Monday, October 03, 2011

RELATIVE COST OF TOILET PAPER AND DOLLAR BILLS

RELATIVE COST OF TOILET PAPER AND DOLLARS
1. TOILET PAPER
a. I COUNTED THE NUMBER OF SEPARATE SHEETS IN A ROLL
OF TOILET PAPER.
THERE ARE 300 SHEETS IN A ROLL OF T.P.
b. THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY 380 MILLION PEOPLE IN USA
380 MILLION = 380 x 10^6 PEOPLE= 380,000,000 PEOPLE
c. ASSUMING THE USE OF 10 ROLLS OF T.P. PER PERSON PER
MONTH
10 X 380x 10^6 = 3800x 10^6 ROLLS OF T.P. USED IN USA
PER MONTH PER PERSON
d. 3800 x 10^6 ROLLS x 300 SHEETS PER ROLL
= 1140,000 x 10^6 SHEETS
= 1,140,000,000,000. = 1.14 TRILLION SHEETS
d. THE STORE COST IS $3.85 FOR 9 ROLLS OF T.P.
$3.85/ 9 = $0.43 PER ROLL T.P.
e. THE TOTAL COST FOR 10 ROLLS OF T.P. FOR EVERYONE
IN AMERICA PER MONTH = 3800x 10^6 x $0.43 PER ROLL
= 1634 x 10^6 DOLLARS IN AMERICA
FOR 10 ROLLS PER PERSON PER MONTH
= 1634,000,000. = 1.634 BILLION DOLLARS FOR
1.14 TRILLION SHEETS OF T.P.
f. 1.634 BILLION DOLLARS / 1.14 TRILLION SHEETS
= 1.634 x 10^ 9 / 1.14 x 10^12 = 1.43 x 10x^-3 DOLLARS
PER SHEET OF T.P.
= 0.00143 DOLLARS TO WIPE
OUR BUTS WITH ONE SHEET
OF T.P.
g. IT COSTS EACH AMERICAN 0.00143 DOLLARS TO WIPE OUR
ASSES PER SHEET OF TP
14.6 x 10^12 DOLLARS OF DEBT / 1.14 x 10^12 SHEETS OF TP
TO WIPE OUR BUTTS FOR ONE MONTH
h. 14.6/1.14 = $12.8 DOLLARS OF DEBT TO WIPE OUT BUTTS FOR ONE MONTH.

i. THUS, IT COSTS 12.8 DOLLARS OF DEBT TO WIPE OUR ASSES WITH ONE SHEET OF TP FOR ONE MONTH

2. NATONAL DEBT
a. NATONAL DEBT = 14.6 TRILLION DOLLARS
14.6 TRILLION = 14.6 x 10^12 DOLLARS
14,600,000,000,000 DOLLARS

c. AMERICANS USE 1.14 x 10^12 SHEETS OF T.P. PER MONTH
TO WIPE OUR ASSES. THE 1.14x 10^12 SHEETS ARE WORTH
14.6 x 10^12 / 1.14 x 10^12 = 12.8 DOLLARS OF DEBT TO
WIPE OUR ASSES FOR ONE
MONTH WITH SHEETS OF
TOILET PAPER

BOTTOM LINE
d. AT THE PRESENT TIME, IT COSTS $ 0.00143 TO WIPE OUR BUTTS WITH ONE SHEET OF TOILET PAPER
e. THE NATIONAL DEBT IS SO LARGE AND WOULD MAKE THE DOLLAR SO MUCH LESS VALUABLE THAT IT WOULD TAKE 12.8 OF THE LESS VALUABLE DOLLARS TO WIPE OUR BUTTS WITH ONE SHEET OF TOILET PAPER
c. EVENTUALLY, IT WILL BE CHEAPER TO WIPE OUR BUTTS
WITH DOLLAR BILLS THAN TOILET PAPER.
d. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT OBAMA AND THE PRESENT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INTENDS.

e. The national debt has now been quoted as 16 trillion dollars, not 14.6 trillion. The real national debt is hidden and may be much bigger. Eventually, it will be cheaper to wipe our butts with dollar bills than TP.

Labels: ,

OBAMA WAS AN ORGANIZER BEFORE A POLITICIAN

TO: Anyone Who Needs To Know
Knowledge Is Power

Dear Sir/Madam

Barack Obama was a trained community organizer before he was a lawyer or a politician. A community organizer uses a process developed by Saul Alinsky called ALINSKY which is very foreign to a normal negotiator or even to someone who is actually negotiating in good faith. ALINSKY is the radical’s bible and is used in politics, union organizations and even local government and especially Communist organizers. An Alinskyite never makes clear what his agenda is. President Obama has not submitted a budget for many months. The reason he has not submitted a budget is that he is following the Alinsky playbook. That is an insult to all of us and shows his disdain for all of us and Congress. I am dismayed that Congress continues to allow him to continue his thumbing his nose at the Constitution, Congress and the United States of America. Not submitting a budget is part of the Alinsky playbook. Obama is waiting for Congress to develop a spending plan and appropriations to fulfill the plan and then saying NO. He is following the Alinsky bible. He has no integrity. Do you really want to allow such a man to continue to destroy us?

The following is a quote from a trained organizer named Stanley Kurtz who recognized what Obama really is and what his agenda is. Kurtz heard Obama’s important speech at the 2002 (IIRC) convention. Obama was elected because he only talks in glittering generalities and never actually states what his agenda would be or the steps he would take to achieve his agenda. This is just an extension of his policy of “voting present” instead of actually casting a vote that had some substance and could be used to evaluate the man. The Americans who voted for Obama for president were manipulated using an Alinsky process. What is the Alinsky process? The following quote by Stanley Kurtz, a National Review author plus an added comment on Alinskyism by Art Chance, also of the National Review, makes quite clear what happened in the debt debate and how Obama got what he wanted. We, the voters and members of Congress have to understand what the Alinsky tactic is before we are able to rationally vote for anything. The voting citizens are now learning what Obama really is. Supporting him is not in the future of true Americans. Unfortunately, America is infected with millions of people (illegal immigrants, terrorists, America haters, a radical media, and a Congress that appears impotent to stop him.) that are destroying the United States of America.

.
By Stanley Kurtz, National Review Author:
“Here’s my take on the puzzle of Obama’s leadership style. Obama is still every inch the Alinskyite organizer. He talks about uniting, even as he deliberately polarizes. He moves incrementally toward radical left goals, but never owns up to his ideology. Instead, he tries to work indirectly, by way of the constituencies (added-- the democrat part of the debt super committee, & the United States Senate) he seeks to manipulate.”
“Leading from behind” is classic Alinskyite strategy. The organizer finds out what the people he’s organizing want, gives them enough to gain authority and control, then slowly and quietly pushes the group in his ideological direction, all the while making it seem as though the plan is what the people (added—the super committee & the United States Senate) themselves have asked for. Obama used to literally lead from behind, by managing his group’s protests from the back of the room, while the ostensible leaders took charge on stage. That is what Alinskyite organizers do”.
“Alinskyite organizers are tough when facing down the “enemy” (their word), but subtle, stealthy, and incremental when dealing with the members of their own group. Above all, they are never openly ideological. Everything is portrayed as pragmatism”.
“The trouble with Obama’s Alinskyite leadership style is that he’s trying to adapt it to the presidency, a role it was never designed for. When he tries classic Alinskyite polarization, he treats people he’s supposed to be leading as his enemies. When he tries to bring about leftist results under the guise of a neutral pragmatism, he disappoints his base, which desperately wants him to turn his eloquence to the task of persuading the country of their principles”. (added—this is exactly what some of the liberal base is complaining about. They say that Obama is not doing what he promised to do and they do not see what the real Obama process is.)
“Obama is a bad negotiator because Alinskyite’s don’t negotiate, they intentionally polarize. (added—The democrats on the “super committee especially the woman, are all Alinskyites and you should be aware of their tactics. Is the United States Senate, an Alinskyite organization??) As for their own groups, they try to placate all factions and hide their own goals. That about describes Obama’s performance on the debt deal, which included a dollop of both of these stances”.
“I’ve laid it all out in Radical-in-Chief, from standard Alinskyite operating procedure, to Obama’s own use of it in Chicago, to the contradictions inherent in the attempt to apply these lessons to the presidency. I believe Obama is still moving according to this Alinskyite template. In his own words, it was his true political education. It’s still the key to what he’s up to.” (Added—Obama and his minions( United States Senate) are going to do the same thing. They will suggest ridiculous ideas and then wait for the Republican part of the Super Committee( or the Senate) to work among themselves to try to come up with a workable debt solution. However, the solution that will be accepted by the Democrat group( and Obama) will be one that has ruined the ability of Republicans or America to actually solve the debt problem. The Republicans are going to have to do what the House Republicans failed to do and work ONLY for a debt solution that will destroy Obama’s desired result.) The reason why the Senate has been co-opted is that it is easier to control a majority of 100 men than it is to control a majority of 435 people. The United States must return to the original Constitution’s directive to have individual State’s legislatures elect the senators of their state.
“True, Alinskyite polarization and ideological reticence were never designed for the presidency. On the other hand, I doubt a candidate that is this leftist could ever have gotten elected President without them. From Obama’s perspective, he’s already gotten more done on health care, and plenty of other issues, than any other Democrat in history. For Alinskyites, patience is all. Obama has at least an even chance of re-election. So despite the difficulties of his community-organizer techniques, he’s likely to keep to them.
The Tea Party is a difficult problem for Obama. ( The Tea Party is taking no prisoners and know what they want. The new Republican House members have not understood what is happening to them. They tried to negotiate in good faith when all the time, the Alinskyites were just waiting for the Republicans to beat themselves. That is exactly what happened. ) As David Bromwich notes, at the Huffington Post, Obama has almost never actually used the words Tea Party. The left yearns for Obama to take on the Tea Party in an overt ideological battle. But that is exactly the sort of thing Alinskyite organizers are forbidden to do. Bromwich asks why Obama has steadfastly refused to recognize the existence of the Tea Party. The answer is Saul Alinsky.
The important comment on ALINSKY by Art Chance, also of the National Review puts the results of the debt “debate” in a clear, easily understood fashion.

The following quote of the Kurtz analysis of Obama as written by Art Chance is given below.



“We few in the United States who actually practice adversarial public sector labor relations knew what Comrade Obama was the second we laid eyes on him. By "adversarial" I mean we work for a Republican government in a union state where you actually have to bargain with unions. In Democrat controlled states, the government conspires with unions against the people and the legislature”.
“When I saw him make his famous speech at the '02 (IIRC) convention I said to myself, “I know you, and you’re the one they think they can dress up and pass off as reasonable." He's a by-the-book communist/union organizer and anyone who deals with him should know Alinsky like a Baptist minister knows the New Testament”.
“Obama is almost impossible for "nice guy" Republicans to deal with. The Republicans get their ideas about negotiating from "Getting to Yes" while Obama and his ilk get theirs from "Rules for Radicals." In the debt debate, Obama didn't want a deal, he wanted a political process that could be played to his advantage, and he was very successful against the "nice guys" in getting that. Typical of an Alinskyite, he never made a concrete proposal, and made the Republicans negotiate with themselves to try to come up with something he would buy. Anyone who's ever dealt with a public employee union knows that game. If you start from the position that an agreement with them is your objective, you end up compromising yourself into their position, which is exactly what Boehner/McConnell did. Both of them are too much from the "nice guy" tradition to understand that the only way to bargain with a communist-trained negotiator is to start out with a position that if he is forced to accept it, will kill him politically or economically and make it so that the default from his not reaching an agreement is having to live under your, untenable for him, conditions. In other words, you really do have to do what the Democrats were accusing the Tea Partiers of, you hold a gun to their heads, a political or economic gun of course, and quietly say, "be reasonable so I don't have to use it."
Unfortunately, being a “nice guy” is not what needs to be done when dealing with Barack Obama or the Democrats. America desperately needs to defeat Obama, but we also need to understand what he is and many of the Democrats really are. The national media and minority voters were as fooled as anyone by Obama’s Alinsky tactics. It is time to destroy the Alinskyite Democrat Party because they do not want America to prosper. They know what they want and are waiting for the “good guys” to give it to them. The Democrat Party has become an Anti-American Party and is actively working to destroy America.

Mr. Boehner, you and the other Americans on the Super Committee have to understand what you are dealing with. Otherwise, we and America may be destroyed. Also, you may have noticed that NONE of the conservative talk radio hosts EVER talk about the effect of the Federal Reserve and the other World Central Banks (the FED is one of that group) on the debt problem. They always talk about who should be elected. The truth is the World’s Central Banks don’t care who gets elected because they (Central Banks) control the printing of currency for the nations that have allowed such a disaster to occur and therefore control enough of the election process to keep their power. The ONLY Republican candidate that understands what is happening is Rep. Ron Paul from Texas. I pray daily that he will be our next President.


p.s. Please send copies of this letter to anyone in Congress that needs to understand what they are facing.
p.p.s. Now that some of the voters understand what Obama really is, I believe that they and the Tea Party Alliance are going to have to destroy the Alinskyite United States Senate by ballot. A recent email from an organization (not Tea Party) asked if a person believes that the Government Caused Problems can be solved by ballots or bullets. You would be amazed at the number of those Americans who are willing, if necessary, to use bullets in a Second American Revolution to save the United States of America from destruction by an Alinskyite government.

Labels: , ,

Summary Of Congess Education Training

SUMMARY OF PROFESSSIONAL TRAINING
OF OBAMA ADMINISTRATION EXECUTIVE
BRANCH LEADERSHIP
Reference----Capitol Contacts, published by
Washington Times Newspaper
(L) = Lawyer
EXECUTIVE OFFICES OF THE PRESIDENT
112th Congress
1. President: Barack Obama(L), First Lady Michelle Obama(L)
2. Vice President: Joseph Biden(L)
3. Cabinet Secretary: Chris Lu
4. *Central Intelligence Agency: Leon Panetta(Office Eliminated in 112 Congress)
5. Communications Director: Dan Pfeiffer
6. White House Counsel, Bob Bauer
7. Domestic Policy Council, Melody Barnes
8. *Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa P. Jackson
9. Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, Joshua Dubois
10. Intergovernmental Affairs, Cecilia Munoz
11. Legislative Affairs, Phil Schiliro
12. Management and Administration, Cameron Moody
13. *Management and Budget, Jacob Lew
14. Military Office, George Mulligan
15. *National Drug Control Policy, R. Gil Kerlikowske
16. National Economic Council, Gene Sperling
17. National Intelligence Director, James R. Clapper
18. National Security Adviser, Thomas Donilon
19. Political Affairs, Patrick Gaspard
20. *Council of Economic Advisors: Christine Romer
21. Presidential Personnel, Nancy D. Hogan
22. Press Secretary, Jay Carney
23. Scheduling and Advance, Alyssa Mastromonaco
24. Science and Technology Policy, John P. Holdren
25. Senior Adviser to the President, Valerie Jarrett
26. Counselor to the President: Peter M. Rouse
27. *U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice
28. *U.S. Trade Representative, Ronald Kirk
*= Cabinet Rank
(Note—my sources do not say which of the
Executive Offices are lead by lawyers)
=============================
OBAMA CABINET 112th Congress
15 People in Obama Cabinet,
6 Are Lawyers,
2 Are Ph.D.,
3 Are Masters of Public Administration
2 Are Education Administration
2 Are Military
0 Are Businessmen

1. Department of Agriculture (USDA): Sec. TomVilsack (L, Albany U., Attorney, 1975)
2. Department of Commerce: Sec.Gary Locke (L, Boston U., Attorney, 1975)
3. Department of Defense: Sec.Robert M. Gates(Ph.D. George Twn,Coll. Pres., USAF, 1967-69)
4. Department of Education: Sec. Arne Duncan(BS, Harvard), Education Admin.
5. Department of Energy: Sec. Steven Chu(Ph.D. Scientist)
6. Department of Health & Human Services: Sec. Kathleen
Sebelius (MPA, U. Kan.,Public Off.,1977)
7. Department of Homeland Security: Sec. Janet Naolitano (L, U.Vir.,1982)
8. Department of Housing & Urban Development: Sec. Shaun Donovan (MPA, Harvard, Housing Admin.,)
9. Department of the Interior: Secretary Ken Salazar (L,U.Mich, 1981)
10. Department of Justice: Attorney Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr.(L, Columbia, 1976)
11. Department of Labor: Hilda L. Solis (MPA, USC, 1981)
12. Department of State: Sec. Hillary Rodham Clinton(L, Yale, 1973)
13. Department of Transportation: Sec. Ray H. LaHood(BS, Educator, Bradley U., 1971)
14. Department of Treasury: Sec. Timothy Geithner (MA, Johns Hopkins, 1985, economist)
15. Department of Veterans Affairs: Sec. Eric K.
Shinseki(MA), Military Officer

U.S. SENATE LEADERSHIP
9 of 10 are Lawyers (90%)
1. President, Joe Biden, (L)
2. President Pro Tempore, Daniel Inouye, (L),
3. Majority Leader, Harry Reid, (L)
4. Majority Whip, Richard Durbin, (L),
5. Democratic Policy Comm. Chair, Charles Schumer, (L), Pub. Official, 1974)
6. Democratic Conference Chair, Harry Reid, (L),
7. Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell, (L)
8. Minority Whip, Jon Kyl, (L)
9. Republican Policy Comm. Chair, John Thune, (MBA, Assoc. Exec.1985)
10. Republican Conference Chair, Lamar Alexander, (L),

=======================================
U.S. HOUSE LEADERSHIP
112th Congress
1. Speaker, John Boehner,( BS, USN, Businessman,)
2. Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, (L)
3. Majority Whip, Kevin McCarthy, MBA, Businessman
4. Republican Policy Committee, Tom Price, Physician
5. Republican Conference Chair, Jeb Hensarling, (L),
Businessman, (1982)
6. Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi, BA, Public Relations
Consultant
7. Minority Whip, Steny Hoyer, (L)
8. Assistant Democratic Leader, BS, Educator, 1961
9. Democratic Caucus Chair., John B. Larson, BA, 1971, Businessman,

4 Businessmen (Larson is a Democrat)
3 Lawyers (Hoyer is a Democrat)
1 Public Relations (Democrat Pelosi)
1 Physician







NUMBER OF LAWYERS IN SENATE
112 Congress
1. 55 members of the U.S. Senate are lawyers (55%)
Of the 55 lawyers in the Senate, 29 are Democrats, 26 are Republicans
==================
111 Congress
2. 57 members of the U.S. Senate were lawyers, 57%
==================
110 Congress
3. 60 members of the U.S. Senate were lawyers, 60%
==================
109 Congress
4. 58 members of the U.S. Senate were lawyers, 58%
====================
108 Congress
5. 60 members of the U.S. Senate were lawyers, 60%
==========================================
NUMBER OF LAWYERS IN HOUSE
1. 112 Congress, 152 lawyers, 152/435 = 34.9 %
2. 111 Congress 162 lawyers 162/435 = 37.2%
3. 110 Congress 165 lawyers 165/435 = 37.9%

Labels: , ,