YOUR GOVERNMENT AT WORK

[Soldier4Christ]

Democrats target private retirement accounts
Party leaders in U.S. House discuss confiscating 401(k)s, IRAs

Democrats in the U.S. House have been conducting hearings on proposals to confiscate workers’ personal retirement accounts — including 401(k)s and IRAs — and convert them to accounts managed by the Social Security Administration.

Triggered by the financial crisis the past two months, the hearings reportedly were meant to stem losses incurred by many workers and retirees whose 401(k) and IRA balances have been shrinking rapidly.

The testimony of Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, in hearings Oct. 7 drew the most attention and criticism. Testifying for the House Committee on Education and Labor, Ghilarducci proposed that the government eliminate tax breaks for 401(k) and similar retirement accounts, such as IRAs, and confiscate workers’ retirement plan accounts and convert them to universal Guaranteed Retirement Accounts (GRAs) managed by the Social Security Administration.

Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor, in prepared remarks for the hearing on “The Impact of the Financial Crisis on Workers’ Retirement Security,” blamed Wall Street for the financial crisis and said his committee will “strengthen and protect Americans’ 401(k)s, pensions, and other retirement plans” and the “Democratic Congress will continue to conduct this much-needed oversight on behalf of the American people.”

Currently, 401(k) plans allow Americans to invest pretax money and their employers match up to a defined percentage, which not only increases workers’ retirement savings but also reduces their annual income tax. The balances are fully inheritable, subject to income tax, meaning workers pass on their wealth to their heirs, unlike Social Security. Even when they leave an employer and go to one that doesn’t offer a 401(k) or pension, workers can transfer their balances to a qualified IRA.

Mandating Equality

Ghilarducci’s plan first appeared in a paper for the Economic Policy Institute: Agenda for Shared Prosperity on Nov. 20, 2007, in which she said GRAs will rescue the flawed American retirement income system (www.sharedprosperity.org/bp204/bp204.pdf).

The current retirement system, Ghilarducci said, “exacerbates income and wealth inequalities” because tax breaks for voluntary retirement accounts are “skewed to the wealthy because it is easier for them to save, and because they receive bigger tax breaks when they do.”

Lauding GRAs as a way to effectively increase retirement savings, Ghilarducci wrote that savings incentives are unequal for rich and poor families because tax deferrals “provide a much larger ‘carrot’ to wealthy families than to middle-class families — and none whatsoever for families too poor to owe taxes.”

GRAs would guarantee a fixed 3 percent annual rate of return, although later in her article Ghilarducci explained that participants would not “earn a 3% real return in perpetuity.” In place of tax breaks workers now receive for contributions and thus a lower tax rate, workers would receive $600 annually from the government, inflation-adjusted. For low-income workers whose annual contributions are less than $600, the government would deposit whatever amount it would take to equal the minimum $600 for all participants.

In a radio interview with Kirby Wilbur in Seattle on Oct. 27, 2008, Ghilarducci explained that her proposal doesn’t eliminate the tax breaks, rather, “I’m just rearranging the tax breaks that are available now for 401(k)s and spreading — spreading the wealth.”

All workers would have 5 percent of their annual pay deducted from their paychecks and deposited to the GRA. They would still be paying Social Security and Medicare taxes, as would the employers. The GRA contribution would be shared equally by the worker and the employee. Employers no longer would be able to write off their contributions. Any capital gains would be taxable year-on-year.

Analysts point to another disturbing part of the plan. With a GRA, workers could bequeath only half of their account balances to their heirs, unlike full balances from existing 401(k) and IRA accounts. For workers who die after retiring, they could bequeath just their own contributions plus the interest but minus any benefits received and minus the employer contributions.

Another justification for Ghilarducci’s plan is to eliminate investment risk. In her testimony, Ghilarducci said, “humans often lack the foresight, discipline, and investing skills required to sustain a savings plan.” She cited the 2004 HSBC global survey on the Future of Retirement, in which she claimed that “a third of Americans wanted the government to force them to save more for retirement.”

What the survey actually reported was that 33 percent of Americans wanted the government to “enforce additional private savings,” a vastly different meaning than mandatory government-run savings. Of the four potential sources of retirement support, which were government, employer, family, and self, the majority of Americans said “self” was the most important contributor, followed by “government.” When broken out by family income, low-income U.S. households said the “government” was the most important retirement support, whereas high-income families ranked “government” last and “self” first (www.hsbc.com/retirement).

On Oct. 22, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Argentinean government had seized all private pension and retirement accounts to fund government programs and to address a ballooning deficit. Fearing an economic collapse, foreign investors quickly pulled out, forcing the Argentinean stock market to shut down several times. More than 10 years ago, nationalization of private savings sent Argentina’s economy into a long-term downward spiral.

Income and Wealth Redistribution

The majority of witness testimony during recent hearings before the House Committee on Education and Labor showed that congressional Democrats intend to address income and wealth inequality through redistribution.

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

On July 31, 2008, Robert Greenstein, executive director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, testified before the subcommittee on workforce protections that “from the standpoint of equal treatment of people with different incomes, there is a fundamental flaw” in tax code incentives because they are “provided in the form of deductions, exemptions, and exclusions rather than in the form of refundable tax credits.”

Even people who don’t pay taxes should get money from the government, paid for by higher-income Americans, he said. “There is no obvious reason why lower-income taxpayers or people who do not file income taxes should get smaller incentives (or no tax incentives at all),” Greenstein said.

“Moving to refundable tax credits for promoting socially worthwhile activities would be an important step toward enhancing progressivity in the tax code in a way that would improve economic efficiency and performance at the same time,” Greenstein said, and “reducing barriers to labor organizing, preserving the real value of the minimum wage, and the other workforce security concerns . . . would contribute to an economy with less glaring and sharply widening inequality.”

When asked whether committee members seriously were considering Ghilarducci’s proposal for GSAs, Aaron Albright, press secretary for the Committee on Education and Labor, said Miller and other members were listening to all ideas.

Miller’s biggest priority has been on legislation aimed at greater transparency in 401(k)s and other retirement plan administration, specifically regarding fees, Albright said, and he sent a link to a Fox News interview of Miller on Oct. 24, 2008, to show that the congressman had not made a decision.

After repeated questions asked by Neil Cavuto of Fox News, Miller said he would not be in favor of “killing the 401(k)” or of “killing the tax advantages for 401(k)s.”

Arguing against liberal prescriptions, William Beach, director of the Center for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation, testified on Oct. 24 that the “roots of the current crisis are firmly planted in public policy mistakes” by the Federal Reserve and Congress. He cautioned Congress against raising taxes, increasing burdensome regulations, or withdrawing from international product or capital markets. “Congress can ill afford to repeat the awesome errors of its predecessor in the early days of the Great Depression,” Beach said.

Instead, Beach said, Congress could best address the financial crisis by making the tax reductions of 2001 and 2003 permanent, stopping dependence on demand-side stimulus, lowering the corporate profits tax, and reducing or eliminating taxes on capital gains and dividends.

Testifying before the same committee in early October, Jerry Bramlett, president and CEO of BenefitStreet, Inc., an independent 401(k) plan administrator, said one of the best ways to ensure retirement security would be to have the U.S. Department of Labor develop educational materials for workers so they could make better investment decisions, not exchange equity investments in retirement accounts for Treasury bills, as proposed in the GSAs.

Should Sen. Barack Obama win the presidency, congressional Democrats might have stronger support for their “spreading the wealth” agenda. On Oct. 27, the American Thinker posted a video of an interview with Obama on public radio station WBEZ-FM from 2001.

In the interview, Obama said, “The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.” The Constitution says only what “the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you,” and Obama added that the Warren Court wasn’t that radical.

Although in 2001 Obama said he was not “optimistic about bringing major redistributive change through the courts,” as president, he would likely have the opportunity to appoint one or more Supreme Court justices.

“The real tragedy of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused that I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change,” Obama said.

[HisDaughter]

Scalia: Foreign law isn't ours
At Houston gala, he criticizes courts that cite countries' trends for rulings
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle
Nov. 17, 2008, 11:01PM
 
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia prepares to speak to judges and lawyers Monday night in Houston. He was also promoting a book he co-wrote with Dallas-based author Bryan Garner.

Share  Print Email Del.icio.usDiggTechnoratiYahoo! BuzzJudges who use foreign laws to interpret the U.S. Constitution are rewriting it rather than respecting its founders, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia told a roomful of judges and top lawyers in Houston on Monday night.

"I fear the courts' use of foreign law in interpreting the Constitution will continue at an accelerated pace," the 72-year-old conservative jurist said.

Scalia spoke at a $150-a-head steak and potatoes dinner sponsored by the local chapter of the Federal Bar Association and held at the Hyatt Regency Houston downtown. Before talking for about 30 minutes, the jurist autographed copies of a book he co-authored.

Scalia promised to be noncontroversial but frequently used the example of Lawrence v. Texas, a Houston case in which he disagreed with the majority that struck down Texas' anti-sodomy law. Scalia complained that foreign laws were cited in that case.

Scalia was typically evangelical in his advocacy of "originalism," or strictly adhering to what the Constitutional authors meant more than 200 years ago. He criticized those who see the Constitution as an evolving or "living document" that adapts to the times.
The 1986 Reagan appointee said he'll only become a believer in those who cite foreign law if they do it more universally, like in abortion cases where more countries prohibit it than don't. "The court has ignored foreign law in its abortion cases," he said.

Scalia said the founders of this country did not want us to emulate Europe.
He told the 50 tables of lawyers that when judges use foreign laws or even U.S. legislative history, they are straying from their true purpose. He said judges do it to expand their own power because they wrongly consider "the views of all segments of mankind" and to make it appear they have something to rely upon.

Scalia said some leeway can be found even sticking only with the Constitutional text.

"It doesn't mean you can't twist the Constitution," he said lightly. "You just do it the good old-fashioned way: You just lie about it."

The self-proclaimed social conservative, known for both his combativeness and his humor, Scalia spoke in Houston in part to promote his book Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges. It's written with Bryan Garner, a Dallas-based legal writing author.

The book's acknowledgments include a thanks to Houston-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge Edith Jones, who introduced Scalia on Monday night.

In response to a question from Jones, Scalia said he disagrees with his alma mater Harvard Law School's decision to copy Yale and scrap grades in favor of a pass/fail system. "I want to know who's best in the class. I don't want to know just who went to Yale," he said.

In response to another question, the jurist said he thinks law schools have gotten away from teaching students to be lawyers, and some academics have even developed a contempt for the practice.

He argued legal academics should spend more time with legal practitioners.

[nChrist]

The last few articles are a great reminder of what's happening right now before our very eyes. Increasingly, the people are abandoning our foundation. In case anyone is wondering, the ONLY appropriate foundation is JESUS CHRIST, VERY GOD! Anything else will fail and fall apart. If we don't already know this from GOD'S WORD, it will be known soon by REALITY.

Love In Christ,
Tom

James 1:18-21 NASB  In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth, so that we would be a kind of first fruits among His creatures. This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God. Therefore, putting aside all filthiness and all that remains of wickedness, in humility receive the word implanted, which is able to save your souls.

[HisDaughter]

Mayor suggests Jesus would allow same-sex marriage
City boss vows to take fight for homosexuals to schools, Congress, White House
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa told a crowd of cheering homosexuals that Jesus wouldn't discriminate against "gays," suggesting that God would allow same-sex marriage.

He then vowed to take the battle for homosexual marriage to schools, churches, Congress and the president.

Villaraigosa, former president of the ACLU of Southern California, addressed the "No on Prop 8" protest outside Los Angeles City Hall on Nov. 15.

"Some have said, 'Well Mr. Villaraigosa, I don't like your position on Proposition 8,'" the mayor said. "They said, 'Who are you to get involved in this issue?' Well, I think we got elected to stand up for a constitution."

He continued, "I think we got elected to stand up for the idea that in the eyes of the law and in the eyes of God, thou shalt not discriminate."

Protesters held signs stating, "Who would Jesus hate?" and "CA gays are the victims and Mormons are the persecutors."

Many chanted, "Yes we can!" – a slogan popularized by the Barack Obama campaign.

Villaraigosa suggested Jesus stood for individual rights, including "rights" to same-sex partnerships.

"You know, I didn't live – and none of us did – during the time of Jesus," he said. "But I like to believe that the Jesus I love, the Jesus I pray to, didn't just talk about being a shepherd. He knew that the role of the shepherd was to bring the flock in – all of the flock, every one of us. The constitution has always been a document that speaks out for rights, the fundamental rights of people, for the liberty that we cherish and love, for the liberty that we fight and die for."

Then the mayor promised to continue the fight for "gay" marriage beyond protests.

"We come today to begin a conversation because it's not just going to be about demonstrations," Villaraigosa said. "It's not just going to be about the Internet. We're going to have conversations in our neighborhoods, in our schools, in our churches and every civic institution, in our unions, in city hall and the halls of Congress and the legislature.

"We're going to take every opportunity to begin that conversation – all the way to the White House."

(An obvious flamer, blasphemer, and horse's pa'toot)

[nChrist]

Romans 1:22-28 KJV  Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,  23  And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.  24  Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:  25  Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.  26  For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:  27  And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.  28  And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

1 Corinthians 6:9 KJV  Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Ephesians 4:18-19 KJV  Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:  19  Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

Ephesians 5:11-12 KJV  And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.  12  For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret.

1 Timothy 1:9-10 KJV  Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,  10  For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

Jude 1:6-10 KJV  And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.  7  Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.  8  Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.  9  Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.  10  But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.

[HisDaughter]

Calif. Supreme Court to take up gay marriage ban
 
SAN FRANCISCO – California's highest court agreed Wednesday to hear several legal challenges to the state's new ban on same-sex marriage but refused to allow gay couples to resume marrying before it rules.

The California Supreme Court accepted three lawsuits seeking to nullify Proposition 8, a voter-approved constitutional amendment that overruled the court's decision in May that legalized gay marriage.

All three cases claim the measure abridges the civil rights of a vulnerable minority group. They argue that voters alone did not have the authority to enact such a significant constitutional change.

As is its custom when it takes up cases, the court elaborated little. However, the justices did say they want to address what effect, if any, a ruling upholding the amendment would have on the estimated 18,000 same-sex marriages that were sanctioned in California before election day.

Gay rights groups and local governments petitioning to overturn the ban were joined by the measure's sponsors and Attorney General Jerry Brown in urging the Supreme Court to consider whether Proposition 8 passes legal muster.

The initiative's opponents had also asked the court to grant a stay of the measure, which would have allowed gay marriages to begin again while the justices considered the cases. The court denied that request.

The justices directed Brown and lawyers for the Yes on 8 campaign to submit arguments by Dec. 19 on why the ballot initiative should not be nullified. It said lawyers for the plaintiffs, who include same-sex couples who did not wed before the election, must respond before Jan. 5.

Oral arguments could be scheduled as early as March, according to court spokeswoman Lynn Holton.

Both opponents and supporters of Proposition 8 expressed confidence Wednesday that their arguments would prevail.

But they also agreed that the cases present the court's seven justices — six of whom voted to review the challenges — with complex questions that have few precedents in state case law.

The lawsuits argue that voters improperly abrogated the judiciary's authority by stripping same-sex couples of the right to wed after the high court earlier ruled it was discriminatory to prohibit gay men and lesbians from marrying.

"If given effect, Proposition 8 would work a dramatic, substantive change to our Constitution's 'underlying principles' of individual on a scale and scope never previously condoned by this court," lawyers for the same-sex couples stated in their petition.

The measure represents such a sweeping change that it constitutes a constitutional revision as opposed to an amendment, the documents say. The distinction would have required the ban's backers to obtain approval from two-thirds of both houses of the California Legislature before submitting it to voters.

Over the past century, the California Supreme Court has heard nine cases challenging legislative acts or ballot initiatives as improper revisions. The court eventually invalidated three of the measures, according to the gay rights group Lambda Legal.

[Soldier4Christ]

GOP congressman on carmaker bailout: 'It is not your money'

A Republican congressman seeking a $25 billion bailout of the troubled U.S. auto industry made a stunning statement about taxpayer funds to benefit Detroit, claiming, "It is not your money."

Rep. Joe Knollenberg, R-Mich., made the remark during a discussion with Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto yesterday as the pair debated sending billions of federal dollars to prop up the Big Three carmakers.

Cavuto asked Knollenberg: "When the housing industry CEOs come to you and say, 'You know, [if] we go under and all the ancillary businesses – the dishwasher manufacturers, the washer-and-dryer manufacturers, the Lowe's and the Home Depots that vastly depend on our being alive and vibrant – if we go under, there's hell to pay. And then the textile manufacturer comes to you and says, 'If we go down, there's hell to pay.' And on and on and on we go. Where do you draw the line with our money?"

"It is not your money," said Knollenberg.

Cavuto screamed back, "It is! It is taxpayers money!"

Knollenberg claimed dealers are not selling cars right now because "there's no credit to get."

He explained, "If we could just remove that problem, and this is what we're trying to do, then we'd be in the position to sell cars."

Cavuto fired back: "There's nothing in the $25 billion or $50 billion that will open up credit for folks to buy cars that in good times and bad, they had not wanted to get from these guys."

Knollenberg explained, "The purpose of the $25 billion is to give them some money for the time being to make sure they stay alive, that they stay in place."

He claimed there would be a massive negative ripple effect through the economy if even one of the major automakers is allowed to fail.

Cavuto closed the discussion by saying, "Congressman, there's a line of people behind them who are going to make a similar argument. I hope you're ready for it."

Knollenberg held his seat for 16 years in the House of Representatives, but was just defeated this month by Democrat Gary Peters, who will be the first Democrat to hold that district since 1893.

Today on the CBS "Early Show," Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala. said automakers should file for bankruptcy and fire their management.

"I don't believe that they have immediate plans to change their model, which is a model of failure," Shelby said.

He argued against any bailout, saying, "It will just prolong the agony. These companies are failures now, unless we get rid of the management."

[Soldier4Christ]

This is the problem with our government. This false ideology has even crept into our republican party. And people say this is not about socialism in our government.

[HisDaughter]

Pentagon Hit by Unprecedented Cyber Attack
As a result of the cyber attack, the Defense Department has banned the use of external hardware devices throughout a vast network of military computers.

FOXNews.com

Thursday, November 20, 2008

The attack came in the form of a global virus or worm that is spreading rapidly throughout a number of military networks.

"We have detected a global virus for which there has been alerts, and we have seen some of this on our networks," a Pentagon official told FOX News. "We are now taking steps to mitigate the virus."

The official could not reveal the source of the attack because that information remains classified.

"Daily there are millions of scans of the GIG, but for security reasons we don't discuss the number of actual intrusions or attempts, or discuss specific measures commanders in the field may be taking to protect and defend our networks," the department said in an official statement.

Military computers are often referred to as part of the Global Information Grid, or GIG, a system composed of 17 million computers, many of which house classified or sensitive information.

FOX News obtained a copy of one memo sent out last week to an Army division within the Pentagon warning of the cyber attack.

"Due to the presence of commercial malware, CDR USSTRATCOM has banned the use of removable media (thumb drives, CDRs/DVDRs, floppy disks) on all DoD networks and computers effective immediately."

[Soldier4Christ]

Fortunately this is not the main Military communications network which is a network that is completely separate from the internet.

[nChrist]

Fortunately this is not the main Military communications network which is a network that is completely separate from the internet.

Hello Pastor Roger,

I have no idea what OS they have, but I would hope it's high security. To me, that would mean a totally encrypted Unix system. They could have multiple levels of security with such a system and grant access to only certain parts of the system by encryption techniques that could even be matched with the fingerprints of the operator. If they don't have such a system, I would really like to know why in a day and age like this. Individuals can easily install their own encrypted Unix system with no expensive software or additional equipment, so I know that a high security application would be fairly easy. It really bothers me greatly when I hear things like this. We should all expect systems like this to be completely SAFE and SECURE. If they aren't - WHY AREN'T THEY?

[Soldier4Christ]

No matter how much security is installed if there is a hard line attached to civilian communications it is not enough. All classified government computers should be on a totally isolated system. This is not to say that they can't have computers that are tied to the internet but that those they do have tied to the internet should not be be tied into those containing classified information. Any time there is a wire or phone line, etc between them there is always a greater risk of security problems.

[HisDaughter]

Report: U.S. Dominance and Influence Predicted to Fade
Alarming government report predicts environmental catastrophe, threat of nuclear war and the decline of America as the dominant global power by 2025.
FOXNews.com

The next two decades will see a world living with the daily threat of nuclear war, environmental catastrophe and the decline of America as the dominant global power, according to a frighteningly bleak assessment by the U.S. intelligence community.

"The world of the near future will be subject to an increased likelihood of conflict over resources, including food and water, and will be haunted by the persistence of rogue states and terrorist groups with greater access to nuclear weapons," said the report by the National Intelligence Council.

The analysts said that the report had been prepared in time for Barack Obama's entry into the Oval office on January 20, where he will be faced with some of the greatest challenges of any newly-elected president.

"The likelihood that nuclear weapons will be used will increase with expanded access to technology and a widening range of options for limited strikes," the 121-page assessment said.

The analysts draw attention to an already escalating nuclear arms race in the Middle East and anticipate that a growing number of rogue states will be prepared to share their destructive technology with terror groups.

"Over the next 15-20 years reactions to the decisions Iran makes about its nuclear program could cause a number of regional states to intensify these efforts and consider actively pursuing nuclear weapons," the report Global Trends 2025 said. "This will add a new and more dangerous dimension to what is likely to be increasing competition for influence within the region," it said.

The spread of nuclear capabilities will raise questions about the ability of weak states to safeguard them, it added. "If the number of nuclear-capable states increases, so will the number of countries potentially willing to provide nuclear assistance to other countries or to terrorists."

The report, a year in the making, said that global warming will aggravate the scarcity of water, food and energy resources. Citing a British study, it said that climate change could force up to 200 million people to migrate to more temperate zones. "Widening gaps in birth rates and wealth-to-poverty ratios, and the impact of climate change, could further exacerbate tensions," it said.

The report says the warming earth will extend Russia and Canada's growing season and ease their access to northern oil fields, strengthening their economies. But Russia's potential emergence as a world power may be clouded by lagging investment in its energy sector, persistent crime and government corruption, the report says.

"The international system will be almost unrecognizable by 2025, owing to the rise of emerging powers, a globalizing economy, a transfer of wealth from West to East, and the growing influence of non-state actors. Although the United States is likely to remain the single most powerful actor, the United States' relative strength -- even in the military realm -- will decline and US leverage will become more strained."

Global power will be multipolar with the rise of India and China, and the Korean peninsula will be unified in some form. Turning to the current financial situation, the analysts say that the financial crisis on Wall Street is the beginning of a global economic rebalancing.

The U.S. dollar's role as the major world currency will weaken to the point where it becomes a "first among equals."

"Strategic rivalries are most likely to revolve around trade, investments and technological innovation, but we cannot rule out a 19th-century-like scenario of arms races, territorial expansion and military rivalries." The report, based on a global survey of experts and trends, was more pessimistic about America's global status than previous outlooks prepared every four years. It said that outcomes will depend in part on the actions of political leaders. "The next 20 years of transition to a new system are fraught with risks," it said.

The analysts also give warning that the kind of organized crime plaguing Russia could eventually take over the government of an Eastern or Central European country, and that countries in Africa and South Asia may find themselves ungoverned, as states wither away under pressure from security threats and diminishing resources..

The intelligence community expects that terrorism would survive until 2025, but in slightly different form, suggesting that Al Qaeda's "terrorist wave" might be breaking up. "Al Qaeda's inability to attract broad-based support might cause it to decay sooner than people think," it said.

On a positive note it added that an alternative to oil might be in place by 2025.   

[HisDaughter]

America's 1st openly transgendered mayor
City leader promises 'change' – in form of breast implants, lipstick, high heels
© 2008 WorldNetDaily


Stu Rasmussen (photo: Stu rasmussen for Mayor)


Oregon voters have just elected the nation's first openly transgendered mayor.

Stu Rasmussen, 60, served as mayor of Silverton, Ore., in 1988 and 1990 – but not while wearing a skirt and high heels.

The new Rasmussen, or Carla Fong, as he calls himself, sports a new pair of breast implants, dresses and makeup.

And 52 percent of town residents re-elected him this month.

"My first two terms, I was a very straight-looking guy," Rasmussen, a software engineer, told the Los Angeles Times. "Now, I write under the name Carla Fong, but basically I'm Stu in Silverton. Honestly, it would be too much trouble to retrain the whole town."

Rasmussen wears deeply plunging tops, as photos reveal on his campaign website. He likes to wear tight miniskirts and long red nails to complement his red mane.

Rasmussen took a break from his position as mayor and spent four years on the City Council. His recent mayoral campaign promised "reasoned discourse … where everybody's going to be participating for a change."

But when he walked into a city council meeting sporting his new look, the dress code was immediately changed to allow only "business casual."


Rasmussen's campaign photo
 

"We're doing business for the city, and he's showing up in outfits that frankly were embarrassing," outgoing Mayor Ken Hector told the Times. "Miniskirts and halter tops to a City Council meeting? Imagine that in Seattle or L.A. When you're dressing, I'm sorry, like a $3 hooker, it's disrespectful to your community."

However, Rasmussen refused to cooperate and cover up.

"He wanted no cleavage, no short skirts, no high heels," he said. "He'd made his point; he'd won the game. So I just proceeded to ignore it."

The new transgendered mayor enjoys showing off his new look.

"If I could have a face transplant, it'd be perfect. A face like this, only a mother could love," he told the Times. Then he glanced down at his cleavage and said, "But people overlook the face now because there's all this other real estate."
---------------
My son, who lives not far from Silverton, has friends who have seen this guy and tell him that it's pretty freaky.