- Questions - Rate Congress - July 24-25, 2011
New High: 46% Think Most in Congress Are Corrupt
New Low: 6% Think Congress Is Doing A Good or Excellent Job
See Toplines
Platinum Page
National Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters
Conducted July 24-25, 2011
By Rasmussen Reports
1* Generally speaking how do you rate the way that Congress is doing its job….excellent good fair or poor?
2* Over the past year, has Congress passed any legislation that will significantly improve life in America?
3* What is a more important role for Congress – passing good legislation or preventing bad legislation from becoming law?
4* Are most members of Congress sincerely interested in helping people or are they just interested in their own careers?
5* Are most members of Congress corrupt?
- Permalink Reply by on
- Permalink Reply by on
- Here is EXTREME1. H.R.1420 : Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission Act
Sponsor: Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] (introduced 4/7/2011) Cosponsors (3)
Committees: House Oversight and Government Reform
Latest Major Action: 4/8/2011 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, U.S. Postal Service, and Labor Policy .
2. H.J.RES.28 : Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States regarding the right to vote.
Sponsor: Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] (introduced 2/14/2011) Cosponsors (7)
Committees: House Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 2/28/2011 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
3. H.J.RES.29 : Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States regarding the right of all citizens of the United States to a public education of equal high quality.
Sponsor: Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] (introduced 2/14/2011) Cosponsors (2)
Committees: House Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 2/28/2011 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
4. H.J.RES.30 : Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States regarding the right of citizens of the United States to health care of equal high quality.
Sponsor: Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] (introduced 2/14/2011) Cosponsors (2)
Committees: House Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 2/28/2011 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
5. H.J.RES.31 : Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to equality of rights and reproductive rights.
Sponsor: Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] (introduced 2/14/2011) Cosponsors (1)
Committees: House Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 2/28/2011 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
6. H.J.RES.32 : Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States respecting the right to decent, safe, sanitary, and affordable housing.
Sponsor: Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] (introduced 2/14/2011) Cosponsors (2)
Committees: House Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 2/28/2011 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
7. H.J.RES.33 : Proposing an amendment the Constitution of the United States respecting the right to a clean, safe, and sustainable environment.
Sponsor: Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] (introduced 2/14/2011) Cosponsors (2)
Committees: House Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 2/28/2011 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
8. H.J.RES.34 : Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to taxing the people of the United States progressively.
Sponsor: Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] (introduced 2/14/2011) Cosponsors (2)
Committees: House Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 2/28/2011 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
9. H.J.RES.35 : Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States respecting the right to full employment and balanced growth.
Sponsor: Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] (introduced 2/14/2011) Cosponsors (2)
Committees: House Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 2/28/2011 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
10. H.J.RES.36 : Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to abolish the Electoral College and provide for the direct election of the President and Vice President by the popular vote of all citizens of the United States regardless of place of residence.
Sponsor: Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] (introduced 2/14/2011) Cosponsors (2)
Committees: House Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 2/28/2011 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Permalink Reply by on
- INTELLECTUAL ESPIONAGE
- At the start of WWII, millions of men showed up at registration offices to take low-level academic tests before being inducted. 3 The years of maximum mobilization were 1942 to 1944; the fighting force - both those inducted and those turned away - had been mostly schooled in the 1930s. Eighteen million men were tested; 17,280,000 of them were judged to have the minimum competence in reading required to be a soldier-a 96 percent literacy rate. Although this was a 2 percent fall-off from the 98 percent rate among voluntary military applicants ten years before, the dip was so small it didn't worry anybody.
- WWII was over in 1945. Six years later another war began in Korea. Several million men were tested for military service, but this time 600,000 were rejected. Literacy in the draft pool had dropped to 81 percent even though all that was needed to classify a soldier as literate was fourth-grade reading proficiency. In the few short years from the beginning of WWII to Korea, a terrifying problem of adult illiteracy had appeared. The Korean War group received most of its schooling in the 1940s; it had more years in school with more professionally trained personnel and more scientifically selected textbooks than the WWII men, yet it could not read, write, count, speak, or think as well as the earlier, less-schooled contingent.
- A third American war began in the mid-1960s, By its end in 1973, the number of men found non-inductible by reason of inability to read safety instructions, interpret road signs, decipher orders, and so on - the number found illiterate, in other words - had reached 27 percent of the total pool. Vietnam-era young men had been schooled in the 1950s and the 1960s-much better schooled than either of the two earlier groups-but the 4 percent illiteracy of 1941, which had transmuted into the 19 percent illiteracy of 1952, now had grown into the 27 percent illiteracy of 1970. Not only had the fraction of competent readers dropped to 73 percent, but a substantial chunk of even those were only barely adequate; they could not keep abreast of developments by reading a newspaper; they could not read for pleasure; they could not sustain a thought or an argument; they could not write well enough to manage their own affairs without assistance.
- Consider how much more compelling this steady progression of intellectual blindness is when we track it through Army admissions tests rather than college admissions scores and standardized reading tests, which inflate apparent proficiency by frequently changing the way the tests are scored.
- http://www.spinninglobe.net/lessons.htm
- Permalink Reply by on
- Permalink Reply by on
- Permalink Reply by on
- With experience in the aerospace industry, can you please tell me where the real contradiction is (<4min)?If ignorance is bliss, the US is on cloud nine.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Lisa,I have been a pilot since I was 6 years old and have flown over 5,000 hours. Wake turbulence are real things but cross winds blow them away so they do not always follow the plane. I have encountered the same wind phenomena that occurred from winds coming off a mountain in Reno, Nevada. We were flying a large twin Cessna 421 on long final when suddenly we were upside down. Going to the tower and interviewing the air traffic controller it was determined that we did follow a heavy [big fully loaded plane].The force of the explosion of the jet fuel could disrupt the wake and as well as the wake is delayed as the video shows. If you want more info go to google and there are literaly hundreds of reports and analysis of wake turbulence and heavy air craft.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Permalink Reply by on
- You can not learn if you will not read - there is no direct SCOTUS case on issue. However if you read Slaughterhouse it talks of citizenship [s] - the point is still like always - a person "BORN" inside the borders of the U.S.A. is a CITIZEN AND ENTITLED TO ALL RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES .It will take a amendment to repeal the birth issue. Your fears of the slippery slope is just BS and you know it. The use of a Article V State amendment can be written prior to the convention and even then it has to be returned to the State legislature for final ratification of 38 state legislatures. Get real - I will not let you misrepresent the facts with your loose based opinions. Facts not BS is what you need to put down.Take the time to go here and watch the videos and read the entire publication then come back and explain your loose slippery slope BS.
- Permalink Reply by on
- SCOTUS cases on issue - the Slaughter house case addresses citizenship as a citizen of the United States of America and a separate citizenship of a individual State. the others all come off Slaughter and show the new found power of reach through to the States by the Federal government and the courts. Ending and diminishing States rights and powers. If the founders intended the Bill of rights to apply to the States would they have not spelled that out in detail?We have debated this many times but Atlas you keep trying to say that the SCOTUS must define Natural born - that is not within their power nor is it going to rule on that issue it would at best specify a conflict and send it to Congress for legislative action - IMHOHere's a case from 1983 affirming that an anchor baby is a Natural Born.see also, e.g., Diaz-Salazar v. I.N.S., 700 F.2d 1156, 1160 (7th Cir. 1983) (noting in its recitation of the facts that despite the fact father was not a citizen of the United States, he had children who were “natural-born citizens of the United States”), cert. denied 462 U.S. 1132, 103 S. Ct. 3112 (1983).
No comments:
Post a Comment