Mexico: Violence Continues: Beheadings and Bombings – Will a New President from an Old Party Bring Peace to the U.S. and Mexican Border?

Newly Elected President of Mexico - Enrique Pena Nieto and Family - image: nbclatino.com



From the Telegraph (UK): Enrique Peña Nieto, (Institutional Revolutionary Party –PRI) won the Presidential Elections held in Mexico this past week. The party had ruled for decades prior to 2000- but was ousted over corruption and violence. That said, the problems with violent Drug Cartels and a stagnant economy, plus the popularity of Neito, who is married to one of Mexico’s most famous soap opera stars, Angelica Rivera (ABC News) coupled with promises of reform without a return to the corruption of the past, propelled him to victory. (Telegraph)

However, the violence in Mexico has continued with a dozen dismembered bodies were discovered in Durango State (Borderland Beat), coupled with a car bombing, days before the election in Neuvo Laredo which is less than 2 hours drive from Carrizo Springs, TX, and the beheading of rival drug members which was videotaped and placed online (ABC News).

It remains to be seen, therefore, how the new President, who officially takes office in December, will deal with the cartels: either through a mutual agreement as in past decades under PRI party rule, or other methods not yet know. It that without serious intervention, including marshal law and a complete military compliance with zero tolerance for gangs – little can be done to stem the ever increasing battles on and crossing the U.S. Mexican border into neighboring states (Texas and Arizona (less in California as the border has been secured with 18-foot-high fences and camera monitors in hard-to-reach valleys(USA Today).

President Obama did call and congratulate President elect, Enrique Peña Nieto, but did not mention the drug cartels or address the growing violence on the border. (Yahoo News) This is most likely related to the ongoing scandal with the Justice Department under Attorney General Eric Holder who was found to be in Contempt of Congress for refusing to submit documents relating to the Fast and Furious gun exchange with Mexican Cartels which led to the death of a border patrol agent and untold numbers of Mexican nationals (Alaska Dispatch). President Obama has exercised Executive Privilege in refusing to release the documents subpoenaed by Congress in this case, protecting Holder. The President insists he knows nothing about the situation. That said, the administration has offered a $5 million dollar reward for information leading to the arrest of one of the cartel members who has operations in both the U.S. and Mexico (U.S. Department of Justice).

Mexico, it appears, is on its own, with a new President, an old political party and an out-of-control border war that once was based on the occasional shootout, but has morphed into Middle Eastern like car bombings, beheadings and dismemberments. As this is occurring right on the U.S. border as well as in popular cities throughout Mexico, it bears watching by those planning trips to Mexico, as well as Border States in the U.S. It also gives credence to Arizona’s Governor, Jan Brewer, who has fought relentlessly for the rights of Arizonan’s to protect themselves from the overflow violence. She has gone head to head with the administration, and has won a partial victory in the Supreme Court over enforcement of the Arizona Law SB1070. Governor Brewer is one of the biggest advocates for a controlled U.S. Mexican border to preserve the peace, lives and livelihood of Arizona and U.S. residents.

Of course, it remains to be seen if the popular new President will have an impact on the border, but, as Mexico’s elections, which require a national voter i.d. card (USA Today), are based on the will of the people, his political fortunes may depend upon finding a solution to end the violence.

Is ObamaCare (Affordable Health Care Act) a Tax or a Penalty? – The Short and Simple Answer – a Public Service Announcement

With all the hubbub about politics, and one’s pocket book, and the war of words between Democrats and Republican’s – it is without doubt, one of the biggest disservices to the American People that the question of whether or not Obama Care is a Tax or a Penalty be answered. It is constantly asked.

The Democrats want the people to view it as a penalty – if you don’t have insurance, and are uninsured – then you pay a “penalty”

Using the Massachusetts Model - similar in “penalty structure” to the Federal Model
When it comes time for those of you who are not offered employer insurance, or if offered, cannot afford the insurance or, if unavailable, one cannot still afford the insurance – one can pay a penalty to the State of Massachusetts, Department of Revenue, which is sometimes up to two-thirds less than having to buy insurance, but at least – one is not going to jail for not paying their “penalty”.

Additionally, the penalty is paid to the Department of Revenue, the department that is directly responsible for all taxes in Massachusetts.

Moreover the employer, the employed, the unemployed, the underemployed, must produce proof of insurance to the state of Massachusetts in order to file their tax returns – in other words, there is no way around not having health insurance in Massachusetts - if one does not – one pays the “fee” to the Commonwealth.

Under the Affordable Health Care Act, the situation is similar, except forms will be going to the Internal Revenue Service, if one does not have the insurance papers, or proof of insurance, one is assessed a penalty of up to $25,000, and if one can’t pay that penalty? – then one is subject to interest on the outstanding balance, one might have wages garnished, or even social security garnished, and incur incredible legal fees, or face prison. This is for every single American that is not insured, it does not affect those on Medicaid, or Medicare, or those who have insurance through employers, but those who do not have the luxury of either, and there are millions of them – all earning anywhere from $30K to under $200K per year.

So, is it or is it not a tax?

The rule of thumb is this: if you pay a fee or a penalty to an agency such as the Internal Revenue Service, must include supporting data on your Tax Returns in order to either become except from the penalty or pay the penalty – then that penalty – on your Tax Returns, and the monies that you pay – is a TAX.

When money comes out of your pocket and is placed in the hands of a government – call it a fee, call it a penalty – if it sounds more politically appealing, but at the end of the day, the citizen who’s wallet is slimmer, who’s mortgaging their home, if they can to pay the fees levied by the IRS for not having health insurance, is having their wages, or tax returns garnished for not having health insurance, and has to make any payments to an agency who’s sole specific purpose is to collect taxes for the Federal Government – what does that make the money leaving one’s pocket and going to the Federal government? – A Tax

Therefore, a penalty or a fee is just a nice word used by politicians to get you to pay a – Tax.

It’s simple, it’s logical, and now the American Public is being forced to purchase an item, and if they cannot afford to purchase that item? – They are being taxed, and if they do not pay that tax, they are considered “criminal”.

More-over, if one lives in a state that already has Health Care Reform with penalties in place for non-compliance and those “taxes” are sent to a Department of Revenue, then one will be liable to pay two fines – or two taxes – just like one does the income penalty – or the federal income penalty, the taxes one pays or is penalized for working for a living. That’s a stretch, but it allows one to understand that every nickel or dime one is paying to a state or government is not a “fee” or “penalty” is it a tax. The word tax being unpopular, is often interchanged with “fee” or “penalty” but is, and remains a tax.

Elizabeth Warren, (D) for Senate, Mass. – House Flipping History Does not Square with Stump Speeches – Hypocrite?

Elizabeth Warren, Dem for MA Senate, (Against Scott Brown), shown with house she "flipped" in OK - image Boston Herald)


Elizabeth Warren appears to have a bit more family history that might not square with her “persona” as a “champion for the middle class” – The Boston Heraldreported that Warren and her Husband made huge profits off foreclosed properties in Oklahoma, and lent money to family members at high interest rates to boot. The woman who is being groomed by the Democrats as the “Next Barack Obama” (NYTimes-Multiple source), apparently has more hypocrisy in her history besides claims to have begun the Occupy movement (Shades of Al Gore), and her fiasco of a claim that she was part Cherokee, to the extent that it appeared to have given her a job at Harvard. The list goes on and on – making her one of on the biggest shysters to come down the Massachusetts Turnpike (see Big Dig) in a long time.

The problem with Warren, is not so much her ideology , which as progressive as the President, and every college professor in Massachusetts (with few exceptions), Warren is the typical bongo drumming, down with capitalism, up with the people, taxes are great, share the wealth nonsense everyone in the Bay State is used to hearing – and for the most part ignoring. – Of course, not everyone buys into the Progressive Democrat ideology – with booksellers to bakers from the East Coast to the Western Hills, using the moniker for cities such as Amherst and the entire Bay State – as the “People’s Republic”. The difference between those die-hard, tie-died liberal progressive Democrats is that they are sincere in their belief structure, having of background of bongo drumming and the occasional protest against whatever strikes their fancy at the moment. Even criminal Speakers of the Massachusetts House are so transparent, that they are normally indicted – Massachusetts politicians maybe a lot of things, but for the most part, they are essentially honest and have a past, criminal or otherwise, to back that up.
However, the more we learn about Elizabeth Warren, the more it appears as if she’s taken advantage of the programs and the systems in a way that would make most EBT Fraudsters proud – and to top it off, has an excuse, or press release – handy whenever the next shoe bomb falls. All in all, the whole lying about being a Cherokee to get ahead, and get federal student loans, and into specific colleges, and into jobs, fairly commonplace – and not such a big deal, on the face of it – so Elizabeth Warren lack integrity. The fact that she’s flipped houses, for profit, and then goes on an “Occupy Wall Street Rant” – classic do as I say, not as I do elitist Progressive fare. However, she continues to offer these press releases stating that it’s overblown – seriously.

Warren who runs ads that do not tie her in any way to the Democrat Party, rather attempt to make her appear as independent as possible to Massachusetts voters – are so lacking in depth that no one east of the Boston Globe, the Herald and the Mass DNC knows who she is and what she is running for – a recent Democrat Convention held in Springfield, MA was underpublicized, except in a local daily, and a few blubs on local news – the bulk of all Warren stories, good or bad, are coming from out-of-state.

That strategy is not going to work for Massachusetts, assuming that one will get the vote simply because one has a “D” in front of their name, especially when the incumbent, even though a Republican, is one Scott Brown – popular. It’s rather hard to find anyone who doesn’t know who Brown is – but on the other hand, it’s difficult to find anyone who knows show Warren is – even down to the Cherokee Nation – and for Warren – she’s got too much fodder on the table now to try and play coy – she’s a carpetbagger from Oklahoma who has splaining' to do about her “dubious” past, and even that might not work. However, in order for the DNC plan of turning her into the next Barack Obama, so they can achieve another historic 1st (1st women President), they need a springboard, so they are using Massachusetts as a way to get Elizabeth some credence. They should back another horse, find another state, and go for it, leaving Warren to fare for her. It’s going to be a huge waste of money and comparable to the attempts of the SEIU and Wisconsin Democrats to topple Scott Walker in a recall.

Why? Brown broke the mold – not the mold as in now everyone who is a Republican will get elected (although there are a few house seats that are going to be extremely competitive and could give the Congress a few more Republicans), but the mold that puts people in a mindset of “vote Democrat if you’re a Democrat” - Independents, if one must be reminded are the majority “party” in MA, and they no longer care if someone is “a friend of Barack Obama’s” or “A Kennedy”. Therefore, stand up Elizabeth be proud of your hypocritical land-flipping, your claims of being on the “Trail of Tears” (sarcasm), and anything else that might come up – (the Herald is most likely saving the better skeletons for September and October) – and run for a statehouse seat. You could then get elected to the Speaker of the House (just as good a platform for a woman, historically, in Massachusetts, and just as lucrative a job opportunity!) If all else fails, after the indictments are handed down, Warren could enjoy a massive state pensions then take to the airwaves, as a talk show host – maybe grab a spot next to Carr’s on WRKO.

As a feminist, one must realize that not every woman who comes down the pike (Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New York just to name a few turnpikes), is worth the vote. One must be discriminatory, when looking for someone who would represent not only the people, but women in general – as a first of anything, or as a Senator or elected official. It is imperative that the credentials be almost squeaky clean – maybe a blur, but not to the point of continued “revelations” of character flaws. Why? Women have a hard time being taken seriously, still earning less on a dollar despite multiple attempts dating from JFK forward to enact “Equal Pay Laws”, maligned for everything from biological to fashionable, women themselves eat their own (See Hillary Clinton, most qualified candidate in the past decade for President, thrown under the bus, by alleged “feminists”), so why would a flawed candidate believe for one minute that they would be qualified to not only take on the Senate, but stand for all American women? The danger in electing Warren isn’t that she’s incompetent, or that she stretches the truth, or that she’s a Progressive who sits at Obama’s right hand and has become his biggest Romney attack dog – the danger is that should she be elected, she’ll be the one all women are judged against, especially in Massachusetts – making it impossible or implausible that another woman running, even a competent woman would be able to make the grade. Is it Warren’s fault? Not entirely, it’s the DNC and their failure to completely vet; their arrogance in thinking that anyone they choose to be the Next Barack will just be so elite, no one would dare question their choice. (The DNC isn’t the only major party with that problem – See Scott Brown early election with the RNC stayed out of the race until it became glaringly apparent that here was a race and he had a snowballs chance in Hades that he just might win and make history.)

To recap, Warren is a lovely woman, grandmotherly, sweet, in her ads, but a tool none-the-less of the DNC, she has made at least one glaring hypocritical error, and of course, figured out how to best the system by being “American Indian” – perhaps thinking no one would buy her being another “minority”. Due to the benign ads, no one has a clue that she’s a Democrat – which might play in her favor, except she’s unknown and Brown is known – for doing a lot and working for the state. He may have those who disagree with him, especially within his own party, but that’s a non-starter. When name recognition is a problem, something is wrong – and for Warren to get her name out there, she’ll have to bring all the baggage with her – then the PAC ads will begin – and that will be the end of it.

Although polls show this to be a close race, one must recall the Massachusetts polls of the past, specifically with Scott Brown, where he was the underdog, by upwards to 15 points, 3 days before he won by 5. In Massachusetts, when one is known to be doing their job, Democrat or Republican, people remember, and instead of voting just because someone is of a certain prominent party, or in support of ObamaCare (the TAX), or in support of “middle class families, losing their homes”, while having flipped houses, one will vote for the Devil the know – rather that the Devil that they don’t.
It’s that simple.