VAMOS AL PUNTO.

[siboneyes]

Eric Holder Plays Texas Hold ‘Em In Voter ID Suit

IBD 3/13/2012

Voting Rights: The most politicized attorney general in American history takes on Texas’ Voter ID law as discriminatory and intimidating to minorities, and tries to make American elections safe for vote fraud.

The Justice Department’s civil rights division, the same group that dropped the case of a group of New Black Panthers wearing military garb and carrying billy clubs as they stood outside a Philadelphia polling place in 2008, has filed an objection in U.S. District Court to Texas’ voter identification law on the grounds it intimidates minorities and suppresses minority voter turnout.

Photo IDs and the requirement that they be shown are ever present in our society — from cashing a check to boarding a plane to entering Eric Holder’s own Department of Justice. Yet Holder, who once said criticism of him and his boss, President Obama, was due to their skin color, sees racism in Texas’ move to guarantee the sanctity of the ballot box.

Requiring some kind of identification to prove you are who you say you are when voting was one of the proposals in 2005 by the Commission on Federal Election Reform chaired by Jimmy Carter and James Baker, two individuals not known for racist inclinations.

In the objection, Thomas Perez, chief of Justice’s civil rights division who exonerated the New Black Panther thugs, said that Texas data showed that anywhere from 6% to 10% of Hispanics don’t have one of the seven acceptable photo IDs issued by the state or federal government. It completely ignores the fact that the state’s election-identification certificates are free.

The empirical evidence shows that voter ID laws do not suppress minority voting. In Georgia, black voter turnout for the 2006 midterm elections was 42.9%. After passage of photo ID laws, black turnout in the 2010 midterm rose to 50.4%. Black voter turnout also rose in Indiana and Mississippi after those two states enacted their voter ID laws.

Hans von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation points out that black voter turnout increased in Georgia in the presidential election of 2008, the first election under its voter ID law, by a greater percentage than in Mississippi, a state without such a requirement.

“There is no question about the legitimacy or importance of a state’s interest in counting only eligible voters’ votes,” wrote liberal Justice John Paul Stevens for the 6-3 majority in the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision upholding Indiana’s ID law, the toughest in the nation.

The Supreme Court justices said “we cannot conclude that the statute imposes ‘excessively burdensome requirements’ on any class of voters.” The decision cited the finding of a district judge that plaintiffs had “not introduced evidence of a single, individual Indiana resident who will be unable to vote as a result of the law.”

A study by the University of Delaware and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln found that “concerns about voter identification laws affecting turnout are much ado about nothing.” Not unless you are an administration willing to play the race card to **noallow** re-election.

Texas is one of 16 states or parts of states that under Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act must obtain permission from DOJ or a federal court in Washington, D.C., before redrawing district lines or revising election procedures because of voting rights violations in the past. Yet there is no evidence that a voter ID requirement constitutes a voting- or civil-rights violation.

So now we have a “war on voting rights” to join the “war on women” the administration is complaining about, even though photo IDs are as easily obtainable in these states as are contraceptives by Georgetown coeds.

We suspect the DOJ action against Texas and other states has more to do in revving up the Democratic base than in correcting any injustice, real or imagined.

[sirjohn]

DON'T DARE TO TRY IT ON TEXAS!!!

War On Women: Feds Cut Off Women's  Health Funding to Texas

By Guy Benson 3/16/2012

That headline may seem unusual (since when does the Obama  administration cut funding for anything other than military healthcare and successful school choice programs?), but once you see  who this move is intended to protect, all shall be  revealed:

The federal  government on Thursday began making good on its promise to cut off all  funding for the Texas Medicaid Women's Health Program amid an escalating  fight over the state's ban on funding for clinics affiliated with abortion  providers. In a letter to state officials, Cindy Mann, director  of the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said her agency  regretted the move. "We had hoped not to be at this point. But, unfortunately,  as we've made clear to the state at all points in this process, we don't have a  choice," Mann said on a conference call with reporters after sending the  letter...

The standoff stems from a law passed by the Legislature last  summer and took effect Wednesday. It bars state funding for clinics affiliated  with abortion providers. The Obama administration had pledged to stop  funding the Women's Health Program because federal law requires women to be able to  choose any qualified clinic. Gov. Rick Perry counters that states have the  right, under federal law, to determine qualified providers in the  program. The program provides care to about 130,000 women between the  ages of 18 and 44 earning less than $20,000 a year or less than $41,000 for a  family of four — with federal funds  paying 90 percent of its cost and Texas covering the rest. Mann said that last  year it cost about $41 million, and about $34 million of that came from  Washington...Planned  Parenthood issued a statement criticizing the actions taken by Perry and  the Texas  Legislature.

So I guess indigent Texas women will simply have to go without  because Obama's government prioritizes protecting a political ally and Democrat cash cow over the "women's health"  they claim to hold dear.  Wait, what's that?  They won't?  Hey, look who's standing up for women's  healthcare:

Perry, who slammed the federal government constantly during  his short-lived bid for the Republican presidential nomination, has directed state health officials to find the funding to keep the program  going from other parts of the budget, but he has promised not to raise  revenues to cover the costs.

Remind me: Who, exactly, is waging this alleged "war on  women," again?

[sirjohn]

PRINCESS MALIA ON MEXICO WITH 12 LADIES ON  WAITING

Obama's  daughter  spends spring break in Mexico

MALIA   OBAMA

ALTHOUGH THE   STATE DAPARTMENT HAS WARNED AMERICANS NOT TO TRAVEL TO MEXICO, PRINCESS  MALIA  OBAMA WENT TO OAXACA ON SPRING BREAK IN MEXICO WITH 12 LADIES IN  WAITING AND 25  SECRET AGENTS AT A COST TO THE TAXPAYERS  SEVERAL OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS   DOLLARS.

Agence   France-PresseMarch 19,   2012

OAXACA, Mexico - The elder daughter of  U.S.  President Barack Obama is spending her spring break in the historic  Mexican city  of Oaxaca in the company of 12 friends, a state police  official said.

The young tourists, including 13-year-old Malia Ann Obama,  are  staying at a downtown hotel in this city famous for its colonial  architecture  and well-preserved native American traditions, the official  said.

"We are here to block access to the hotel by other people  and  escort the vehicles that are carrying the visitors to tourism sites,"  the police  official told AFP under the condition of anonymity.

Malia Obama and her friend are guarded by 25 U.S. Secret   Service agents as well as Mexican police, the official noted.

The group, which arrived in Oaxaca Saturday, has already   visited the architectural zone of Mitla and the tree of El Tule believed to  have  one thousand years.

The sightseeing plan also includes visits to Monte Alban  known  for its archeological research sites and Oaxaca’s famous  artisan  quarters.

Mientras el Indice de Miseria gracias a Obama rompe el récord de Carter, la familia real Obama vive al estilo del Rey Luis XVI...  caviar para ellos, para el pueblo cake!!!

[sirjohn]

Obama's  daughter  spends spring break in Mexico

MALIA   OBAMA

ALTHOUGH THE   STATE DAPARTMENT HAS WARNED AMERICANS NOT TO TRAVEL TO MEXICO, PRINCESS  MALIA  OBAMA WENT TO OAXACA ON SPRING BREAK IN MEXICO WITH 12 LADIES IN  WAITING AND 25  SECRET AGENTS AT A COST TO THE TAXPAYERS  SEVERAL OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS   DOLLARS.

Agence   France-PresseMarch 19,   2012

OAXACA, Mexico - The elder daughter of  U.S.  President Barack Obama is spending her spring break in the historic  Mexican city  of Oaxaca in the company of 12 friends, a state police  official said.

The young tourists, including 13-year-old Malia Ann Obama,  are  staying at a downtown hotel in this city famous for its colonial  architecture  and well-preserved native American traditions, the official  said.

"We are here to block access to the hotel by other people  and  escort the vehicles that are carrying the visitors to tourism sites,"  the police  official told AFP under the condition of anonymity.

Malia Obama and her friend are guarded by 25 U.S. Secret   Service agents as well as Mexican police, the official noted.

The group, which arrived in Oaxaca Saturday, has already   visited the architectural zone of Mitla and the tree of El Tule believed to  have  one thousand years.

The sightseeing plan also includes visits to Monte Alban  known  for its archeological research sites and Oaxaca’s famous  artisan  quarters.

Mientras el Indice de Miseria gracias a Obama rompe el récord de Carter, la familia real Obama vive al estilo del Rey Luis XVI...  caviar para ellos, para el pueblo cake!!!

[siboneyes]

Obama Dining With Supporters for  $35,800 a Plate

By Katie Pavlich 3/19/2012

OBAMA IS THE POLITICIAN WHO HAS RECEIVED MORE $$$ FROM WALL STREET



Obama still flush with cash from financial sector despite frosty relations

Los multimillonarios que recibieron  la mayor parte de los $800 billones del estímulo a la hora de Obama repartir el  botín del estímulo entre sus secuaces, ahora acuden a pagar su deuda de gratitud  engrosando las arcas de la campaña presidencial de Obama, el presidente mas  corrupto en la historia de U.S... AMOR CON AMOR SE PAGA  $$$$.

This afternoon in Washington D.C. President  Obama is lunching with his wife and his most prominent supporters at the W Hotel  for $35,800 a plate. They are the 1 percent.

The president this afternoon will host a private, roundtable  discussion with 20 of his wealthiest supporters at the W Hotel in Washington,  D.C.  Tickets to the event – Obama’s 109th of the election – were $35,800  apiece, a campaign official said. Meanwhile, Michelle will travel to New York City to host a colorful duo of fundraisers that  include a bowling party at Chelsea Piers and cocktails with Hollywood  stars.

In Michelle Obama's case, a picture is worth $5,000:

For the first time in my life, I am really proud of  this  country.

About 90 donors are expected for the reception, the campaign  said, with tickets starting at $5,000 for a photo with Obama and a cocktail,  $25,000 to mingle with her.

Although Obama has been heavily campaigning and  attending campaign fundraisers, his fundraising totals aren't piling up as  quickly as expected. At this time in his 2008 campagin, Obama had raised  significantly more money.

President Obama has many names, but this week, as he reaches  100 donor events since announcing for reelection last April, he’s the “fundraiser-in-chief.” According to several counts, the  Big 100 will come Thursday when he does four fundraisers enroute to collecting  and spending $750 million to $1 billion for his reelection. So far since April  2011, he has raised an estimated $82 million to $100 million at those  events.

Obama may be working fundraisers as hard as former President Clinton, but the numbers aren’t fantastic. In January, he didn’t raise as  much as he did in 2008, with contributions to Obama and the Democratic National  Committee down 30 percent, according to a Boston Globe analysis. After those  numbers came out, Obama flip-flopped and pushed donors to give to his “super  PAC.”

Obama lags behind Republican front-runner Mitt Romney in  finding donors willing to give $2,000 or more — a surprising development for a  sitting president, and one that could signal more worrisome financial problems  heading into the general election. At this point in the last election cycle,  Obama had received such large donations from more than 23,000 supporters, more  than double the 11,000 who have given him that much this time.

[siboneyes]

Petroleum producers plan presidential protest

Chellie Mills Reporting

KFOR-TV

March 20, 2012

CUSHING, Okla. -- The President is scheduled to speak in Payne County this Thursday morning. It may be rural Oklahoma, but when it comes to pipelines, it's the Capitol. The President is expected to talk about energy, though many in that industry are not impressed.

They are even planning to protest his visit, calling it a political ploy more than a genuine interest.

Mike Cantrell with the Domestic Energy Producers Alliance says, "For the last three years he's been anti-fossil fuels."

Mickey Thompson, an energy industry expert and political analyst, says, "He calls our industry an industry of the past and they'd like us to go away."

The President is expected to mention his support for a pipeline running from Payne County to the gulf; it's the southern end of the “Keystone XL Pipeline.”

Industry experts say while his support for the southern end is welcome, it's not needed.

They build pipelines in the country all the time without needing presidential approval.

The President's "green light" is only needed for approximately 50 feet on the northern end of the pipeline; that segment would cross the Canadian border.

So far the President has delayed that project.

Thompson says, "The President is using this, frankly, as a publicity stunt to say he's doing something against high gas prices."

Cantrell says, "We take exception to the hypocrisy of standing before the largest crude oil facility in the world and saying anything about energy."

Thompson and others in the industry are planning to be in Payne County with their equipment as a protest to what the President has to say.

Thompson says, "We don't think it's disrespectful to the office of the President to come to Cushing as people in the oil and gas business to say, 'We don't buy this.'"

It's unclear how much of Thursday's protest will be witnessed by President Obama.

The event isn't open to the public or the protesters

[monte890]

:carcajadas:Que bonitas se ven esas torres ardiendo;Asi deberian arder todos esos politicos en U.S.A.Ladrones que siguen acabando con el pobre.

[sirjohn]

Obama contra la Iglesia

1/31/23012

Obama vs. Cardenal   Dolan

La amenaza a la libertad religiosa en Estados Unidos no es una broma, ni, cuando se afirma eso, se está exagerando. No se trata ya de que Obama esté llevando a cabo una política de  apoyo económico a  prácticas que católicos -y no sólo católicos- consideran criminales, como es el aborto. Es que ahora quiere obligar a que esas prácticas sean  subvencionadas desde  las propias  instituciones  religiosas. Y ahí es donde  se entra  de lleno en el ataque a la   libertad religiosa.

La Iglesia católica en Estados Unidos tiene miles de instituciones sociales, como colegios -casi cada parroquia tiene hospitales, asilos, comedores sociales, centros de atención  a  drogodependientes  o a emigrantes, etc. Como obliga la ley, los  empleados  de estos centros tienen  un seguro médico para  sus  trabajadores.

Sin embargo, ese seguro no incluye el acceso a  determinadas  prestaciones que van en contra de la moral católica.   Por  ejemplo, si uno de esos  empleados quiere abortar, el seguro  que  le ofrece  la Iglesia no le paga el  aborto, se lo tendrá  que pagar él  por su cuenta.  O si quiere utilizar   anticonceptivos, los había  pagado de su bolsillo en  la farmacia.

Pues bien, ahora Obama quiere que en esos seguros  se incluyan cosas que van abiertamente contra la moral   católica. Deberán ofrecer  anticonceptivos y también píldoras abortivas. De esta manera, la Iglesia se hará cómplice de hechos  que  considera gravísimos, hasta el  punto de que excomulga al que los comete, como es el caso del  aborto.

¿Por qué hace esto Obama?  ¿Le  preocupa el interés de los empleados de las instituciones católicas, a  fin de que no gasten más de la cuenta si quieren llevar una vida contraria  a lo que  indica la moral de la empresa para la que trabajan? Estoy seguro  de que esto no  es así. Creo que Obama ha encontrado la manera de asfixiar  a las obras sociales  católicas, de abocarlas al cierre o de forzarlas a ir  contra sus principios, con  lo cual quedarían totalmente  desprestigiadas.

Es más sutil que Fidel  Castro,   que cerró todo lo que tenía la Iglesia en Cuba, pero busca  el  mismo objetivo. Los radicales -y  Obama lo es cada vez más- saben que la Iglesia tiene, gracias a  sus  obras sociales, un gran  prestigio y por eso quieren acabar con  ellas.  Si cerraran todos  las instituciones católicas en Estados  Unidos se  haría un gran daño a  millones de  personas, pero eso  a Obama le da  igual. No le preocupan los pobres. El odio se está  convirtiendo cada  vez más en su motivación.

Los obispos   norteamericanos  han plantado  cara y no van a ceder, con el  cardenal  Dolan a su cabeza. Va  a ser una guerra  dura. Quizá  Obama gane  algunas batallas, pero terminará perdiéndola. Su futuro   va a ser como  el de Zapatero, su amigo: una retirada deshonrosa y   desprestigiada, donde  todos los que hoy le apoyan le  volverán la  espalda y se  avergonzarán  de él. http://www.magnificat.tv/es/node/658/2

[siboneyes]

President Obama’s Secretary  Paid   Higher Tax Rate Than He Did

April 13, 2012 Brendan Smialowski

President Obama today released his 2011 federal income   tax,  with he and his wife reporting an adjusted gross income of  $789,674.  The Obamas  paid $162,074 in total tax – an effective  federal income tax  rate of 20.5%. The  Obamas also reported donating  approximately 22% of  their income to charity — $172,130.

President Obama has been making a big political push for the “Buffett Rule,” which would require millionaires to pay a minimum of 30%   of  their income in taxes. To illustrate the point, the president has   pointed out  that billionaire investor Warren Buffett pays a lower tax  rate  than does his  secretary.

President Obama’s secretary, Anita Decker Breckenridge,   makes  $95,000 a year. White House spokeswoman Amy Brundage tells ABC  News  that  Breckenridge “pays a slightly higher rate this year on  her  substantially lower  income, which is exactly why we need to  reform our tax  code and ask the  wealthiest to pay their fair share. ”

It should be noted that president would not be impacted  by  the  Buffett Rule, though he would see his taxes go up if the  so-called  Bush tax cuts  on higher income wage-earners were allowed  to expire, as the  president says he  wants.

-Jake Tapper



~COMRADE OBAMA DID NOT PAY  HIS  FARE SHARE IN TAXES....  DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I   DO!!!

Let's look at this: OBAMA made   $789,674 and gave $172,130 to charity. That leaves $617,544 taxable income.  From  that he took enough deductions to bring his income down to $142,700  at the VERY  top to mean he paid in the 20% bracket. So he wrote off  $464,844 of his income  for mortgage interest, taxes and other non-taxable  ventures.

It astounds me that he can   bIitch and whine about the rich getting all these breaks but he da.mn sure  takes  them himself. No one made him do it - it was his   choice.

[siboneyes]

The media can ignore it, but Obama is losing big among Catholics which will seal his doom

By Coach Collins, on April 20th, 2012

Since such records have been kept no Democrat presidential candidate has ever lost the “Catholic vote” and won the general election. Republicans can win a general election despite losing the “Catholic vote” but a Democrat simply can’t. This makes Barack Obama’s war on Christians in general and Catholics in particular so dangerous for him and his Party.

The results of a new Pew survey of voters by religious affiliation, holds devastating news for Obama’s chances of reelection. The ease with which it can be found proves this news is being purposely ignored by a delusional media that believes Obama is cruising toward an easy reelection.

Pew found Mitt Romney with a commanding lead among Evangelical and Catholic voters that has actually grown by 5 and 8 points respectively in just the past month. Obama now trails Mitt Romney 73/20 among Evangelicals and 57/37 among White Catholics.

The significance of Pew’s findings among “White” Catholics grows geometrically when added to that of “Evangelicals” because it means that Obama is also on track to lose by a very large margin among Whites, who make up 2/3 of the electorate in November.

Over the history of polling by religious affiliation the “Catholic vote” has served as a 90% accurate predictor of final results. Moreover the winning Catholic percentage has consistently been very close to the winners victorious percentage in the general election – Obama’s 54% of the Catholic vote was the same as his overall winning margin in 2008.

Democrats like Hubert Humphrey in 1968 have even won the Catholic vote with landslide numbers (56/37) and still lost their race. Conversely George McGovern was pummeled in 1972 when he was the loser among Catholics by 20 points.

The fight is just getting underway

The hard numbers point to an electoral disaster for Obama and his Party next November. To avoid this total wipeout Obama has to reverse himself and back down from his demands that the Catholic Church change her doctrine to suit him. Since that is not going to happen the question becomes: How vigorous will the Catholic Church fight back?

If a new video titled Test of Fire: Election 2012 from a group called Catholics Called to Witness is an indicator of what is coming from Catholics who are determined to defeat Obama, his Election night will be a nightmare. This brief video contains a chilling reminder that the way a Catholic votes next November will be recorded for “eternity.” This time Catholics are playing for keeps and starting with a huge lead.

[siboneyes]

Coming to your wallet in 2013: Taxmaggeddon

by David Harsanyi

04/22/2012

Will Rogers once famously quipped that the “only difference between death and taxes is that death doesn’t get worse every time Congress meets.” He was wrong. Not only do taxes get worse when Congress is in session, but now they will get worse when they’re not—much worse.

Coming in January, if Washington does not act, Americans can brace themselves for the biggest single yearly tax increase in the history of the world. What the Heritage Foundation calls Taxmageddon.

A $494 billion spike. An average of $3,800 per person in 2013.

Here’s what you have to look forward to:

--The expiration of the much-maligned 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts. For political purposes, Democrats refer to them as “tax cuts for the wealthy.” In reality, the across-the-board cuts eased rates for nearly everyone, 60 percent of the benefit going to middle and low-income taxpayers.

--Reacquaint yourself with the marriage tax penalty.

--Say hello to a spike on dividend taxes that may take them anywhere from 15 percent to near 40 percent, depending on your situation— which will inevitably be poorer.

--Say goodbye to the payroll tax cuts and half of your child tax credit, which will go from $1,000 per little one to $500.

The alternative minimum tax fix is not in. Once upon a time the AMT was instituted to make things more “fair” (sound familiar) but without a congressional fix it may hit 34 million taxpayers next year.

And only the Supreme Court stands in the way of Obamacare taxes being instituted.