Classy Budgeting

The sight of understanding is view through clear eyes, an open mind, and a cynical heart. Money is clear and doesn't mind much and fills the pockets like a blood to the heart if you're lucky enough. 

Between 11.68 and 15.71 percent of growth doesn't cut it for the spending cap for me. The Legislative Budget Board should subject changes with is financial growth to come. The spending cap is put in place just as The Darling Texan explains, to basically put a cap on it. Of course the cap doesn't help if you poke holes in it. In other words creating loopholes in budget spending. So what is the point?

House of Cards (season one) said it first, the first thing to be talked about is education. Why didn't we get the memo? I agree with The Darling Texan that it is a topic too far ignored. The Darling Texan particularly its points out that Texas has one of the lowest SAT rates and we should direct some of this potential growth and spending cap nonsense to Texas school systems. 

This is no taboo subject, yet, of course low and behold our children down the road haven't received enough education it will be a sore subject. The Darling Texan makes it understood with clear eyes and an open mind that it is up to us and the lawmakers we elect to take our booming surplus of potential growth and use it for betterment purposes, "getting back on track".

http://thedaringtexan1.blogspot.com/2014/12/needed-changes-for-new-budget.html

Judicial Rules

An article based on the Supreme Courts more recent hearing has struck particular attention to the 13 class-action lawsuit and about 400,000 plaintiffs against Amazon. The court ruled Tuesday on whether workers should be compensated for the lengthy security measure prior to leaving an Amazon Warehouse. Where workers jobs are to "retrieve products from warehouse shelves and package them for delivery" The court ruled the security measure were not apart of their job and therefore they will not be paid as if it were. The court considered this was not "integral and indispensable" to their jobs. 

The Supreme Court interpreted the law in 1956 in Steiner v. Mitchell to require pay only for tasks that are an “integral and indispensable part of the principal activities for which covered workmen are employed.”

There is no reason for workers to be paid for what they do before and after their productive work time. They are not putting for effort contributing to the job by taking off their belt. It should be said that it should not have to be such a burden and lengthy time however it should be incorporated in as part of the day. There must obviously be some way to make security check move smoother and faster, which Amazon reports to have contrary to the article. There is a solution here and for the Supreme Court to hear and address such an arbitrary issue is lacking in progress of the Judicial system in our nation's government. 

-http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/10/business/supreme-court-rules-against-worker-pay-for-security-screenings.html?ref=politics&_r=0

Commentary

I do concur!

The war on terror is an ongoing threat that President Obama has been evasive in addressing. Although his intentions may mean well he has not followed through with his original plan to close Guantanamo Bay, rightly so.

An example of this is the trade three detainees that have been proven leaders of Al-Qaeda later to have been traded for one military personnel. This contributed to the usage of prisoners as bargaining pons in Presidents Obama's chess set. The blog presents other examples and accruate data to display that the prisoners of Guantanamo are there for a reason. For that reason, the idea that President Obama has the "good intention" to release those not an affective threat is largely diluted to the threat they may potentionaly make later on. 

Consequently, I could not agree more that "Closing Guantanamo bay is a huge mistake." because of the severity of the crimes and prisoners. I do feel that the original critique is a not haste in saying events that may come from Guantanamo Bay's closing may lead to another 9/11 attack may be possible. We fear what we do not know. 

The original article confirms data on the numbers of prisoners and President Obama's intentions, the article critique confirms the facts and presents the logical view that Guantanamo Bay should not be closed due to future high risk events.

- http://lpusg.blogspot.com

Vote and Save and Safe

The "last-ditch effort at NSA reform" as some see it for the assumed wiretapping to being in America. 

To begin the conversation… some conditions may apply, you're liberty may be at stake, you privacy may be in jeopardy, and you're safety may be monitored by America's Father.

"Congress can and should take up and pass the bipartisan USA Freedom Act, without delay."

Majority Leader is taking the initiative to clarify the Surveillance Reform Bill that will be voted on this year. This article discussing what the bill includes as well as the motion made by Senate.

The bill was first introduced in July and will reach a consensus later this year. The bill includes NSA's "bulk collection of Americans' phone records" and modifies the inclusions and security of persons "city, state, ZIP code or area code" 

I agree with the article and the bill to hopefully be passed, in order to monitor and provide safety through searching and collecting further information of all American's. What is less safe than thorough investigation of all threats foreign and domestic. If an American is not considered a threat, their information is secure and recored. As per the bills provision the amount of monitoring and investigation provides "narrowing the definition of an appropriate surveillance target" So that there is no extortion and manipulation to the bills provisions. Further serving the purpose to keep American's safe. However the extent of the bill may bring multiple provisions later on to determine the extent of the bill in America.

Article NSA Surveillance Reform Bill Pushed Forward for Vote in Senate from Newsweek by Lauren Walker

It SHOULD Stop.

An editorial, more or less an opinion piece from The Seattle Times discusses the manipulation of our freedom of press. The editorial "FBI is undermining core principle of a free press" digs it's nails into FBI's impersonation's of journalists to acquire knowledge. The editorial stating "Impersonating journalists is not an appropriate cover for the FBI.".

Who could argue that the "fundamental freedoms of American life" aren't being held over a fire. As if the First Amendment didn't preserve the "freedom to share ideas and covey information vital to a functioning republic" there is more at stake than journalists freedom of press, speech, and distribution of information.

By shining a light on those who find truth, convey a message and dig where other's can't the FBI has exposed a large source to all kinds of information. By pretending to be a journalist, journalists are in danger.

Who's to say they aren't all just spy-journalists, all in on it from the FBI. What a terrible assumption that put future information at stake. The editorial presents a valid point that the suspicions of innocent journalists and freelance writers can lead to dangerous events. For example the beheadings in both 2002 and 2014 of writers for being alleged spy-journalists.

To what extent will the FBI go to get information? Sacrificing the jobs, writings and opinions, even lives? FBI Director James B. Comey later argued that the impersonations of journalists to get information are done "reasonable and legally" in his letter to The New York Times. How can this be? Again not only are they infringing the rights of journalists they are impersonating, which to a degree may be felony. But also creating unreasonable circumstances to follow. Where does the trust go to the person confiding in journalists? Where does the trust go to the FBI who undermine the natural rights of other for information, and potentially endangering people?

"This deception undermines core American principles. It should stop."

It SHOULD Stop.

(editorial by the board of seattle times members: Kate Riley, Frank A. Blethen, Ryan Blethen, Jonathin Martin and others. Posted Nov.11. http://seattletimes.com/html/editorials/2025004310_fbiapeditorialxml.html)

Let's talk about financial crisis' that our national government has "dealt" with for years. Scott Martelle reports in the LA Times, making note that "For many of us, The Great Recession just keeps on trucking". Martelle has been reporting and providing opinion pieces for LA Times for quite some time and can be considered moderately credible in this articles. Frankly, I couldn't agree more having seen many so called white collard workers knocked down to lower jobs or without a job in general. Ofcourse aren't we on the upper end of this recession? Not exactly... Recently jobs rates have seen new percentages but over all the long-lasting unemployment seems to milk as much as it can. Where is our government with all of this? Addressing other issues I'm sure. A large number of people (45% of those asked if government should get us out of this mess) reacted saying government "should act" versus put it on the shoulders for private-sector initiatives to play part. Martelle is clearly targeting the average worker as an audience. Since that is who this concerns. Martelle makes a concluding point that although "Wall Street maybe soaring, most of us are not." Martelle makes an underlying message for us to essentially point the finger back at our national government, asking what are they going to do about it? 

Article. LATIMES. "The Great Recession: The financial crisis that keeps on giving"

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-unemployment-great-recession-personal-finances-rutgers-2014009926-story.html 

Threats grow and grow these day, however to what extent do we take them seriously. Where do we make decisions based on the threats made? That answer for Congress would be eh let’s say December. Why? Because to face “Authorization for the Use of Military Force” may put Congress between a rock and an even harder place than they are now.

            Congress has decided, or rather not decided to address what Syrian rebels have to help and what ISIS may bring. The decisions of funds given to Syrian rebels to “oppose the Islamic state and temporarily fund the government” are about to be in question… later. Setting up the ever so clever “Syria cliff” leaving the National Government and its leaders to measure what actions may not return the worst consequences (all other events, Iraq and Afghanistan, in mind).

            This is important to keep an eye on as the government nears a critical midterm and political direction soon. So how fast will threat grow and will a December be soon enough?

-Article

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/syria-vote-senate-2014-111093.html?hp=r8