El propio Obama mato la unica Reforma Migratoria biparti

[sirjohn]

DA EL TIRO DE GRACIA BILL CLINTON A LA  REELECION DE OBAMA

ENSALZA BILL CLINTON EL "STERLING"  RECORD EMPRESARIAL DE ROMNEY

Video: Romney's Qualifications,  Business Experience Lauded by...Bill Clinton

By Guy Benson 6/1/2012

Just when you thought yesterday couldn't have gotten any worse for the Obama campaign, a certain  former president appeared on CNN and asserted that Mitt Romney is qualified to  be president, thanks to his leadership as governor and "sterling" career in the private  sector:

This could deliver something of a coup de grace to  the Obama campaign's all-Bain-all-the-time attack strategy.  President  Obama stated that this campaign will "be about"  Romney's "vampire capitalism."  Bill Clinton, Deval Patrick, and at least a dozen other Democrats have dissented from  that view. Publicly. And we're still awaiting an explanation for why a handful of  companies failing after Romney left Bain = greedy and evil, whereas Solyndra and  other taxpayer-financed benefactors of cronyism shutting down = honest  mistakes.  Enlighten us, liberals.  Oh, and by the way, Romney  has jumped ahead in Ohio, Virginia, Florida and  North Carolina.

[termopilas9]

iscuten::colera:

[giron61]

Study which  correctly predicted every presidential race since 1980 says huge Romney  win

A University of Colorado analysis of state-by-state factors  leading to the Electoral College selection of every U.S. president since 1980  forecasts that the 2012 winner will be Mitt Romney.

The key is the economy, say political science professors  Kenneth Bickers of CU-Boulder and Michael Berry of CU Denver. Their prediction  model stresses economic data from the 50 states and the District of Columbia,  including both state and national unemployment figures as well as changes in  real per capita income, among other factors.

“Based on our forecasting model, it becomes clear that the  president is in electoral trouble,” said Bickers, also director of the CU in DC  Internship Program.

According to their analysis, President Barack Obama will win  218 votes in the Electoral College, short of the 270 he needs. And though they  chiefly focus on the Electoral College, the political scientists predict Romney  will win 52.9 percent of the popular vote to Obama’s 47.1 percent, when  considering only the two major political parties.

“For the last eight presidential elections, this model has  correctly predicted the winner,” said Berry. “The economy has seen some  improvement since President Obama took office. What remains to be seen is  whether voters will consider the economy in relative or **noallow** terms. If  it’s the former, the president may receive credit for the economy’s trajectory  and win a second term. In the latter case, Romney should pick up a number of  states Obama won in 2008.”

Their model correctly predicted all elections since 1980,  including two years when independent candidates ran strongly, 1980 and 1992. It  also correctly predicted the outcome in 2000, when Al Gore received the most  popular vote but George W. Bush won the election.

The study will be published this month in PS: Political  Science & Politics, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Political  Science Association. It will be among about a dozen election prediction models,  but one of only two to focus on the Electoral College.

While many forecast models are based on the popular vote, the  Electoral College model developed by Bickers and Berry is the only one of its  type to include more than one state-level measure of economic  conditions.

In addition to state and national unemployment rates, the  authors looked at per capita income, which indicates the extent to which people  have more or less disposable income. Research shows that these two factors  affect the major parties differently: Voters hold Democrats more responsible for  unemployment rates while Republicans are held more responsible for per capita  income.

Accordingly -- and depending largely on which party is in the  White House at the time -- each factor can either help or hurt the major parties  disproportionately.

Their results show that “the apparent advantage of being a  Democratic candidate and holding the White House disappears when the national  unemployment rate hits 5.6 percent,” Berry said. The results indicate, according  to Bickers, “that the incumbency advantage enjoyed by President Obama, though  statistically significant, is not great enough to offset high rates of  unemployment currently experienced in many of the states.”

In 2012, “What is striking about our state-level economic  indicator forecast is the expectation that Obama will lose almost all of the  states currently considered as swing states, including North Carolina, Virginia,  New Hampshire, Colorado, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida,” Bickers said.

In Colorado, which went for Obama in 2008, the model predicts  that Romney will receive 51.9 percent of the vote to Obama’s 48.1 percent, again  with only the two major parties considered.

Election prediction models “suggest that presidential  elections are about big things and the stewardship of the national economy,” Bickers said. “It’s not about gaffes, political commercials or day-to-day  campaign tactics. I find that heartening for our democracy.”

[termopilas9]

Anti-Obama Film Director At National Press Club

7,31, 2012 By Daniel Noe

Earlier this month, “Dreams From My Real Father” director Joel Gilbert appeared at the National Press Club in Washington, DC to talk about his documentary.

Today, even the most socialist Dems will still deny that their

policies and the policies of Barack Obama are socialist.

Thomas was right. We Americans will never “knowingly”

adopt socialism.

Are you ready to wake up yet?

[dobleriezgo]

Prohibido olvidar cuando el congresista Barack Obama no voto por la reforma migratoria  McCain -Kennedy en el 2007.

Lo mas terrible, es que Obama con todo el Congreso a su favor en el 2009, tampoco quiso pasar la reforma migratoria. Que joyita para los ilusos es Obama.  :chicle:

---

floridianprincess ha escrito:

La unica reforma migratoria realmente bipartidista fue hecha por los senadores John McCain y Ted Kennedy.  A esa, no solo no le hicieron caso en aquel tiempo sino que Obama, Hillary Clinton y sus complices se encargaron de hacer campana en contra de esta reforma y la mataron en sus etapas tempranas. Ademas, acuerdense de que Obama es negro y que para el los negros valen mas que los hispanos y los blancos y realmente no quiere la igualdad para los hispanos.

---

[matanzas3]

Go Ahead, Make Romney’s   Day

By Ben Shapiro Sept 3, 2012 FrontPage



The Republican National Convention was a well-run,  brilliant  spectacle: beautifully staged, wonderfully timed, and with  fantastic speakers.  But no one decision showed that the Romney campaign  gets it more than their  decision to invite Clint Eastwood to speak just  before Marco Rubio on the night  of Mitt Romney’s nomination.  

Andrew Breitbart was fond of saying that politics lies  downstream from culture. In other words, culture changes how  people think  and feel; politics is a reflection of that change. And Hollywood is the  central component of American culture.  

Eastwood represents the last gasp of classic Hollywood:  old-fashioned heroes and anti-heroes who stand strong for American  values  of justice and freedom. Eastwood is the same Eastwood in Dirty Harry as he  is in Gran Torino (2008). In the former, he won’t stand for Americans’ safety and property rights being violated by criminals, no matter what the  liberal niceties require. In the latter, he stands up for private  property  against the forces of thuggery.  That’s the Clint Eastwood  who strode onto the stage.  

And then he did something no leftist Hollywood figure  would  do: a comedy routine. Eastwood stood up there and ad libbed a  routine … with an  empty chair. The chair, of course, represented President  Obama in all of his  indecisive glory.   “I remember three and a  half years ago, when Mr. Obama;  won the election,” said Dirty Harry: 

“And though I was not a  big  supporter, I was;watching that night when he was having that thing and  they  were; talking about hope and change and they were talking about, yes;  we can,  and it was dark outdoors, and it was nice, and people; were  lighting  candles.  They were saying, I just thought, this was great.  Everybody is  crying, Oprah was crying. I was even crying. And then finally — and I haven’t  cried that hard since I found out that there is 23  million; unemployed people in  this  country.”   Ouch.  

The left went insane over Eastwood’s routine, calling it   unfunny, wandering, and bizarre. There was some of all of that – not every   moment was blockbuster. But overall, it was genius. The meme took hold:  Obama  was an empty chair. And this week, conservatives across the country  celebrated  National Empty Chair Day over Labor Day, placing empty chairs  on their lawns to  signify an empty presidency.  

That’s the power of imagery and narrative. Perhaps  the  two most powerful takeaway moments from the RNC were Eastwood’s empty  chair  routine, and Paul Ryan’s tremendously powerful line: “College  graduates should  not have to live out their 20s in their childhood  bedrooms, staring up at fading  Obama posters and wondering when they can  move out and get going with  life.” Ryan’s line spawned an  entire ad showing a college  student removing his faded Obama poster after  recognizing that Obama hasn’t lived up to any of his  promises.  

Eastwood did what he was   supposed to do: he shifted the debate. Actually, he did more than that: he   bravely lifted the entertainment industry taboo against knocking an  incompetent  president of the United States. And he took fire for  it.

Eastwood  had been Betty White doing that same routine at  the Democratic National  Convention, the left would have feted him as a  comic genius.   Nonetheless, Eastwood’s appearance highlighted  the fact that President Obama is now worthy of  becoming the butt of jokes.  Most important, it’s clear that the Republican Party is beginning to  recognize the necessity of Hollywood. If they are willing to  reach out to  Hollywood, to use its talents and let them help craft the  conservative  narrative, conservatives will reap the benefits in the same way the  left  has.

[matanzas3]

The Fantastic Romney Video You  Probably Didn't See

By Guy Benson

9/3/2012

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and Hot Air’s Allahpundit are in rare agreement: A video  produced for the Republican National Convention that played on the evening of  Mitt Romney’s acceptance speech should have been featured more prominently in  prime time.  Why?  It was touching, humanizing and uplifting – and it  also highlighted Romney’s professional accomplishments in a very compelling  way.  Because the ‘likeability’ factor is such a major  component of this campaign, why wouldn’t RNC organizers have moved heaven and  earth to ensure that tens of millions of voters would be exposed to such a  brilliant piece of biographical art?  Before we tackle that question, let’s  watch it.  I realize that 10:30 is a decent chunk of time to invest in a  YouTube clip, but c’mon – it’s Labor Day, and the video is well worth your  time:

High marks for production values and content.  My  personal favorite moment is the light bulb snippet; I laughed out loud at Mitt's  aluminum foil "fix."  Given how compelling and effective this video is, a  strong argument can be made that airing it during the heart of prime time should  have been a no-brainer.  Sure, everyone in the packed convention hall  (hardly undecideds) saw it, as did the CSPAN crowd, but most home viewers did  not.  Here's the dilemma Team Romney encountered: The major broadcast  networks decided they'd only cover the 10-11pm ET hour each night.  Peggy  Noonan writes that this choice is a national scandal, and I agree, but that's  another subject for another day.  So the Romney folks had to make a  choice.  The final hour could feature Clint Eastwood or the video, but not  both.  They opted for the former.  I think the Hollywood star's  presentation turned out to be a net positive for Romney -- I may revisit this  point later -- but was he really better than this bio spot, at the end of the  day?  Donning my Monday morning quarterback helmet, I'd say Eastwood should  have gone at 9:45 or so (every single cable news outlet would have run  it in full, plus the video ended up going mega viral anyway), followed by Marco  Rubio at the top of the hour.  The video above would then have served as a  moving and inspirational introduction for the candidate's entrance, guaranteeing  that it would air with peak viewership.

In any case, hindsight is 20/20 and this whole discussion is  moot.  What's done is done.  That being said, I still think the Romney  campaign should consider promoting this video aggressively online.  A final  thought: In 2008, the Obama campaign was flush with cash.  As election day  approached, with coffers overflowing, they secured a 30 minute prime time slot on two  national broadcast networks to air a documentary-sstyle mega ad.  Mitt  Romney currently enjoys a large fundraising/cash-on-hand advantage over his  rival, and I imagine the money will continue to flow in.  I won't pretend  to have any special knowledge of the Romney camp's spending priorities, but I  wonder if they'd at least consider shelling out substantial bucks to air some  version of this clip in the final weeks of the campaign -- if the resources are  there, of course.

[pi1234lar]

Claro que no se me olvida, hace cuatro años mantenia conversasiones con grandes contributarias monetarias a la campaña de Obama y cuando les hacia la pregunta que si estaban de acuerdo con que su candidato qe pusiera en su agenda la reforma migratoria, ellos sencillamente quedaban callados. Barack obama en lugar de eso promovio otras polizas que nos han llevado al declive, y mi opinion es pusimos un lider qque puediera componer esta economia tan dañada no a culpar a otras adminitracio

[giron61]

The Terrifying Line in Obama's Speech That Everyone Missed

09/07/2012

His Agenda: President Obama's convention speech got rough reviews, and rightly so. He offered little but tired bromides and recycled promises. But critics overlooked one promise that will guarantee an even bleaker future.

There was plenty to dislike in Obama's speech. The language was flat, his delivery languid. The speech was stuffed with standard Obama chestnuts about the smallness of politics, the corrupting influence of money in politics, and how cynicism is our worst enemy.

Instead of stirring rhetoric filled with hope and promise, Obama pledged that under his leadership, "our path is harder" and "our road is longer."

Seriously? After four years of the worst economic recovery since the Depression, falling incomes, lower-paying jobs, increased hopelessness and exploding debt, all Obama has to offer is that he'll make this nightmare last even longer?

He also told the public that they "elected me to tell you the truth" not to "tell you what you wanted to hear," but then proceeded to hide inconvenient truths while filling the public's ears with sweet nothings.

For example, he pledged government help for everyone who could possibly want or need it, but managed to avoid any mention of the hard truth that the national debt just topped $16 trillion and entitlements are unsustainable.

He said he'd spend money saved from ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan on roads, bridges and schools. Even the liberal press wasn't buying this one. As the AP pointed out, Obama "laid claim to a peace dividend that doesn't exist."

Obama promised to "take responsible steps" that would "keep the promise of Social Security." But he failed to mention that the only options he's left on the table are raising taxes or cutting benefits. That may not be what people want to hear, but it's the **noallow** truth.

He trotted out his supposed plan to cut deficits by $4 trillion over the next decade. But his actual plan — the budget he presented in February — would add $3.5 trillion in deficits, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Then Obama said he'd create a million new manufacturing jobs, recruit another 100,000 math and science teachers, cut tuition growth in half, and reform the tax code. All by magic, apparently, since he's provided no detailed plans on any of this.

But while everyone was picking apart these and other flaws in Obama's speech, they overlooked the most frightening line of all. That was when Obama promised that he'd pursue "the kind of bold, persistent experimentation that Franklin Roosevelt pursued during the only crisis worse than this one."

That promise might have made liberal hearts swoon. But as Amity Shlaes explained in her outstanding history of the era — "The Forgotten Man" — it was precisely FDR's "bold, persistent experimentation" that was largely to blame for the length, depth and severity of the Great Depression.

Convinced that the government had to do something, FDR tinkered and experimented, she said, figuring that if he didn't "get it right the first time ... maybe he'd get it right the second time." But the very arbitrariness of FDR's actions, she found, made it impossible for businesses to make plans. And so, as FDR's bold experiments increased, business activity decreased and markets froze.

"From the point of view of a business," Shlaes said in a 2009 interview, "it is annihilating to hear Washington uncertain, and that itself retards recovery because you really don't know what to expect."

If Obama wants to conduct experiments, he should get a job as a high school science teacher, and not use the entire nation as guinea pigs, particularly when we already know how his tests will turn out.

[valladolid1]

Obama’s   Unconstitutionalism

By Daniel Greenfield On September 18, 2012 @ 12:38 pm In  The  Point

THIS  WAS WHEN OBAMA  TOOK POWER

OBAMA TAKING THE OATH TO  BE  FAITHFUL TO THE CONSTITUTION

Ask YouTube to take down a video that Muslims find  offensive?  Sure. Jail a filmmaker who made a movie that offends Muslims?  Holder’s on it.  And all of it just in time for Constitution Day on  September 17th, or as Obama  calls it, “Let’s have a barbeque and use that  old piece of paper made by some  dead white men that I found lying around  the place to feed the  flames.”

Robert Knight at the Washington Times has assembled a list  of  ways that Obama has enriched our understanding of the Constitution by  ignoring  it, violating it or setting it on fire during his favorite  concerts.

Now for some examples of Mr. Obama’s violations:

Launching an illegal war in Libya. Article I, Section 8  gives  Congress the power to declare war. Under the congressionally enacted  War Powers  Act, Mr. Obama had 60 days to get congressional approval after  U.S. bombs  started dropping in Tripoli, but he didn’t bother. Putting the  Muslim  Brotherhood in charge of yet another Arab nation appeared to be a  higher  priority than following the law.

Undermining the nation’s armed forces. Article II, Section  2,  names the president commander in chief. Instead of asserting American  power, Mr.  Obama projects weakness, emboldening our enemies. The murder of  our ambassador  and three other staff members in Benghazi, Libya, and the  attacks on our  embassies in Egypt and Yemen are bitter fruit of that  reality.

Violating religious freedom. Mr. Obama’s Department of  Health  and Human Services ignored the First Amendment by issuing a  Soviet-sstyle order  to Catholic and other faith-based institutions to  violate their beliefs and  provide insurance covering abortifacients,  contraceptives and  sterilizations.

And there is that whole thing about criminalizing  blasphemy  against Islam. I hear we have something in the Bill of Rights  about  that.

THIS IS OBAMA AFTER   TRAMPLING ON THE CONSTITUTION

ASSUMING DICTATORIAL   POWERS

Obama wants to increase the poverty  class making more, and more Americans dependents of the government filling the  lines of those voting for the “misery party.” ... 47 million Americans are now  in extreme poverty receiving food under the “food stamp” president… 47% pay no  taxes… in desperation, many unable to find fobs decided to take on disability in  order to survive… the number of Americans in disability increased to almost 9  million!!!

Romney, in the other hand, wants to  diminish the amount of people on poverty creating millions of new jobs and  raising to form part of the middle class those who are now suffering under the “food stamp” president.