich. poll say" was the chief of staff for former Senate Majority leader Randy Richardville until he had a public tiff with Senator Rick Jones! He was then reassigned within the Richardville "team" and former Governor Jennifer Granholm's staffer Amber McCann was brought in to replace Marsden as chief of staff! Oh the webs they weave.

Wednesday, June 10, 2015

Michigan House Votes To Raise Taxes To Fix Roads

They just don't get it do they?  After a resounding defeat of
Proposal 1 that would have raised taxes to fix Michigan Roads, the Michigan House today approved a plan to shift hundreds of millions of dollars from the state's general fund and make other changes, including raising taxes ,aimed at putting nearly $1.2 billion a year toward repairing the state's roads.

Most bills were approved primarily along party lines Wednesday in the Republican-controlled House.

Along with many other changes, the 12-bill package would earmark $442 million from the general fund for roads in the fiscal year starting Oct. 1.That number would increase to $792 million in the 2019 fiscal year.


The plan would raise the diesel tax to 19 cents from 15 cents to match the gas tax and index both taxes to inflation. Registration fees would be raised by $30 on certain hybrid vehicles and by $100 on electric vehicles

Oakland County Michigan Sheriff Risks Life Enters Hostage Situation Unarmed

A man barricaded himself inside a home in Pontiac, Michigan, on May 5th, 2015, holding two children hostage 
Sheriff Michael Bouchard
with a large knife. But the stand-off, which certainly had the potential to turn deadly, ended peacefully thanks to actions take by the Oakland County Sheriff, Michael Bouchard.

The suspect reportedly ran into the home in order to evade arrest. The man, a parolee, feared being arrested after he learned the Michigan Department of Corrections was planning to visit him as part of a welfare check.

The suspect kept repeating that he was going to die today and that he had nothing to live for.

The two children he held hostage were the suspect’s nieces.

Oakland County Sheriff Michel Bouchard eventually entered the home to negotiate with the man,  showing the distraught man that we was disarmed.

The Suspect's Nieces Released Unarmed
Unarmed and face-to-face with an armed hostage taker, Bouchard managed to talk the man down, convincing get him to throw away his knife and let the kids go.  He reassured the suspect that nobody was going to die today. Police were able to arrest him without any one getting injured.

“I know I breached a lot of protocol and made a few people nervous, but I felt that after I chatted with his mother, that between his mother and I, we could diffuse the situation,” Bouchard told WXYZ-TV.

Tuesday, June 9, 2015

Land Of The Free? U.S. Feds Arresting Those For Criticizing Obama



The federals have a program called a program called "Vigilant Eagle" part of Homeland Security to watch and report any anti-Obama or U.S. Government posts on social media.


From The Rutherford Institute:
 In the four years since the start of Operation Vigilant Eagle, the government has steadily ramped up its campaign to “silence” dissidents, especially those with military backgrounds. Coupled with the DHS’ dual reports on Rightwing and Leftwing “Extremism,” which broadly define extremists as individuals and groups “that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely,” these tactics have boded ill for anyone seen as opposing the government.

 One particularly troubling mental health label being applied to veterans and others who challenge the status quo is “oppositional defiance disorder” (ODD). As journalist Anthony Martin explains, an ODD diagnosis 
 “denotes that the person exhibits ‘symptoms’ such as the questioning of authority, the refusal to follow directions, stubbornness, the unwillingness to go along with the crowd, and the practice of disobeying or ignoring orders. Persons may also receive such a label if they are considered free thinkers, nonconformists, or individuals who are suspicious of large, centralized government… At one time the accepted protocol among mental health professionals was to reserve the diagnosis of oppositional defiance disorder for children or adolescents who exhibited uncontrollable defiance toward their parents and teachers.”

 The case of 26-year-old decorated Marine Brandon Raub—who was targeted because of his Facebook posts, interrogated by government agents about his views on government corruption, arrested with no warning, labeled mentally ill for subscribing to so-called “conspiratorial” views about the government, detained against his will in a psych ward for standing by his views, and isolated from his family, friends and attorneys—is a prime example of the government’s war on veterans.

 
This is the video of Brandon J Raub, being "arrested" and taken away by Chesterfield County Virginia Police Department

Raub’s case exposes the seedy underbelly of a governmental system that is targeting Americans—especially military veterans—for expressing their discontent over America’s rapid transition to a police state.


Monday, June 8, 2015

Jerusalem No Longer Part Of Israel US Supreme Court Rules

The  US Supreme Court in a divided decision  struck down a law that would allow American citizens born in Jerusalem to have Israel listed as their birthplace on passports, saying it unlawfully
encroached on the president's powers to set foreign policy.

The 6-3 vote ruling, a victory for President Barack Obama, comes at a time of strained relations between Israel and the US, the country's most important ally.

The Obama administration had said that if the law were enforced, it would have undermined the US government's claim to be a neutral peacemaker in the Middle East.

Writing for the court, Kennedy conceded that the US Congress, which enacted the law in 2002, has a role to play in foreign policy but cannot make decisions on recognising foreign governments. That is the president's "exclusive power," Kennedy wrote.

"Congress cannot command the president to contradict an earlier recognition determination in the issuance of passports," added Kennedy, a conservative who often holds the key vote in close cases.
Ari and Naomi Zivotofsky, the American parents of now-12-year-old Menachem Zivotofsky, had waged a long court battle to have the boy's passport state he was born in Israel.

'Delicate subject'
The case touched upon what Kennedy called the "delicate subject" of Jerusalem's status. The city, considered holy to Muslims, Jews and Christians, is claimed by both Israelis and Palestinians and has been a major point of contention in the Middle East for decades. The justices took no position on that issue.

An estimated 50,000 American citizens were born in Jerusalem and could, if they requested it, list Israel as their birthplace if the law had been enforced.

The court was divided, with its four liberals joining Kennedy in the majority. One of the court's conservatives, Justice Clarence Thomas, agreed with the outcome but differed over the legal rationale.

The court's other conservatives, Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Antonin Scalia and Justice Samuel Alito, all dissented, saying the law did not involve recognition of a foreign government.

Congress passed the law when President George W. Bush was president, but neither his administration nor the current Obama administration ever enforced it.