Daily news sites| Find Breaking World News
Latest Updates

Paranoid Schizophrenia & Guns

Paranoid Schizophrenia & Guns
Paranoia [ˌpærəˈnɔɪ.ə] (adjectiveparanoid [ˈpærə.nɔɪd]) is a thought process believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs, or beliefs of conspiracyconcerning a perceived threat towards oneself. (e.g. "Everyone is out to get me.") Making false accusations and the general distrust of others also frequently accompany paranoia. For example, an incident most people would view as an accident or coincidence, a paranoid person might believe was intentional.

Schizophrenia (/ˌskɪtsɵˈfrɛniə/ or /ˌskɪtsɵˈfrniə/) is a mental disorder characterized by a breakdown of thought processes and by poor emotional responsiveness.[1] Common symptoms include auditory hallucinationsparanoid or bizarre delusions, or disorganized speech and thinking, and it is accompanied by significant social or occupational dysfunction. The onset of symptoms typically occurs in young adulthood, with a global lifetime prevalence of about 0.3–0.7%.[2] Diagnosis is based on observed behavior and the patient's reported experiences.



  1. Judge Rules Oikos Shooting Suspect Mentally Incompetent

    Patch.com-17 hours ago
    ... allegations that could result in the death penalty if he's convicted... suffers from paranoid schizophrenia and is unable to cooperate with his ...

  1. Fairbanks Militia Leader Schaeffer Cox Sentenced to 26 Years

    KTVA CBS 11 News Alaska-18 minutes ago
    ... Fairbanks militia leader Schaeffer Cox was sentenced to 26 years in ... Cox was diagnosed withparanoid schizophrenia, paranoid delusions ...
  2. Lyman man gets life sentences in 1993 killings

    San Francisco Chronicle-8 hours ago
    Rosemond was convicted in 1996 of killing his girlfriend, 42-year-old Christine ... Rosemond has been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia.
  3. Rosemond resentenced in 1993 double-murder

    Spartanburg Herald Journal-22 hours ago
    A jury convicted Rosemond in March 1996 for their murders and he was sentenced ... Rosemond was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia.
  4. Pasco slaying suspect's sanity in question

    Mid Columbia Tri City Herald-Jan 6, 2013
    ... strike under Washington's "three strikes" law and life in prison if convicted... Hart is aschizophrenic with an antisocial personality disorder, and has ... He denied any paranoidsymptoms or delusions, but admitted that he ...
  5. Predicting violence remains difficult, despite years of study by ...

    Denver Post-Jan 4, 2013
    ... a disorder that emerges in young adults and often includes paranoid thoughts. ... The risk ofschizophrenics committing homicide was 0.3 percent - more ... She was convicted of animal cruelty but will soon be released on ...

  6. Psychiatrist whose patient hacked man to death convicted of ...

    The Guardian-Dec 19, 2012
    A French psychiatrist has been found guilty of manslaughter after one of ... 43, who is now said to suffer from a kind of paranoid schizophrenia...
  7. Lee Johnson questioned over death of Thomas Embling Hospital ...

    Herald Sun-Dec 27, 2012
    The 30-year old, who suffers paranoid schizophrenia and has more than 120 criminalconvictions, was paroled in late 2009 after the stabbing.
  8. Jury finds Joseph Frye guilty of raping 75-year-old woman

    Tampabay.com-Dec 12, 2012
    "They get a paranoid schizophrenic to confess," he said. "Good enough." Littman called the DNA match "a slender thread to base a conviction ...

  9. Schizophrenic guilty of Kingsbury butcher's shop bloodbath to be ...

    Evening Standard-Dec 12, 2012
    Haughton, 33, of Wembley, north London, was convicted at the Old Bailey ... Haughton, who suffers from paranoid schizophrenia, injured two ...

Some important issues deserving attention as the New Year begins

Some important issues deserving attention as the New Year begins


By James Shott

With the country facing the $16.4 trillion debt limit in two months – which works out to about $52,000 per man, woman and child – and with the government spending about a third more than it collects every year, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said Friday that president Barack Obama should invoke the Constitution to raise the debt ceiling on his own, circumventing Congress. “I would do it, in a second, but I’m not the President of the United States,” Mrs. Pelosi said.

She believes the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states that the validity of U.S. public debts “shall not be questioned,” gives Mr. Obama all the authority he needs to raise the ceiling.

That’s just what the country needs: the biggest spending president in the history of the nation by far – with trillion-dollar-plus deficits every year of his presidency – having the ability to unilaterally increase the amount of money the country borrows whenever he wants to.

Barack Obama is an irresponsible spendthrift who has shown no capacity for fiscal matters, and therefore needs a mechanism, like Congressional intervention, to keep him from bankrupting the country. Congress must not allow him to invoke the 14thAmendment.

Former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is quoted as having said something like “never let a good crisis go to waste,” and anti-gun zealots have thus initiated new efforts to ban scary looking so-called “assault weapons,” or even repeal the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to prevent future mass murders like the Newtown, CT school incident in which 26 people were murdered by what most people understand was a crazed individual.

Other Americans are justifiably concerned about such violence and also support those measures. But those prescriptions miss the point: The factor responsible for this horrible incident was the state of mind of the murderer, not guns or the 2nd Amendment. What we must focus on are mental health issues, our dramatically devolved culture, and providing better school security.

The Founders, who had just put their lives on the line to gain independence, understood that Americans must be guaranteed the right to defend themselves with weapons equal to those that may be used against them. Some states felt so strongly that certain rights, like the right to bear arms, needed to be explicitly guaranteed that they would not ratify the Constitution without the Bill of Rights being included.

If measures such as those that are being advocated were in force in the 1770s, we would be singing “God Save The Queen” as our national anthem.

One of the reasons our country is in such horrible condition at this time is that some of our elected representatives have been in office for decades, during which time their perspective has most often changed for the worse. Long tenure in office is contrary to the concept of citizen leaders who serve their country for a short time, and then return to civilian life, as it was early in our history. This same problem exists for presidents as well as Congresspersons.

Even if we have someone a majority of Americans regard as a good president in office, removing the ban restricting his or her tenure to eight years opens the door to eventually having a “president for life” which is not so different from being ruled by a king. That didn’t work out so well prior to 1776, and there are examples throughout history where people stayed too long in office to their country’s detriment.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected four times, and his policies extended the Great Depression by several years and deepened its effects, increasing the suffering of the people who elected him. When the U.S. Supreme Court decided FDR’s Agricultural Adjustment Act was unconstitutional, he attempted to overcome the Court’s opposition by increasing the number of Justices, and doing so by adding appointees favorable to his policies.

His behavior prompted the proposal for and the adoption of the 22nd Amendment, which is one of the best things resulting from FDR’s presidency.

Eight years is enough for a president to hold office. Leave the 22nd Amendment alone.

As 2013 begins the country still languishes in non-recovery from the 2008 recession, President Barack Obama gave a New Year’s gift to returning members of Congress, federal workers and Vice President Joe Biden by signing an executive order ending a years-long pay freeze.

Federal employees are already paid more than their private sector counterparts. “The federal government paid 16 percent more in total compensation than it would have if average compensation had been comparable with that in the private sector, after accounting for certain observable characteristics of workers,” the Congressional Budget Office reported.

Government employees at all levels exist to serve the public. They should not be treated less well than private sector workers, but sometimes when circumstances warrant, they must make sacrifices, like everyone else has to do. And considering the nation’s critical fiscal condition alluded to above, any additional non-essential spending is plain foolish.

The House of Representatives has voted to rescind Mr. Obama’s Executive Order.

Cross-posted from Observations

Why Is The Left In America So Filled With HATE? ... J. D. Longstreet

Why Is The Left In America So Filled With HATE?   ...   J. D. Longstreet
Why Is The Left In America So Filled With HATE?
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
********************


Their bitterness and hatred is stunning in its depth and intensity.  Their hate knows no bounds. It is America's political left of which I write.  

Anything or anyone not toeing the progressive/Marxist/socialist line of America's political left is the lowest of the low beneath even their respect for a gnat.

Their gall overfloweth.  They foul and sour the very air with their violent language, their profane speech, their threats (implied and otherwise), their cock-sure overconfidence scrawls FEAR across their foreheads.

They have no respect for anyone other than themselves.  Common decency in addressing another human being who may hold a differing opinion is avoided like the plague.

Their use of the vilest of profane language in the pubic square is their trademark.  Having a conversation with them is akin to walking barefoot through a livestock pen -- in the dark. 

They are the bully in every conversation or discussion.  Their use of vocal force to dominate a debate, especially when they are losing to common sense, only demonstrates the shallowness of their own knowledge stream and their feeling of inadequacy amidst a gathering where the mean age is over ten years.

They lash out in all directions when they perceive a threat to their well guarded empty vault of morals.  They guard well that which they do not have and transfer the evil which they do.

They are like frightened, terrified, children. Unsure of themselves, they flounder in a sea of grey on a black and white planet.

Narcissistic and hypocritical they claim love and respect for all while they harbor hate, and revulsion for anyone not like them, or anyone not deferring to them, or anyone disagreeing with them.

They are takers and users unable, or unwilling, to make or give.  There is no true charity in them.

They outwardly sing praises to freedom while they, themselves, are slaves to an authoritarian political philosophy.   They would enslave the world in an instant given the chance. 

Their favorite weapon is bureaucratic despotism wielded through government agencies shielded from pubic accountability. 

They love the cowardice of dictatorship.

They are all apparatchiks of a strong centralized authority -- the state.  It is to the state they bow and pay homage and their allegiance.    

They have created, and they sustain, a permanent underclass of underachievers in America from whom only a vote is required to receive largesse from the country's treasury.

They have given America the Square Deal, the Fair Deal, and the Great Society -- all referred to as "progressive" when, in fact, all are socialist introductory programs, which ultimately enslave their participants.

They cry "fairness" without ever telling us their definition of fairness.

They cry "equality" while never explaining that, to them,  some are more equal than others.

They cry "Social Justice" while never explaining that social justice is only another name for socialism, an introductory form of communism/Marxism.

They will not hesitate to use a nation's pain to further their agenda even when that pain involves the deaths of thousands at work or a score of children at school.  Their motto, their creed, is: "never let a crisis go to waste."

They will pour into the streets to save the live of a condemned murderer -- or -- take the life of an unborn baby.

They have shown a great tendency to worship nature rather than nature's God -- to worship creation, rather than the Creator.

The left lives and breathes in a world of their own making,  a world where they writhe in self-hate, amid pustules of resentment, their reason clouded by anger, guilt, doubt, and their own self-loathing.  They have yet to understand the oppression they complain of is self-inflicted by the weight of the guilt they feel for living in a country like America and taking advantage of the freedom and the liberty -- freely given them -- while they snipe at, and openly attack, the very foundations of the country that has been so very kind to them.

The rancid attitude of the left has poisoned the American political process and has infected the American citizenry so deeply that a total breakup of the country would not be unexpected.

The only joy they seem to be able to attain is by creating a mob in the streets where they make complete and utter fools of themselves (to the amusement of of millions) by protesting the very thing(s) that makes America great, unique, and exceptional.

If the description above seems to fit the symptoms of a mental disorder to you, the reader, I must confess that I had the same reaction when reading over them a second time.  It is cause for wonder, is it not?

I feel sadness and sorrow for the political left. Paraphrasing the scriptures:  "They, among all men, are the most to be pitied."

© J. D. Longstreet

Serrano Puts Forth Resolution to End Presidential Term Limits

Rep. Jose Serrano (D-NY)
Representative Jose Serrano (D-NY) wants to repeal the 22nd Amendment of the Constitution that places term limits on the office of the President.  (Of note, Serrano is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which according to my research is an organization that supports Marxist policies.)

No, I repeat, NO President, whether Democrat, Republican, or otherwise, should serve more than two 4-year terms as President, whether continuous or separated by time.

In fact, members of Congress have clearly shown that they need term limits as well.

Why?  Because our "representative" government has become its own aristocracy concerned more with their own power, wealth and status rather than the needs and liberties of the people.  Term limits would only be the beginning.  We must elect representatives who actually understand, support and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Congressman Puts Forward Resolution To End Term Limits On Presidency


Congressman Jose Serrano (D-NY) put forth a House resolution that would repeal the twenty-second article of amendment to the United States Constitution on Friday. This would effectively remove term limits on the Presidency should it be ratified by three-fourths of the States. It has currently been sent to the House Judiciary Committee. The resolution would also have to pass both houses of Congress by two-thirds in each house.
[...]
The following is the text of the resolution put forward:

H.J.RES.15 — Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual… (Introduced in House – IH)
113th CONGRESS
1st Session

H. J. RES. 15
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 4, 2013

Mr. SERRANO introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:
`Article–
`The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.’.

Continue reading (article continues)...

Connect to AAE
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
   Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies ("Follow")
   YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/AAEnemies ("Subscribe")
Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

A Battle Cry: “From My Cold, Dead, Hands” ... J. D. Longstreet

A Battle Cry:  “From My Cold, Dead, Hands”   ...   J. D. Longstreet
A Battle Cry:  “From My Cold, Dead, Hands”
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

***************

I was listening to a radio show in the wee hours of the morning, some time ago, and there was an on-going debate about gun control in the USA.

As I listened, it became clear to me that those on the “take the guns” side have managed to delude themselves into thinking that those of us on the “keep the guns” side will give up our weapons without a bloodbath in the streets of America.  I nearly dropped my razor.  It was such a blow to me to realize that those “Ban the Guns” folks are SO out of touch with reality that they actually believe that.

Now, I’m a Southern American.  I was reared around guns as a child and have handled, and fired weapons, all my life. I was taught to fire weapons at the age of six.  That is actually a little late for a Southern boy to learn how to handle firearms.

I legally purchased my first shotgun at age 12.  It was a Winchester, model 37, with a 30-inch barrel, full choke.  It was a very good squirrel gun… and a “weapon of mass destruction” on small game.  It made a terrific deer weapon with either a 12-gauge slug or double-ought buckshot.  But good marksmanship was required.  It was a single shot, so often the shooter had a single chance to bag the game for which he was aiming.

I have hunted the woods and the swamps of the two Carolinas all my life until failing health put a stop to it. 

In the eyes of the “Ban the Guns” folks I own an arsenal of weapons.  In a manner of speaking, I suppose I do. I own long guns, handguns, and I even have "edged" weapons such as Bowie knives.  Generally speaking… I’m armed to the teeth.  At one time I was actually very good with a bow as well.   (Often my aim was better with a bow that with a rifle.  Go figure!)  I tell you this, not as a boast, but to attempt to point out that I'm an average gun owner.  Actually, a bit below average, here, in my part of the country.  The point is that, where I live, having multiple guns is nothing special.  In fact, it is normal -- VERY normal. 

Only a tiny portion of weapons owned by citizens of the United States are registered.  Would you care to guess why?  Because… if the weapon is registered, the government knows what it is, where it is, and who has it.  

And one other point the “Ban the Guns” folks overlook… it is fairly easy to manufacture both handguns and long guns in your basement workshop.  Back in the day of the “zip guns” I made several myself.  I was nearly always armed during my teen years.

As I said, I’m just an “average” gun owner here in the American Southland.  I have no gun rack in my pick-up.

Having said all this… allow me ask you a serious question.  Do you really believe, way down deep, that I would willingly hand over my weapons and place my safety, and that of my family, into the hands of bureaucratic government agencies such as a local, state, or federal law enforcement agency?  Do You?

Well, friend, if you do … you are demented and need serious help, right away.

I can say, with no hesitation, the only way the US government will ever come close to getting gun owning Americans to give up their weapons is -- with force of arms.  In other words… they will have to use their guns to take our guns.  There will be a blood bath the likes of which this country hasn’t seen since the “late unpleasantness” in 1861 to 1865.  It would cause an instant separation in the country.  The UNITED states would be no more.

This is not an easy thing for me to say.  It is not an easy thing to contemplate, yet it is an undeniable truth -- except for the gun grabbers among us who seem to exist in a state of denial.
 
Call us what you will, but when the security of our families is at stake the line will have been crossed and that’s when the gun safes, and gun cabinets, are opened and WE take responsibility for the safety of our homes and our families.

There is much truth to the old adage:  “An armed man is a free man.  An unarmed man is a “subject”.

America was conquered and taken with the gun. Our independence was taken with the gun, our freedom is secured with the gun, and our liberty, as a free people, will be safe as long as American citizens are armed with a gun.

To quote Charlton Heston:  “…from my cold, dead, hands!” 

You may find those words of Mr. Heston "corny."  But I tell you, in all seriousness, those words spoke directly to the souls of American gun owners.  It was -- and is -- a battle cry!

As horrible as it is to contemplate, America would suffer a domestic military conflagration -- within our borders -- unmatched by any in history, save for the War Between the States. 

Some say there is no chance armed American civilians can prevail over the combined might of the US military.  I'd point out that these are the same folks who think the US won the war in Iraq and are winning the war in Afghanistan. 
   
Irregular forces, the world over, have discovered that you don't have to defeat the US military, you only have to make it unpleasant for them, for a protracted period,  and their civilian handlers/commanders will make them quit and will take them home. It is a lesson learned and a lesson that would indubitably be put to use in any domestic conflict.  It worked for American irregulars when they fought the British, a world superpower, for our Independence ... and won.

There is yet time for good sense to prevail.  We could publicly recognize that gun violence is actually down n America.  We could do something about getting treatment for the mentally ill among us and get them into institutions where they would no longer be a threat to themselves or others. But to turn a nation of law abiding gun owners, overnight, into a nation of law breakers and criminals is unacceptable. 

I do expect the Congress to come to its senses -- at least to some degree.  But our authoritarian, socialist, ideologue President is a loose cannon and I DO expect him to come after our guns with the power of Executive Orders issued to agencies he controls such as BATFE, DHS, and TSA.

Nothing is certain.  But I think we can all prepare for a different America.  The America we knew before Obama is gone forever.  The peace and tranquility of old America has been shattered beyond repair. We Americans have entered a completely new and dark phase of our existence. 

For those of you waiting for the revolution to begin, understand:  you are four years late.
  It began when socialist were given control of our government in 2008.  Those of us who consider ourselves "constitutionalists" are just now picking ourselves off the floor in stunned disbelief at now quickly our government folded.

This IS a new America, a confused, even bewildered America.  Those of us who cling to our religion and our guns have not yet found our footing. 

But we will.
              

© 2013   J. D. Longstreet

Gun Control Archie Bunker Style

Archie says...

(I paraphrase) "I can solve your hijacker problem instantly, just give every passenger a pistol and then they turn it in when the flight is over"




NRA wants everybody in the theater or the school to be equipped with guns...fear is great for record gun sales, and that's what NRA is about, they get $$$ for every weapon sold.




Climate Change Fact Or Fiction ?

Climate Change Fact Or Fiction ?

1 Trillion Dollar Platinum Coin option or not?

1 Trillion Dollar Platinum Coin option or not?


Don’t like the platinum coin option? Here’s a functionally equivalent alternative: have the Treasury sell pieces of paper labeled “moral obligation coupons”, which declare the intention of the government to redeem these coupons at face value in one year. It should be clearly stated on the coupons that the government has no, repeat no, legal obligation to pay anything at all; you see, they’re not debt, and therefore don’t count against the debt limit.

But that shouldn’t keep them from having substantial market value. Consider, for example, the fact that the government has no legal responsibility for guaranteeing the debt of Fannie and Freddie; nonetheless, it is widely believed that there is an implicit guarantee (because there is!), and this is very much reflected in the price of that debt.

Read Full Article Here


Be Ready To Mint That Coin



Should President Obama be willing to print a $1 trillion platinum coin if Republicans try to force America into default? Yes, absolutely. He will, after all, be faced with a choice between two alternatives: one that’s silly but benign, the other that’s equally silly but both vile and disastrous. The decision should be obvious. For those new to this, here’s the story. First of all, we have the weird and destructive institution of the debt ceiling; this lets Congress approve tax and spending bills that imply a large budget deficit — tax and spending bills the president is legally required to implement — and then lets Congress refuse to grant the president authority to borrow, preventing him from carrying out his legal duties and provoking a possibly catastrophic default. And Republicans are openly threatening to use that potential for catastrophe to blackmail the president into implementing policies they can’t pass through normal constitutional processes. Enter the platinum coin.

There’s a legal loophole allowing the Treasury to mint platinum coins in any denomination the secretary chooses. Yes, it was intended to allow commemorative collector’s items — but that’s not what the letter of the law says. And by minting a $1 trillion coin, then depositing it at the Fed, the Treasury could acquire enough cash to sidestep the debt ceiling — while doing no economic harm at all. So why not? It’s easy to make sententious remarks to the effect that we shouldn’t look for gimmicks, we should sit down like serious people and deal with our problems realistically. That may sound reasonable — if you’ve been living in a cave for the past four years.

Given the realities of our political situation, and in particular the mixture of ruthlessness and craziness that now characterizes House Republicans, it’s just ridiculous — far more ridiculous than the notion of the coin. So if the 14th amendment solution — simply declaring that the debt ceiling is unconstitutional — isn’t workable, go with the coin. This still leaves the question of whose face goes on the coin — but that’s easy: John Boehner. Because without him and his colleagues, this wouldn’t be necessary.


    1. MarketWatch (blog)‎ - 4 hours ago
  1. $1 Trillion Platinum Coin: Not as “Silly” as Debt Ceiling Fight | Daily ...

    finance.yahoo.com/.../1-trillion-platinum-coin-debate-o... - United States
    2 hours ago – From the blog Daily Ticker: A week ago the U.S. officially reached its $16.4 trillion debt ceiling, meaning the government can't issue new debt.
  2. Krugman joins the $1 trillion coin brigade - Political Watch ...

    blogs.marketwatch.com/.../krugman-joins-the-1-trillion-coin-brigade/
    4 hours ago – Paul Krugman, the liberal economist who pens a widely read column for The New York Times, on Monday joined the calls for the U.S. to mint a ...
  3. Funny Money: Pundits float $1 trillion coin as answer to debt-ceiling ...

    www.foxnews.com/.../funny-money-pundits-float-1-trillion-coin-as-a...
    2 hours ago – Is a trillion-dollar coin the solution to the next fight over the debt ceiling?
  4. Could a $1 trillion coin fix the national debt?- MSN Money

    money.msn.com/now/post.aspx?post=94f60738... - United States
    5 hours ago – There's been talk of minting a massive coin of platinum to help solve the nation's debt ceiling problem. It's a fun idea that has lots of problems.
  5. Be Ready To Mint That Coin - NYTimes.com

    krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/.../be-ready-to-mint-that-coin/
    Paul Krugman
    by Paul Krugman - in 851 Google+ circles
    5 hours ago – Should President Obama be willing to print a $1 trillionplatinum coin if Republicans try to force America into default? Yes, absolutely. He will ...

Poetic Justice: Shocked Obama Supporters Discover Their Taxes Went Up

By Findalis
Monkey in the Middle

Stolen From Wake Up America (With Permission)



One difference between those that voted for Obama and those that did not, is that those that did not vote for Obama are not surprised in the least that in the fiscal cliff deal, taxes went up, not only for the so-called rich, but for 77 percent of all American workers.

Via Bloomberg:

The budget deal passed by the U.S. Senate today would raise taxes on 77.1 percent of U.S. households, mostly because of the expiration of a payroll tax cut, according to preliminary estimates from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington.

More than 80 percent of households with incomes between $50,000 and $200,000 would pay higher taxes. Among the households facing higher taxes, the average increase would be $1,635, the policy center said. A 2 percent payroll tax cut, enacted during the economic slowdown, is being allowed to expire as of yesterday. 
One percent of households, or those with incomes over $506,210, would pay an average of $73,633 more in taxes.

80 percent of households making between $50,000 and $200,000 will pay an additional average of $1,635 in taxes withheld from their paychecks.

Also, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington, the tax burden will increase more for someone making $30,000 a year (1.7 percent) than it does for someone earning $500,000 annually (1.3 percent).

Conservatives making  $50,000 and $200,000, that are now seeing smaller paychecks, are suffering as much as liberals making equal amounts, but the conservatives are definitely not surprised. On the other hand, Obama supporters, are expressing anger, shock and outrage over Washington's fingers snatching more money from their paychecks.

Obama supporters believed the statement below, conservatives did not.

“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”---- ” Barack Obama, September 2008. “

 Joseph Curl over at Washington Times visited one of the most liberal websites on the Internet and reports on some of the shocked outrage by Obama supporters.
“What happened that my Social Security withholding’s in my paycheck just went up?” a poster wrote on the liberal site DemocraticUnderground.com. “My paycheck just went down by an amount that I don’t feel comfortable with. I guarantee this decrease is gonna’ hurt me more than the increase in income taxes will hurt those making over 400 grand. What happened?”

[...]

“My boyfriend has had a lot of expenses and is feeling squeezed right now, and having his paycheck shrink really didn’t help,” wrote “DemocratToTheEnd.”
Now of course, some obamabots can't bring themselves to blame Obama because they reelected him despite the fact that Mitt Romney and Republicans warned them Obama was going to raise their taxes, and they cannot cast the blame on Republicans because the GOP has been extremely vocal in the battle to extend all tax cuts, but they lost.

So those Obama supporters found someone else to blame:

“BlueIndyBlue” added: “Many of my friends didn’t realize it, either. Our payroll department didn’t do a good job of explaining the coming changes.”

It is the payroll departments fault.

More:
Some in the thread argued that the new tax — or the end of the “holiday,” which makes it a new tax — wouldn’t really amount to much. One calculated it would cost about $86 a month for most people. “Honeycombe8,” though, said that amount is nothing to sneeze at.

“$86 a month is a lot. That would pay for … Groceries for a week, as someone said. More than what I pay for parking every month, after my employer’s contribution to that. A new computer after a year. A new quality pair of shoes … every month. Months of my copay for my hormones. A new thick coat (on sale or at discount place). It would pay for what I spend on my dogs every month … food, vitamins, treats.”
Now, even before Obama is inaugurated for his second term, to which these very people are completely responsible for, they are already expressing buyer's remorse:
“Really, how am I ever supposed to pay off my student loans if my already small paycheck keeps getting smaller? Help a sister out, Obama,” wrote “Meet Virginia.” “Nancy Thongkham” was much more furious. “F***ing Obama! F*** you! This taking out more taxes s*** better f***ing help me out!! Very upset to see my paycheck less today!”

“_Alex™” sounded bummed. “Obama I did not vote for you so you can take away a lot of money from my checks.” Christian Dixon seemed crestfallen. “I’m starting to regret voting for Obama.” But “Dave” got his dander up over the tax hike: “Obama is the biggest f***ing liar in the world. Why the f*** did I vote for him”?

A quick note to Obama supporters, those that ran to the election polls and pulled that lever for Barack Obama.

Sit down and STFU, you voted for this, you got what you voted for and have absolutely no right whatsoever to complain about it now.

Deal with it... the rest of us have to because of your uninformed decisions.