With Herman Cain rising in popularity in the 2012 election cycle, I just HAD to find this video of his appearance at the inaugural rally for the FairTax in Gwinnett County, GA in 2006! (It’s not the greatest quality, but it’ll do.) I am urging everyone to look into Herman Cain more and get to know him.
He’s a rising star, and I think he has what it takes to make America great again. Of course he hasn’t held elective office before, but that, to me, is what makes him so attractive. The American government IS a business, so isn’t it time we HAVE a businessman in office to run this country? God knows he couldn’t do any worse than Obama has done… in fact, I am ANXIOUS and awaiting with baited breath to see him SLAY Obama in a debate!
From all your fans in Georgia, Mr. Cain… ‘H-I-T-M, Herman!’
And oh… doesn’t hurt that he’s a FairTax proponent, does it?
Well, now isn’t this just spiffy? According to a story in the Bay Area NBC paper, that’s exactly what this new bill would do. From the article:
“A new state bill in the California State Senate could make social-networking sites like Facebook take down personal information and photos for account users under 18 and require more private settings.
“The bill’s language also states that social-networking sites would have to comply with parental requests to remove information or photos from their children’s pages or accounts. The new bill “would require removal of that information regarding a user under 18 years of age upon request by the user’s parent, within 48 hours upon his or her request.”
How do you square this? California is one of those all-permissive states that prefers kids’ rights over parents, so that’s why this kind of shocked me. Especially considering who introduced the bill, SB 242: Sen. Ellen Corbett (D-San Leandro). But where is the hypocrisy you ask? Somehow it makes sense to let parents edit their kids’ Facebook pages, but let a parent know their daughter is going to get an abortion? Fuggeddaboudit! It’s THEN that kids’ rights trump parents’ rights. What a bunch of hypocrites.
Now, I know I’m late to the game on this, but the recent news about more waivers being granted for Obamacare caused me to dive into it again and have a second and third look. First I was wondering about the connections some of the companies had with democrats or democrat-supporting organizations or people, but then you don’t have to research to find that out for a lot of them; it’s right there in their names: this “Union,” that “Brotherhood,” this “Guild,” etc., etc., etc.
I started noticing not who the waivers were granted to, but at the number of employees some of them listed. Aren’t these waivers granted so that the companies/organizations won’t bear an undue burden financially? If you have ZERO or 3 employees, why in the world would you need the waiver?
“Self-Insured Employers: Approved Applications for Waiver of the Annual Limits Requirements. This is a list of self-insured employers that have received waivers of the annual dollar limit requirements for group health plans offered to their employees.”