Republicans to give IRS the ability to revoke passport, prevent US citizens from leaving the country

So typical of how your politicians operate.
They create a bill with the title "Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act" and include a provision that gives the IRS the power to keep US citizens from leaving the country if it finds that they owe $50,000 or more in unpaid taxes — no court ruling necessary.
You are governed by over 500 little Stalins that work in Washington, taking away your liberty one innocently or patriotically-titled bill at a time.
======================== http://news.investors.com/article/608156/201204171850/irs-taking-away-your-passport-obviously-unconstitutional.htm
IRS Might Have Stalinist Powers Under New Law
The Republican House of Representatives may soon follow the Democratic Senate and give the IRS the power to confiscate your passport on mere suspicion of owing taxes. There's no place like home, comrade.
'America, Love It Or Leave It" might be an obsolete slogan if the "bipartisan transportation bill" that just passed the Senate is approved by the House and becomes law. Contained within the suspiciously titled "Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act," or "MAP 21," is a provision that gives the Internal Revenue Service the power to keep U.S. citizens from leaving the country if it finds that they owe $50,000 or more in unpaid taxes — no court ruling necessary.
It is hard to imagine any law more reminiscent of the Soviet Union that America toppled, or its Eastern Bloc slave satellites.
In his 1967 CBS "Town Meeting of the World" debate with Bobby Kennedy, Ronald Reagan declared, "we don't want the Berlin Wall knocked down so that it's easier to get at the throats of the East Germans. We just think that a wall that is put up to confine people, and keep them within their own country instead of allowing them the freedom of world travel, has to be somehow wrong."
Throughout the many decades of the 20th century's Cold War, the freedom of movement Americans enjoyed as a cherished right was one of our secret weapons. As the Communists in Moscow promised the world utopia out of the barrel of a gun, people around the globe noticed that the Soviets needed walls and barbed wire fences to keep their people in, while in the U.S. walls were as pointless as a fish's bicycle.
As Reuters reported Monday, overtaxation has led to close to 1,800 Americans living abroad renouncing their U.S. citizenship last year or turning in their green cards — many of them with broken hearts because of their love for this nation. The record number of former U.S. citizens is nearly eight times more than those who renounced U.S. citizenship in 2008, and it exceeded 2007, 2008 and 2009 combined.
They did it because of the nightmare the U.S. government puts them — and non-American spouses — through, sniffing over any and all of their finances.
There remain few things more prized than American citizenship. Yet now our ever-expanding leviathan of a government is forcing Americans abroad out, and it might soon build its own Berlin Wall, restricting our "freedom of world travel," as Reagan put it, even when there is no conviction from a court.
If House Republicans pass this assault on our Constitution, their credibility will be in tatters. And if it is passed and then signed into law, look for constitutional challenges in federal courts throughout the land. They should begin the next day.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So typical of how HomeLessGuy operates. Living in Canada and yet fixated on the USA. A classic case of penis envy....
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So typical of how liberals operate: because you think that the Republicans *might* do something that the Democrates *already did* you want to blame the Republicans for it.
You're an idiot.
<plonk>
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Doug Miller wrote:

Why don't you tell us how many republican senators voted in favor of the Bill.
Then come back and tell us how many republican congress-critters voted for it when it comes up for a vote...

You're an idiot for thinking that the republicans have your best interests in mind when they vote to take away or restrict your freedoms and liberties (and I'm not saying the democrats do).
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Oren wrote:

The titanic sank gradually, taking over 2.5 hours to go under.
The deck was inclined at a shallow angle, making it easy to launch a make-shift pile of wood to use as a raft.
The waters were dead calm.
There was plenty of chairs and other wooden items on the ship.
The rescue ship (carpathia) reached the area only 2 hours after the ship went under.
Someone only needed to stay above the water for 3 to 4 hours to be rescued. Even less if they were picked up by a semi-empty lifeboat looking for survivors in the water (which I believe they did pick up several who were floating *in* the water with only their life jackets).
It seems there was little to no wind, but air and water temperature were approximately at or just below the freezing point.
What little imagination, intelligence and grasp of simple concepts you people have.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This was brought up and debated by people closer to the situation than you and I. Their conclusion was that it was not possible to make anything that would work and grabbing some of the wood trim in the staterooms would not be enough aid.
Needed material was not so readily available and neither were the tools. Seems so easy sitting at a computer to say what should have been done 100 years ago by a bunch of Brits coming over.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That is *not* gradually, dummy.

Of course there were no currents or "suction" around the deck as it was going under.

And sub-freezing.

They'll keep you *real* dry.

Three hours too late.

Wrong! Why don't you read the replies to your moronic posts instead of repeating your gibberish. One needs to stay *DRY*, not just above water.

Meaning you have less than a minute of exposure until you're a floater.

You're too stupid for words.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
" snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" wrote:

2.5 hours is gradual - shithead.

Suction or being pulled under is a myth.
Mythbusters did an episode on that. They busted it.
But the idea would be to launch yourself on a raft from the deck at the point where the water meets the deck (like going off a boat ramp). You'd float away, and be far enough from the ship when it finally goes under.

They'd keep you above water. Maybe you'd have a pile of spare life jackets too.

Not if you kept yourself above water (even if you got wet at some point).

I'm pretty sure that some people were picked out of the water by the life boats after the ship went down but before the rescue ships got there.

If there's no wind, and you kept yourself above the water, I'd guess you could stay alive for a couple hours.

Totally nuts. No wind chill if there's no wind.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/19/2012 11:32 PM, Home Guy wrote:

Hummm. You're going to die. What do you do? This problem was beat around before on a TV special, and the best answer IIRC, was to tie all the deck furniture together. They had rope and a lot of furniture. I suppose it was possible for someone to survive this way and manage to keep themselves out of the water enough to stay alive. Problem is, the remaining people would pull the contraption down anyway, and that's assuming someone had the presence of mind to build the thing. I'd give the odds of survival as zero to none but you may as well go down trying.
Jim
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/19/2012 11:32 PM, Home Guy wrote:

"Gradual" is a relative term but I'd think 2.5 hours is neither quick nor gradual. How long does it normally take? For a cruse liner hitting an iceberg, 2.5 sounds pretty fast.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Actually, unlike you, we don't confuse fantasy with reality. and recognize where the two are not congruent.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And for the bill to become law, not only would the House have to pass it, but Obama would then have to sign it.
Only a leftist idiot would turn that into:
"Republicans to give IRS the ability to revoke passport"
But then again it IS HomeLessGuy.....
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.