http://government.zdnet.com/?p=4837

So, now the EC of the EU is going after MS for their IE that is packaged withing their OS called XP or W7.  Pretty crazy stuff.  The EC is just having a hay day targeting big corporations within the U.S.  It's nuts.  But, there is this thing called Article 82 of the EC trade treaty among the nations of the EU.  It pretty much says that businesses can't do certain things that are unfair towards their compettitors.  These things are kind of vague.  But, nevertheless, Microsoft must have signed such a treaty or else they would not be able to operate withing the EU.  Intel is also in the news for bad and unfair trade practices within the EU.

My question is this:  If a foreign government requires a U.S. corporation to sign some crazy trade treaty in order to do business in the country, why sign it?  This thing is really big.  Now the EU has a legal invitation to file suit against these business who would be otherwise protected by U.S. law.  Now the EU is going to be in the news weekly as they will be observed applying fines to U.S. companies for stepping on the toes of other businesses that have been educated in Socialist style business practices.

It's all about a level playing field, they say.  Well, here in the U.S.A., business owners have enjoyed the challenge of the playing field filled with obstacles. U.S. business are not used to foreign governments leveling the playing field for them.  Where is the challenge in that?  There is none to find. 

Microsoft and Intel, most likely, signed a treaty only so they could stay within the European market.  If they did not sign, citizens of the EU would not have Intel or Microsoft products.  AMD and Mac (Linux) would be kings in Europe.  But that is just weird because AMD's corporate HQ is practically within the neighborhood of Intel.  They are both HQed in California, USA.  So, these two companies have a dispute on foreign soil and as a result, have brought a foreign government to U.S. soil to attack domestic businesses.  This is just totally nuts

We are supposed to be a sovereign nation.  Businesses are supposed to be able to function producing things that can be sold around the world.  U.S. companies should solve their issues at home instead of taking the battles to foreign soil.  Why should the whole world have to rise up to pass judgement on a U.S. company?

The biggest thing these U.S. companies have done in this case is to be so unguarded as to allow a foreign government to get their little greedy fingers in the control room.  The EC of the EU will not be happy until all US companies are in compliance of their little level playing field where no one is the domminant force, but all sell a little and live within the confines of mediocraty.

"For Christians such as Moore -- and others better known, such as columnist Cal Thomas, a former vice president for the Moral Majority -- the heart of Christianity is in the home, not the halls of Congress or even the courts. And the route to a more-moral America is through good works -- service, prayer and education -- not political lobbying" (From Town Hall Columnist Kathleen Parker and her article "Christians at the Gate")

This has been the push of Liberals since the dawn of this country.  The practice of Christianity should remain in the home.  Churches should focus on the social needs and welfare of their communities and stay out of politics.  This kind of thought has been rammed down our throat since the first pastor recruited for the militia at the onset of the Revolutionary War.

To say that Christians should stay out of politics is actually discriminating against tax paying citizens.  All citizens of the this country have the right to speak their minds and to be active in public life as given by the first amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Tell me Christians should stay at home and I'll provide a list of Founders who were devout Christians who thought their duty to family, neighbors and country, as well as the world, was to be aggressively active in all aspects of Government.

Let's start the list with George Washington, John Adams, John Quincy Adams.  Books have been written about the devout Christian lives of our Founders.  To say Christians should stay at home and let the pagans run the country is contrary to the thoughts and practices of people like Ben Franklin, John Hancock, and others, including, but not limited to, Benjamin Rush.

When Christians enter back into politics, we will definitely have a civil war on our hands.  This is because Christians have believed and followed the lies of the left for about 130 years that say things like Christians should stay at home, run their farms, and go on missions to Africa where Jesus is needed.  Stay out of politics.  Churches should preach peace, love, giving to the poor and stuff like that.  Christians should leave the hard stuff to the more educated and able people.

Lies like that are what has caused this country to do the junk it has.  Christians and Christian Wold View have all been forced into hiding and out of the political sphere. 

Christians need to re-enter public life.  They need to speak their mind based on a Biblical world view.  They need to re-establish themselves as statesmen once again.  Don't endorse flaky, weak, men and women.  If there is no one to endorse, then take up the flag and run with it yourselves. 

HRES 134 IH

111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. RES. 134

Recognizing the 50th Anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s visit to India, and the positive influence that the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi had on Dr. King's work during the Civil Rights Movement.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 4, 2009

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia (for himself, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. SCOTT of Virginia, Mr. SCHIFF, and Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

---

RESOLUTION

Recognizing the 50th Anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s visit to India, and the positive influence that the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi had on Dr. King's work during the Civil Rights Movement.

Whereas Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. changed America forever in a few short years through his teaching of nonviolence and passive resistance to combat segregation, discrimination, and racial injustice;

Whereas, in 1950, during the pursuit of a Bachelor of Divinity degree at Crozer Theological Seminary in Upland, Pennsylvania, Dr. King first became aware of the success of nonviolent political action employed by India's Mahatma Gandhi in political campaigns against racial inequality in South Africa, and later against British colonial rule in India;

Whereas Dr. King began an extensive study of Gandhi's life and ideas, and became inspired to use Gandhi's theory of nonviolent civil disobedience to achieve social change in America;

Whereas, in 1955 and 1956, Dr. King led the Montgomery Bus Boycott to protest the arrest of Rosa Parks and the segregation of the bus system of Montgomery, Alabama, during which time Dr. King was arrested and his home bombed;

Whereas the Montgomery Bus Boycott was the first large-scale, nonviolent civil rights demonstration of contemporary times in the United States;

Whereas, following the success of nonviolent protest in the Montgomery Bus Boycott, Dr. King desired to travel to India to deepen his knowledge of Gandhi's teachings on nonviolent principles;

Whereas Dr. King, his wife Coretta Scott King, and Lawrence Reddick, then chairman of the history department at Alabama State College, arrived in Bombay, India, on February 10, 1959 and stayed until March 10, 1959;

Whereas Dr. King was warmly welcomed by members of Indian society throughout his visit, and met with Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, land reform leader Vinoba Bhave, and other influential Indian leaders to discuss issues of poverty, economic policy, and race relations;

Whereas, while in India, Dr. King spoke about race and equality at crowded universities and at public meetings;

Whereas followers of Ghandi's philosophy, known as satyagrahis, welcomed Dr. King and praised him for his nonviolent efforts during the Montgomery Bus Boycott, which they saw as a landmark success of principles of nonviolence outside of India;

Whereas the satyagrahis and Dr. King discussed Ghandi's philosophy, known as Satyagraha, which promotes nonviolence and civil disobedience as the most useful methods for obtaining political and social goals;

Whereas the satyagrahis reaffirmed and deepened Dr. King's commitment to nonviolence, and revealed to him the power that nonviolent resistance holds in political and social battles;

Whereas the trip to India impacted Dr. King in a profound way, and inspired him to use nonviolence as an instrument of social change to end segregation and racial discrimination in America throughout the rest of his work during the Civil Rights Movement;

Whereas Dr. King rose to be the preeminent civil rights advocate of his time, leading the Civil Rights Movement in the United States during the 1950s and 1960s and earning world-wide recognition as an eloquent and articulate spokesperson for equality;

Whereas Dr. King became a champion of nonviolence, and in 1964, at the age of 35, he became the youngest man to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his efforts;

Whereas through his leadership in nonviolent protest, Dr. King was instrumental in the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965;

Whereas, between 1957 and 1968, Dr. King traveled more than 6,000,000 miles, spoke more than 2,500 times, and wrote five books and numerous articles supporting efforts around the country to end injustice and bring about social change and desegregation through civil disobedience; and

Whereas the work of Dr. King created a basis of understanding and respect, and helped communities and the United States as a whole to act peacefully, cooperatively, and courageously to restore tolerance, justice, and equality between people: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives encourages all Americans to--

(1) pause and remember the 50th Anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s visit to India;

(2) commemorate Dr. King's legacy of nonviolence, a principle that--

(A) Dr. King encountered during his study of India's Mahatma Gandhi;

(B) further inspired him during his first trip to India; and

(C) he successfully used in the struggle for civil rights and voting rights;

(3) commemorate the impact that Dr. King's trip to India and his study of the philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi had in shaping the Civil Rights Movement and creating the political climate necessary to pass legislation to expand civil rights and voting rights for all Americans; and

(4) rededicate themselves to Dr. King's belief that `nonviolence is the answer to the crucial political and moral question of our time' and to his goal of a free and just United States.

 

I realize that the economy has some serious problems.  This Bill (Senate Bill 350 and those related to it in the Senate and the House) is not a recovery plan but a Control the American People From a Throne Room in Washington plan.  I implore you, on behalf of all literate and thinking U.S. citizens, to cause a halt to the approval of this Bill.  Tell the President that he is sadly mistaken.  The President should not at any moment think the the majority of hard working U.S. citizen even remotely approve of this plan. 

I am angry the Democrats in both Houses of Congress pushed the Economic Stimulus plan through without reading the details.

I  am angry that the plan calls for money to be allocated to Neighborhood Electric Vehicles.  What happened to bicycles and walking? 

I am angry that the plan opens the door wide for a national health plan and puts our nations senior citizens at risk.

I am angry that the Bill  opens the door for more Government subsidized birth control and abortions.  Most American people are angry that the minority would concider killing innocent babies while still in the tranquility and safety of the womb.  There are many people who would be glad to adopt these little ones as well as pay all the biological mother’s medical bills in order to insure a safe and healthy delivery.

I am angry that there is a provision for Broadband Internet tax credits.  Internet is a reward for going to work every day and being able to afford the luxery of computers, telephones and associated services.

I am angry that Congress is even concidering playing with COBRA.  COBRA is a privately funded insurance option.  It has never been a right but a privilege of those who have jobs and can afford to pay for it.    It is not a bennifit and never has been.  The government should stay out of the private sector insurance industry. 

I am against the creation of a Health Tech office.  Government should stay out of the private  health care industry.  Presidential Cabinet members are only in office as long as the President holds his office.  They are not carreer experts.  So why form a new government office when the real experts exist in the private sector?  The Federal Government cannot do a better job than private healthcare professionals.

I don’t like the adjustments to Medicaid as provided in this bill.

The bottom line is, this Bill provides for more Government intervention into the private sector than has ever been allowed in the history of this country.  It is Socialist bordering on Communism and I am angered by it.  The Democrats will cause such catastrophic damage to the economy that has never been inflicted on this country before.  Might I remind you that elected officials are not professionals in their field?  They are elected officials who have a lot of money through private donations.  These donations allow them to pay for air time which substantially aids in their election efforts.  They are not professionals except for their uncanny ability to get elected.

If they Federal Government were to downsize, stay out of the public sector as much as is possible, I believe the country’s economic situation would rebound beyond any efforts put forth in the Bill in question.

I want the Democrats to urge the President to table this Bill in all its forms.  I am angry.  I am not alone.  Many of my friends, customers, and fellow Citizens are angry.

Sincerely

(Me)