Congress members make more than three times what the average American makes

I have often made the suggestion that elected officials should make no more than the average their constiuents make.
# # # # # # # # # # #
The Taxpayers Protection Alliance (TPA) and Our Generation (OG) advocacy groups released a report Wednesday showing that federal legislators earn 3.4 times more than the average full-time American worker, and are among the highest paid legislators in the industrialized world.

The report compares congressional salaries and benefits with what private sector workers receive, and with those of foreign legislators.

According to the report, members of Congress receive an annual salary of $174,000 — which alone puts them in the highest-paid 5 percent of U.S. workers. They also, however, receive a host of additional benefits that put their total annual compensation at around $285,000. By comparison, the average full-time American employee earns just $50,875 annually.

The report also compared the American ratio of legislator pay to citizen salary with the same ratios in 13 developed countries, including Spain, Norway, France, the UK, Sweden, Australia, Ireland, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany, Canada and Japan. Of those 13, only Japan had a higher ratio. On average, legislators in other countries receive salaries equal to 2.3 times the average wage.

“Congress has run up a $14.3 trillion debt and a $1.5 trillion deficit, yet they are still among the best compensated employees in America,” said Taxpayers Protection Alliance president David Williams. “It is time to hold our representatives in Washington responsible for their job performance. With the high salaries Congress is collecting, we don’t think it’s too much to ask that they do their jobs and get our economic house in order.”

The groups point out that if congressional salaries were cut to $100,000, taxpayers could save $39 million each year. (RELATED: Gingrich worth at least $6.7 million, has paid off Tiffany account)
“During a weak economic recovery, when unemployment is high and many Americans have to make do with less, Congress should not be rewarding itself with extravagant salaries and benefits,” said Our Generation executive director MacMillin Slobodien. “Immediate steps must be taken to cut congressional salaries and benefits and reassure Americans that sacrifices made during this economic downturn are being shared.”

Are We Alone In the Universe? New Analysis Says Maybe

For decades I have been intrigued by the idea that human beings from planet earth are the only sentient beings in the universe.  It is all up to us.  We are indeed "The Crown of Creation" and the populating of the universe is up to us, one planet at a time.  We have the power to civilize the entire universe, or if we fail and our species becomes extinct, all creation will be nothing but animal, vegetable or mineral.

# # # # # # # # # # #

Are We Alone In the Universe? New Analysis Says Maybe

Scientists engaged in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) work under the assumption that there is, in fact, intelligent life out there to be found. A new analysis may crush their optimism.
To calculate the likelihood that they'll make radio contact with extraterrestrials, SETI scientists use what's known as the Drake Equation. Formulated in the 1960s by Frank Drake of the SETI Institute in California, it approximates the number of radio-transmitting civilizations in our galaxy at any one time by multiplying a string of factors: the number of stars, the fraction that have planets, the fraction of those that are habitable, the probability of life arising on such planets, its likelihood of becoming intelligent and so on. [10 Alien Encounters Debunked]
The values of almost all these factors are highly speculative. Nonetheless, Drake and others have plugged in their best guesses, and estimate that there are about 10,000 tech-savvy civilizations in the galaxy currently sending signals our way — a number that has led some scientists to predict that we'll detect alien signals within two decades.
Their optimism relies on one factor in particular: In the equation, the probability of life arising on suitably habitable planets (ones with water, rocky surfaces and atmospheres) is almost always taken to be 100 percent. As the reasoning goes, the same fundamental laws apply to the entire universe, and because those laws engendered the genesis of life on Earth — and relatively early in its history at that — they must readily spawn life elsewhere, too. As the Russian astrobiologist Andrei Finkelstein put it at a recent SETI press conference, "the genesis of life is as inevitable as the formation of atoms."
But in a new paper published on arXiv.org, astrophysicist David Spiegel at Princeton University and physicist Edwin Turner at the University of Tokyo argue that this thinking is dead wrong. Using a statistical method called Bayesian reasoning, they argue that the life here on Earth could be common, or it could be extremely rare — there's no reason to prefer one conclusion over the other. With their new analysis, Spiegel and Turner say they have erased the one Drake factor scientists felt confident about and replaced it with a question mark.
While it's true that life arose quickly on Earth (within the planet's first few hundred million years), the researchers point out that if it hadn't done so, there wouldn't have been enough time for intelligent life — humans — to have evolved. So, in effect, we're biased. It took at least 3.5 billion years for intelligent life to evolve on Earth, and the only reason we're able to contemplate the likelihood of life today is that its evolution happened to get started early. This requisite good luck is entirely independent of the actual probability of life emerging on a habitable planet.
"Although life began on this planet fairly soon after the Earth became habitable, this fact is consistent with … life being arbitrarily rare in the Universe," the authors state. In the paper, they prove this statement mathematically.
Their result doesn't mean we're alone — only that there's no reason to think otherwise. "[A] Bayesian enthusiast of extraterrestrial life should be significantly encouraged by the rapid appearance of life on the early Earth but cannot be highly confident on that basis," the authors conclude. Our own existence implies very little about how many other times life has arisen.
Two data points rather than just one would make all the difference, the researchers say. If life is found to have arisen independently on Mars, then scientists would be in a much better position to assert that, under the right conditions, the genesis of life is inevitable.
This article was provided by Life's Little Mysteries, a sister site to SPACE.com.
# # # # # # # # #

Are planets that support life, such as Earth, rare?

Hat Tip to Bad Touch

In planetary astronomy and astrobiology, the Rare Earth hypothesis argues that the emergence of complex multicellular life (metazoa) on Earth required an improbable combination of astrophysical and geological events and circumstances. The term "Rare Earth" comes from Rare Earth: Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe (2000), a book by Peter Ward, a geologist and paleontologist, and Donald E. Brownlee, an astronomer and astrobiologist. Their book is the source for much of this article.
The rare earth hypothesis is the contrary of the principle of mediocrity (also called the Copernican principle), advocated by Carl Sagan and Frank Drake, among others.^[1] The principle of mediocrity concludes that the Earth is a typical rocky planet in a typical planetary system, located in an unexceptional region of a common barred-spiral galaxy. Hence it is probable that the universe teems with complex life. Ward and Brownlee argue to the contrary: planets, planetary systems, and galactic regions that are as friendly to complex life as are the Earth, the solar system, and our region of the Milky Way are very rare.

Tea Party Groups Overwhelmingly Pass Motion to Open Congressional Investigation into Obama's Eligibility

On Monday and Tuesday evenings, July 25th and 26th, the South Peoria Tea Party by a vote of 8-0 and then the Sun City West Tea Party by a vote of 56 - 5 voted to pass the motion below. One week ago, the Surprise Arizona Tea Party passed the same motion by 45 - 4. All of these votes occurred in districts served by Congressman Trent Franks and he is being informed of the results.

This same motion is forecast to spread to other Tea Party groups around the nation. 

THE CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION MOTION:

We, the members of the [[ Surprise* ]] Tea Party, hereby with urgent demand, formally summon our Congressman Trent Franks to within the next 30 days publicly call for a full and open Congressional investigation to include discovery and public testimony into the following questions relating to Barack Obama. First, is Barack Obama a natural born citizen eligible to hold the office of President per the terms and historical meaning of Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution as stated in the Supreme Court case of Minor vs. Happersett 88 U.S. 162 (1875 )and why was Barack Obama not held to the same standard as was John McCain in April of 2008 when the US Senate via Senate Res. 511 declared McCain to be a qualified natural born citizen by virtue of “being born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 ? “ Secondly, is Barack Obama holding a legitimate Social Security number issued by the Social Security Administration only to him or is he employing a number (042-68-4425), or numbers also issued previously to a different citizen or citizens and where is a copy of the SS-5 application form in the SSA records needed to obtain that number? And third, is the recently released long form birth certificate which he personally endorsed on April 27, 2011 from the White House Press Room legitimate and identical to an original held by the Department of Health in Hawaii or was it a forged document and therefore a felony under U.S. Criminal codes?

Victory by Judson Phillips

Victory

The Tea Party movement began in 2009.  We fought hard in 2009 and 2010, but until the elections, it was hard to say we had won something.  We won something then and while this battle is not over, it looks like we have won again! What have we won? We are in the process of beating Obama on the debt ceiling and the budget battle.  When liberals are conceding defeat, you know things are good.  On MSNBC, Joe Scarborough said, “Obama caved.”  The Daily Beast’s Tina Brown said, “he will be going on the road for six months as a loser.” Even Obamaton and chief unofficial propagandist Chris Matthews said Obama should not have gone on TV to deliver a political speech.   In other words, “Obama you really blew it badly.” Even while threatening a veto of the Republican plan, Obama is quietly telling the leaders of banks the country will not default.  How will that happen?  The plan conceived of by Harry Reid is not going to pass the House.  John Boehner’s plan may not pass the House.   The only way to avoid default is to admit to something the Tea Party has been saying for a while.  There is enough money there to avoid default.  There may not be enough money there for all of the bills, but the country does not need to default.  The greatest part of what may become a huge Tea Party victory is that John Boehner, who wants to raise the debt ceiling by another $2.5 trillion, may not be able to get his plan through the House.  So many House Republicans are refusing to vote for this, Boehner may need Democrats.   Such a rebellion does not bode well for Boehner if he wants a second term as Speaker.  Eric Cantor has gotten into the fight telling Republicans to quit whining and vote.  Unfortunately for Boehner and Cantor, the Tea Party is there, reminding the freshmen how they got into office.  These Representatives are listening to the people at home and they know they people do not want a tax hike, a debt ceiling hike or anything else, other than cutting spending.  Considering, three years ago, the Tea Party movement did not exist, the results have been pretty good.   Three years ago, a lot of conservatives stayed home when the Presidential race was between RINO and liberal John McCain and far left wing extremist Barack Obama. Then came the Tea Party and Middle America came back to the political fight.   And it has been a fight.  In two and a half years, we have become the most powerful political force in the nation.  We can take a moment to congratulate ourselves, but only a moment.  Boehner still wants to raise the debt ceiling by $2.5 trillion.  At least with his plan there are no new taxes, but that does not make it a great plan.   Just this afternoon, the Daily Caller reported that in the last few years, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) sent more than $90 million in tax dollars to China for health work in China!  That is something China should be spending money on, not America. This is why we must cut, spending, cap it and balance our budget.  Obama may have caved.  Boehner has not.  We need John Boehner to break out that freshly laundered white flag of surrender again, but this time we need him surrendering to the Tea Party.  This time we need him cutting spending without raising taxes or the debt. We may be winning but the war is not over.  Keep the pressure on. Victory is in sight!

Obama Following In Hitler’s Footsteps

 Obama Following In Hitler’s Footsteps

July 26, 2011 by Robert Ringer 

Barack Obama wants to do what is right for America, but his vision of

 “right” is wealth redistribution on a massive scale carried out by an

all-powerful Federal government.

Watching the nonstop commentaries on television about the debt ceiling debate only reinforces the reality that most people — including many perceived conservatives — still don’t get it. If they did, they would not allow themselves to be diverted by a political circus.
It amazes me how the vast majority of conservatives — both inside and outside of the media — still take Barack Obama seriously and believe he is desperately trying to save the United States from economic disaster. Don’t get me wrong. Obama wants to do what is right for America, but his vision of “right” is wealth redistribution on a massive scale carried out by an all-powerful Federal government.
As Obama continues to toy with Republicans over raising the debt ceiling, he is well aware that the continuation of his policies will destroy the U.S. economy beyond repair. I believe his strategy from the outset has been to follow the Saul Alinsky model: Win the Presidency through a semi-legitimate election, then tighten your grip over everything and everybody, move swiftly to create economic chaos, and use the chaos you’ve created to establish a dictatorship.
Now don’t go giving Obama too much credit for originality. He’s really just a slick and clever copycat. Getting elected and then using your powers to eliminate all competition is an old trick used by power-hungry thugs throughout history.
Of all the dictators over the past hundred years, I believe Obama’s rise to power mirrors that of Adolf Hitler’s more than anyone else. I know, I know… I can practically hear readers chuckling. Enslaved people throughout history have a propensity for chuckling — until they wake up one morning and find themselves in chains. So, by all means, feel free to chuckle — but do hear me out.
Though most people don’t realize it, Hitler was legitimately chosen to be chancellor of Germany in 1933 by President Paul von Hindenburg. At his swearing-in ceremony, Hitler faithfully repeated the oath of office: “I will employ my strength for the welfare of the German people, protect the Constitution and laws of the German people, conscientiously discharge the duties imposed on me, and conduct my affairs of office impartially and with justice to everyone.”
Nice words… similar to those uttered by Obama when being sworn into office. Hitler was a charming, eloquent speaker who carried on incessantly about change. (Sound familiar?) Then, once elected, he moved quickly to establish a dictatorship, accomplishing that seemingly impossible feat in 52 days. Obama moved swiftly as well, but opposing forces in America made it impractical to establish a quick dictatorship.
The upstart Nazi Party (which was the commonly used name for the National Socialist German Workers’ Party… repeat, Socialist) staged a slobbering love affair between Hitler and the German people. (Sound familiar?) When Hitler spoke for the first time as chancellor, it was said that he “was greeted with an outpouring of worshipful adulation unlike anything ever seen before in Germany.” (Sound familiar?)
In The Road to Serfdom, F.A. Hayek explained the way countries travel the road from democracy to dictatorship:
It is important to remember that, for some time before 1933, Germany had reached a stage in which it had, in effect, had to be governed dictatorially… Hitler did not have to destroy democracy; he merely took advantage of the decay of democracy and at the critical moment obtained the support of many to whom, though they detested Hitler, he yet seemed the only man strong enough to get things done.
Under the Articles of Confederation, the central government of America was very weak — which was a good thing. It was true then, and it’s true now: You can have a strong government and a weak people, or a strong people and a weak government — but you cannot have both. Today, we have a draconian, out-of-control government and a very weak people.
Arguably, democracy in this country started to break down in 1787 when the Constitution created a strong Federal government. It got worse — much worse — under the fascist policies of Woodrow Wilson’s reign from 1912 to 1920. Then, beginning in 1932, FDR’s failed socialist policies took away even more individual freedom from American citizens. And the final disintegration of true democracy in the U.S. was catalyzed by the left-wing revolutionaries of the 1960s.
So if you’re wondering how Obama and his Marxist cronies have been able to violate the Constitution as though it didn’t exist, the answer is that they are merely taking advantage of the decay of democracy in the U.S. that was already present when they came to power. While Americans have been busy focusing on sports, reality TV, eating out three nights a week and trying to pay their mortgages, the fascistic socialists in Washington have been quietly working to establish a dictatorship based on the ruins of our democracy (which actually began as a republic).
Get it? I hope so. Because if a vast majority of everyday folks don’t get it soon, it will be too late. As I have repeatedly said, the debt ceiling debate is nothing more than a distraction from the real, underlying problem we all face: We are losing our freedom.
Our focus should be on stopping Barack Obama and his Marxist allies in Washington from establishing a communist dictatorship — politely referred to by conservative media commentators as an “imperial presidency.” But regardless of what one calls it, the important thing to understand is that under a dictatorship, everything else becomes irrelevant — including the debt ceiling “crisis” that political junkies are spending so much time fretting about.
To be forewarned is to be forearmed.
–Robert Ringer

Robert Ringer is the author of three No. 1 bestsellers and host of the highly acclaimed Liberty Education Interview Series, which features interviews with top political, economic, and social leaders. He has appeared on Fox News, Fox Business, The Tonight Show, Today, Good Morning America, The Dennis Miller Show, ABC Nightline, and The Charlie Rose Show, and has been the subject of feature articles in such major publications as Time, People, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Barron's, and The New York Times. To sign up for his one-of-a-kind, pro-liberty e-letter, A Voice of Sanity, Click Here.

All-Drama Obama -spinning a narrative that is entirely false.

All-Drama Obama not only isn't budging on tax hikes, he's spinning a narrative that is entirely false.

All-Drama Obama

By Jed Babbin on 7.25.11 @ 6:09AM

After yet another week of political theater, only one thing is clear. Barack Obama would rather have America default on its financial obligations than forgo the massive tax hikes he demands.

On Friday, there were only eleven days between America and the date on which it will begin to default, August 2.

The debt ceiling talks between President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) blew up on Friday when Boehner -- frustrated with Obama's games -- announced he would quit the talks and work out a deal with congressional leaders, rendering Obama irrelevant. Obama deserves to be pushed out of the picture, but Boehner's strategy relied on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to be fiscally responsible and politically sensible. Unsurprisingly, as of Sunday evening, Reid and Pelosi -- having met with Obama -- were off drafting their own bill, leaving Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell empty-handed.

Meanwhile, two more days were lost.

If the stakes weren't so high for our economy, the past three months of debt ceiling crisis talks could be written off as just another White House-engineered psychodrama. All-Drama Obama wants to continue raising voters' anxiety regardless of the effects on our economy simply to pressure Boehner and McConnell to give in to his demands.

Obama has only two goals: one is to increase the debt ceiling to a sufficient level that the issue won't pop up again to damage him in the 2012 campaign, and the second is to increase taxes without making significant cuts in federal spending. He apparently regards the very real debt ceiling crisis as nothing more than a political tool.

But Obama's goals appeared to have been effectively blocked on Friday when Boehner walked out of the White House talks. Obama -- at the point of an agreement -- suddenly imposed a new demand for "revenue enhancements" -- i.e., tax hikes -- far in excess of those Boehner was prepared to accept. Boehner behaved admirably by walking out, and in what he said were his reasons for doing so.

At 3:55 pm on Friday, Boehner told the press that Congress was going to develop its own plan because the White House talks had failed.

He said:

The discussions we've had with the White House have broken down for two reasons. First, they insisted on raising taxes. We had an agreement on a revenue number. A revenue number that we thought we could reach based on a flatter tax code with lower rates and a broader base that would produce more economic growth, more employees and more taxpayers, and a tax system that was more efficient in collecting the taxes that were due the federal government. And let me just say that the White House moved the goalpost. There was an agreement, some additional revenues, until yesterday when the president demanded $400 billion more which was going to be nothing more than a tax increase on the American people.

About three and a half hours later, an obviously rattled Obama went in front of the cameras to blame Boehner for the talks' failure andreiterate his demand for tax hikes. Diving into in class warfare rhetoric, Obama said:

Now, if you do not have any revenues, as the most recent Republican plan that's been put forward both in the House and the Senate proposed, if you have no revenues at all, what that means is more of a burden on seniors, more drastic cuts to education, more drastic cuts to research, a bigger burden on services that are going to middle-class families all across the country. And it essentially asks nothing of corporate jet owners, it asks nothing of oil and gas companies, it asks nothing from folks like me who've done extremely well and can afford to do a little bit more.

And then the drama:

We have now run out of time. I told Speaker Boehner, I've told Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, I've told Harry Reid, and I've told Mitch McConnell I want them here at 11:00 a.m. tomorrow. We have run out of time. And they are going to have to explain to me how it is that we are going to avoid default. And they can come up with any plans that they want and bring them up here and we will work on them. The only bottom line that I have is that we have to extend this debt ceiling through the next election, into 2013.

This act of the drama was played against a backdrop of the series of Obama-declared deadlines that he uses to create tension. But Obama is no Hitchcock: his ticking clocks and burning fuses have become a bore.
READ MORE:  http://spectator.org/archives/2011/07/25/all-drama-obama#

The Coup d’etat on January 21, 2009

AND WHY DOES CONGRESS STAND BY AND DO NOTHING?

by Gary Stevens

(Jul. 23, 2011) — No battle was fought. No guns were fired. No bullets or bombs were involved. In the smooth movement of a pen over a previously-prepared document, the overthrow of the United States of America took place. The coup d’etat, still in its progressive movement of deconstructing America, was achieved without Congressional debate. No voice of argument. Less than 24 hours into office, the putative President of the United States, Barry Soetero (aka Barack Obama), signed Executive Order #13489.

Filed on January 23, 2009 at 8:45 a.m., the occupant of the Oval office sealed his records containing past names, student status, foreign travels, passport information, Selective Service registration and all educational transcripts. The historical footprint of Barry Soetero (his last legal name since adoption) was wiped away in the swoosh signature of a pen on a document prepared by Robert Bauer. No fanfare. No major media paid attention. For the first time in the Republic’s history an unknown, undocumented, and non-vetted candidate took the highest office of the land. Through the cheers, the tears, and the exuberance of those who voted for this unknown mystery, many failed to note what really happened.

The HUGE fact that a previous document (the Constitution) required that the office of President and Vice President be eligible as to age, country of residence and a “natural born Citizen” was disregarded in the election of 2008. The distinction of “natural born” in Article II, Section 1 was deliberately articulated by the founders for these two offices. Why? So that no foreign loyalties could hamper or compromise the Republic. We as a nation have been compromised. All the awareness of terrorism in our day from without is but a distraction of the real threat we have within the White House. A person would have to be blind and not know Braille to see the fabric of complicity among the ranks in government.

Why has there NOT been discovery allowed in every court case filed regarding Barry’s real ID? Why is the FBI NOT investigating the now-proven fraudulent birth certificate? Why is Congress NOT interested in the fraudulent use of Barry’s Social Security number? Why is the only person who peeked into the passport records of Barry shot dead? Why is it okay to have seventy (70) known documented National Socialist members in Congress? Why is the majority of Barry’s administration all linked to Soros or the SEIU or communist organizations? Is there even a hint maybe something is amiss with the incompetence of the impostor?

The GREATEST INSANITY of all!

The Congress is negotiating the economic future of America with an illegal president.

The ALARMING INSANITY:  the liar-in-chief commands our military.

The ASTOUNDING INSANITY:  the Director of Homeland Security has a boss that is “THE” breach of all security.

The ASTRONOMICAL INSANITY:  he is still in office with no disclosure of who he really is !

The coup d’etat from January 21, 2009 continues.

http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/07/23/the-coup-detat-on-january-21-2009/