Responder
¡Bienvenido! Para que puedas participar, intercambiar mensajes privados, subir fotos, dar kudos y ser parte de las conversaciones necesitas estar ingresado en los Foros. | Ingresa | Regístrate Gratis
Banned
sirjohn
Mensajes: 137,146
Registrado: ‎12-15-2005

Re: TO SRJOHN.

OBAMA Y LA DICTADURA   MARXISTA



Contra viento y marea seguiremos denunciando la corrupción  y  los ataques a la libertad por el régimen marxista de Obama y con la  misma  intensidad y constancia como traemos a estos foros día, a día,   la verdad  sobre la tragedia que sufre el pueblo esclavizado y cautivo en  la isla prisión  de Cuba.

Es nuestra potestad y deber como exiliados cubanos y  fieles  ciudadanos de los Estados Unidos, alertar al pueblo americano la  disyuntiva que  confrontarán en las elecciones de Noviembre, cuando se  decidirá si Estados  Unidos seguirá iluminando al mundo llevando en alto la  antorcha de  la  libertad, o optará por seguir la ruta de Cuba y  Venezuela escogida   por  Barack Hussein Obama.

La semana pasada, con el silencio cómplice de una prensa   prostituida y al servicio del régimen, Obama se abrogó poderes  extraordinarios  que le confieren declarar la “ley marcial” en tiempos de  paz, algo similar a los  que hizo Hitler al tomar el poder democráticamente  en Alemania para de inmediato  pasar en el parlamento alemán “the Enabling  Act” que le confería poderes  extraordinarios por 4 años sin posibilidad de  cambios en la ley.

 



 

Como dijo el   filósofo Jorge Santayana: "Quienes ignoran la historia estan  condenados  a repetir sus errores"

Los ataques a la Iglesia y a la libertad religiosa, el   incitamiento a revueltas raciales para provocar el caos, y el ataque de Obama  a  la Suprema Corte de Justicia, presagian disturbios y caos que Obama  aprovechará  para consolidar los poderes dictatoriales que ya se ha  abrogado a-priori  y  mantenerse en el poder pisoteando la  Constitución y la leyes de Estados Unidos.

Banned
sirjohn
Mensajes: 137,146
Registrado: ‎12-15-2005

Re: TO SRJOHN.

Great: US Will Pay More for Canadian Oil Due To Keystone Decision

By Guy Benson 4/4/2012

 

Ideological decisions have consequences (via Hot Air):

Even if President Barack Obama approved the controversial Keystone XL pipeline tomorrow, at least some Canadian oil would still flow to Asia, according to Prime Minister Stephen Harper. In an interview...Harper said Obama's rejection of the controversial pipeline -- even temporarily -- stressed Canada's need to find other buyers for oilsands crude. And that wouldn't change even if the president's mind did.

"Look, the very fact that a 'no' could even be said underscores to our country that we must diversify our energy export markets," Harper told Harman in front of a live audience of businesspeople, scholars, diplomats, and journalists. "We cannot be, as a country, in a situation where our one and, in many cases, only energy partner could say no to our energy products. We just cannot be in that **noallow**."  Harper also told Harman that Canada has been selling its oil to the United States at a discounted price. So not only will America be able to buy less Canadian oil even if Keystone is eventually approved, the U.S. will also have to pay more for it because the market for oilsands crude will be more competitive. "We have taken a significant price hit by virtue of the fact that we are a captive supplier and that just does not make sense in terms of the broader interests of the Canadian economy," Harper said.

Heckuva job, Mr. President.  Not only does your Lefty dogma deny American workers 20,000 jobs and increase our reliance on hostile foreign oil-producing nations, it will also end up jacking up energy costs even higher for US consumers, while needlessly alienating a close ally.  Remember, you personally lobbied to kill this thing, and no amount of face-saving misdirection can change that fact.  Smart power.  Say, what was your Vice President just saying about your administration's energy policies, again?

Banned
sirjohn
Mensajes: 137,146
Registrado: ‎12-15-2005

Re: TO SRJOHN.

Napolitano: 'The President Is Dangerously Close to  Totalitarianism'

April 7, 2012 | Reaganite Republican

 

Says power-mad Obama harbors 'extreme view'
on role of the Supreme  Court and Constitution...
 
 
 
Appearing on Fox the  other night, Judge Andrew Napolitano told Neil Cavuto  that Barack Obama's flippant disregard for all other branches but the Executive  is getting downright scary
(and that's just going by what he says in  public):__________________________________________________​_____________________
 
"I think the President is dangerously close to  totalitarianism. A few months ago he was saying, the Congress doesn’t  count. The Congress doesn’t mean anything. I’m going to rule by decree and  administrative regulation. Now he’s  basically saying the Supreme Court doesn’t count. It doesn’t matter what they  think. They can’t review our legislation. That would leave just him as the only  branch of government standing, so I think he has some problems with  understanding the Constitution or accepting limitations on his power. Look, they are equal branches of  government, but with respect to what the law means, or the Constitution means,  the Court is superior to the President… No  President in modern times has questioned their authority. They’ve questioned the  way the authority has been exercised – not their right to make the decision. This is an extreme view of the  Supreme Court and the Constitution, one that has not been articulated since  Andrew Jackson was in the White  House...."
Diamante
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,641
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: TO SRJOHN.

A Black Man, The Progressive’s Perfect Trojan Horse
lloydmarcus.com ^ | Lloyd Marcus

As millions of my fellow Americans, I am outraged, devastated and extremely angry by the democrat’s unbelievable arrogance and disdain for We The People. Despite our screaming “no” from the rooftops, they forced Obamacare down our throats. Please forgive me for using the following crude saying, but it is very appropriate to describe what has happened. “Don’t urinate on me and tell me it’s raining.” Democrats say their mission is to give all Americans health care. The democrats are lying. Signing Obamacare into law against our will and the Constitution is tyranny and step one of their hideous goal of having as many Americans as possible dependent on government, thus controlling our lives and fulfilling Obama’s promise to fundamentally transform America.

I keep asking myself. How did our government move so far from the normal procedures of getting things done? Could a white president have so successfully pulled off shredding the Constitution to further his agenda? I think not.

Ironically, proving America is completely the opposite of the evil racist country they relentlessly accuse her of being, progressives used America’s goodness, guilt and sense of fair play against her. In their quest to destroy America as we know it, progressives borrowed a brilliant scheme from Greek mythology. They offered America a modern day Trojan Horse, a beautifully crafted golden shiny new black man as a presidential candidate. Democrat Joe Biden lorded Obama as the first clean and articulate African American candidate. Democrat Harry Reid said Obama only uses a black dialect when he wants.

White America relished the opportunity to vote for a black man naively believing they would never suffer the pain of being called racist again. Black Americans viewed casting their vote for Obama as the ultimate Affirmative Action for America’s sins of the past.

Then there were the entitlement loser voters who said, “I’m votin’ for the black dude who promises to take from those rich SOBs and give to me”.

Just as the deceived Trojans dragged the beautifully crafted Trojan Horse into Troy as a symbol of their victory, deceived Americans embraced the progressive’s young, handsome, articulate and so called moderate black presidential candidate as a symbol of their liberation from accusation of being a racist nation. Also like the Trojan Horse, Obama was filled with the enemy hiding inside.

Sunday, March 21, 2010, a secret door opened in Obama, the shiny golden black man. A raging army of democrats charged out. Without mercy, they began their vicious bloody slaughter of every value, freedom and institution we Americans hold dear; launching the end of America as we know it.

Wielding swords of votes reeking with the putrid odor of back door deals, the democrats landed a severe death blow to America and individual rights by passing Obamacare.

The mainstream liberal media has been relentlessly badgering the Tea Party movement with accusations of racism. Because I am a black tea party patriot, I am bombarded with interviewers asking me the same veiled question.“Why are you siding with these white racists against America’s first African American president?” I defend my fellow patriots who are white stating, “These patriots do not give a hoot about Obama’s skin color. They simply love their country and oppose his radical agenda. Obama’s race is not an issue”.

Recently, I have come to believe that perhaps I am wrong about Obama’s race not being an issue. In reality, Obama’s presidency has everything to do with racism, but not from the Tea Party movement. Progressives and Obama have exploited his race from the rookie senator’s virtually unchallenged presidential campaign to his unprecedented bullying of America into Obamacare. Obama’s race trumped all normal media scrutiny of him as a presidential candidate and most recently even the Constitution of the United States. Obamacare forces all Americans to purchase health care which is clearly unconstitutional.

No white president could get away with boldly and arrogantly thwarting the will of the American people and ignoring laws. President Clinton tried universal health care. Bush tried social security reform. The American people said “no” to both president’s proposals and it was the end of it. So how can Obama get away with giving the American people the finger? The answer. He is black.

The mainstream liberal media ontinues to portray all who oppose Obama in any way as racist. Despite a list of failed policies, overreaches into the private sector, violations of the Constitution and planned destructive legislation too numerous to mention in this article, many Americans are still fearful of criticizing our first black president. Incredible.

My fellow Americans, you must not continue to allow yourselves to be “played” and intimidated by Obama’s race or the historical context of his presidency. If we are to save America, the greatest nation on the planet, Obama’s progressive agenda must be stopped.

Lloyd Marcus, (black) Unhyphenated American, singer/songwriter, entertainer, author, artist, and Tea Party patriot

LloydMarcus.com

Diamante
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,641
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: TO SRJOHN.

Socialist  Obama Envisions A Socialist America

Right Side News ^ | 4/9/2012 | J. D. Longstreet

 

Socialism IS Slavery -- To The  State!



so·cial·ism NOUN: 1. Any of various theories or systems of  social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is  owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls  the economy.

2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between  capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the  dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.  (SOURCE)

The definition above clearly  describes Obama's agenda for America. Socialism.

Every time those of us who clearly see America's  President for what he is and dare to speak out publicly about the dangers to  American freedom and liberty Mr. Obama's agenda presents -- we are attacked as  ignorant boobs. The attacks themselves are a key part of the way socialism works -- silence those who would warn of the danger socialism  presents.

As Mr. Obama is campaigning for another chance to bring  America to her knees, there are those on the socialist plantation in America  preparing to flock to the polls and vote to draw the chains of socialism even  tighter around themselves and all Americans. They are the people the  fathers of Marxism and communism referred to as: “useful  idi..ots.”

Future historians will write of  the ignorance of the American electorate in the early 21st century and wonder at  their lack of reasoning. I sincerely doubt those future historians writing about  us will be Americans, however. By that time, the “American iron curtain” will  have fallen and we will be engulfed in the darkness of  communism.

My maternal grandmother had the ability to see short distances  into the future and make accurate predictions. Nothing was made of it. In our  family, it was something that was, well, just there. I grew up in an atmosphere  in which groping into the future, mostly with little success, was not uncommon  in our family. But, I sometimes think, a bit of my grandmother’s ability may  have been attached to my DNA. Frankly, I rather hope it has not.

If I remark that I have a bad feeling about something, my  family takes notice and plans accordingly. Me? I worry.

On one occasion, my family and I were going on a road trip. I  felt awful about it. Something was telling me, literally shouting in my mind “don’t go.” My wife was driving that day. A few blocks from home, I demanded  that she stop the car. She pulled over and I got out.

We had this protracted discussion at curbside as to why, I  didn’t want to go, and I could not give a reasonable answer -- except that  something was very wrong.

Finally, after a great deal of persuasion from both my wife  and my daughter, I got back in the car and we continued our road trip. About ten  miles down the hiway we had a head-on collision with a drunk driver attempting  to make a U-turn in front of us.

We were all belted but my passenger seat broke away from its  mount and my head crashed into the windshield smashing it (the windshield) and  giving me one heck of a headache.

The car was totaled.

The local hospital cleared us all with bruises, contusions,  and possibly a light concussion for yours truly.

That is just one example from many such, uh, “premonitions.” I  hasten to add that I believe all human beings have the ability to sense danger.  But it does seem to be more pronounced in some, for whatever reason.

 





True premonitions are rarely wrong. Science tells us that  premonitions are based on human emotions. That alone should cause us to question  them. But here’s the thing. Just being wrong once or twice causes one to wonder  WHEN is the feeling right—and -- WHEN is the feeling wrong. See the dilemma? It  will, most certainly, make a worrier of any person endowed (or cursed) with  them. It is, in my opinion, truly a curse.

No, I am not about to make a prediction! But I am  deeply worried/concerned about the coming Presidential Election -- and -- I am  about to issue a warning.

I am just as concerned about the coming Presidential Election  as I was over the auto wreck, I noted above. Those of us who live along  America’s southeastern coast know when the Coast Guard runs up the hurricane  warning flags, it is time to pay close attention and prepare for the coming  storm.

I fear for America. A storm is coming. Here’s why I  say that:

America is dangerously split. Our Congress is a very good  example of where the American people are at this moment in history – split,  divided. As a result, the election in November could just as easily swing one  way as it could the other. Many will disagree with me. I expect that, I respect  that, and I understand that.

The GOP has never gone up  against a candidate as devious, unscrupulous, and self-assured as Obama. Obama  is what I would call “neo-evil.” I do not think the Republicans are anywhere  near ready for that with which they are about to be  inundated.

Look. A man who will attack the Supreme Court in a  State of the Union Address – with the court sitting right in front of him, and  then issue thinly veiled threats at them, again, over the fifty-fifty chance  that his signature achievement – Obamacare – might be ruled unconstitutional -- is capable of doing whatever he feels is necessary to **noallow** a second term  as President.

Obama’s machine, and it is as  huge and powerful a political machine as this nation as ever seen (far exceeding  anything Romney and the Republicans can muster) has been at work since his first  election. They are dug-in in all 50 states just awaiting the word to begin  shredding the Republican nominee.

Obama has no problem comparing himself to Abraham  Lincoln, even Ronald Reagan when, in fact, he resembles Hugo Chavez in Venezuela  more than ANY past US President. Obama’s efforts within  his administration all seem to indicate that he is attempting to recreate a  Chavez regime here, in America.

A socialist is a person who has decided that  capitalism doesn’t work and is striving toward communism. Socialism is only the  middle phase between capitalism and communism. That middle phase is where Obama  is today and he is striving toward the latter -- and he intends to drag America  into the cesspool with him.

I am not going to predict that Obama will win in November. I  don’t think I need do that. I think just watching the campaign the next few  months will be all that is necessary to convince you that I am not just  whistling Dixie. Of course, by that time, it will be too late.

J. D. Longstreet is a conservative  Southern American (A native sandlapper and an adopted Tar Heel) with a deep  passion for the history, heritage, and culture of the southern states of  America. At the same time he is a deeply loyal American believing strongly in  "America First".· He is a thirty-year veteran of the broadcastingbusiness, as an  "in the field" and "on-air" news reporter (contributing to radio, TV, and  newspapers) and a conservative broadcast commentator.

Longstreet is a veteran of the US  Army and US Army Reserve. He is a member of the American Legion and the Sons of  Confederate Veterans.· A lifelong Christian, Longstreet subscribes to "old  Lutheranism" to express and exercise his faith.

Articles by J.D. Longstreet are  posted at: "INSIGHT on Freedom",· "Hurricane Alley... by Longstreet",· "The  Carolina Post" and numerous other conservative websites around the  web.·

Diamante
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,641
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: TO SRJOHN.

Zimmerman family challenges Holder on New Black Panthers, says no arrests ‘based solely on your race’

By Matthew Boyle - The Daily Caller 04/09/2012

 

RACISTS


In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder on Monday, obtained exclusively by The Daily Caller, a family member of George Zimmerman asked the nation’s top law enforcement officer why he has chosen to not arrest members of the New Black Panther Party for their rhetoric — some of which may fit the federal government’s definition of a hate crime — throughout the Trayvon Martin case.

The family member believes the reason Holder hasn’t made those arrests is because he, like the members of the New Black Panther Party, is black.

“I am writing you to ask you why, when the law of the land is crystal clear, is your office not arresting the New Black Panthers for hate crimes?” the family member wrote to Holder.

“The Zimmerman family is in hiding because of the threats that have been made against us, yet the DOJ has maintained an eerie silence on this matter. These threats are very public. If you haven’t been paying attention just do a Google search and you will find plenty. Since when can a group of people in the United States put a bounty on someone’s head, circulate Wanted posters publicly, and still be walking the streets?”

 

 

 

 

 

The New Black Panthers have issued ultimatums to the Sanford authorities, saying they want Zimmerman arrested “dead or alive.” They have placed a bounty on Zimmerman’s head, and have called for the building of an army of vigilantes to track him down and effect a citizen’s arrest.

Most recently, the New Black Panther Party has called for violence.

In a conference call recorded over the weekend, the militant group said it planned to “suit up and boot up” and prepare for the next stages of the “race war.”

So far, however, no members of the New Black Panther Party have faced legal consequences.

After citing the U.S. Department of Justice’s published definition of a “hate crime,” the Zimmerman family member wrote that there is “no other explanation” for Holder’s failure to authorize arrests of New Black Panther Party members, other than the fact that Holder himself is black.

“I would surmise that, based on your own definition of a hate crime, you have chosen not to arrest these individuals based solely on your race,” the family member wrote to Holder, insisting too that the was “NO racial component” to the “tragedy” that occurred on the late February night when Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin.

The Daily Caller has confirmed the identity of the Zimmerman family member but is withholding that person’s identity out of concern for the family’s safety.

The family member also criticized members of Congress who have forcefully criticized police for failing to arrest Georgfe Zimmerman, as well as “the Congressional Black Caucus, the NAACP, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Spike Lee, [and] President Barack Obama,” adding that “many” who have commented on the case without having a complete understanding of the facts “no doubt understand the laws of our great nation.”

Noting President Obama’s White House event last week celebrating the 1960 novel “To Kill a Mockingbird,” Zimmerman’s family member drew a novel comparison to the American literary classic.

“Strangely enough this case has a lot of parallels to those of Harper Lee’s ‘To Kill a Mockingbird,’” the letter to Attorney General Holder read. “George Zimmerman has been treated much like Tom Robinson was, chastised for not being the right (or wrong) color and found guilty based on race factors.

“You have the opportunity to act as Atticus [Finch] and do the right thing. Your boss would refer to this as a ‘teachable moment.’”

DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler has not responded to The Daily Caller’s request for comment on why Holder hasn’t authorized the arrest of any New Black Panther Party members, nor has she answered whether that decision is related to Holder’s race.

Diamante
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,641
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: TO SRJOHN.

How Obama Destroys His Enemies

By Ben Shapiro On April 9, 2012  In Daily   Mailer,FrontPage





President Obama has always disliked free speech as a  general  matter, particularly for those who oppose him. He frequently  suggests that those  who disagree with him simply lack the power of reason;  he constantly attacks  those who do not bow to his opinions. In the last  month alone he has directly  castigated the Supreme Court (it would be “unprecedented,” he said, for them to  strike down Obamacare); Rush  Limbaugh (he called up Sandra Fluke to tell her how  out of line Limbaugh  was); and Congress (if they don’t act on whatever it is he  wants, he will  go it alone).

But he has one problem: the First Amendment does  not  allow him, as president, to use the power of government to fight his  enemies.  Obama’s solution to this dilemma lies in 501(c)3 charitable  organizations  working in close tandem with the federal  government.

Here’s how it works.  First,  President Obama forges deep and abiding connections with  like-minded charitable  organizations. These are theoretically supposed to  be non-partisan, but they are  typically not – they have a direct line to  the White House. So, for example,  Media Matters for America coordinates  routinely with the White House on  important issues of the day. And they  are experts at initiating so-called  secondary  boycotts.

 



 

Their expertise was honed in the Don Imus affair, as the  Daily  Caller reported. When Imus made offensive comments about the Rutgers  women’s  basketball team, Media Matters sprang into action, coordinating  with other  allies and pushing for a boycott of advertisers on Imus’ show.  Soon, Imus was  gone.

They quickly moved on to Lou Dobbs. They attempted  to  force his advertisers to stop buying time on his radio show; in  particular, they  looked to put pressure on Ford. And they were successful.  By November 2009,  Dobbs had moved on from CNN, to Media Matters’ delight.

All this time, Media Matters  was  working with the Obama Administration. Anita Dunn, the White  House  communications director, met regularly with Media Matters to plot  strategy.  Media Matters had weekly calls with the White  House.

The stage was set. The actors were in   place.

Their first joint target  was  Glenn Beck. While the White House claimed that Fox News wasn’t a “real” news  channel, Media Matters worked the back channels, coordinating  with Color of  Change to “expose Glenn Beck’s racist rhetoric in an effort  to educate  advertisers about the practices on his  show.”

Once again, it had impact: Beck’s advertisers began  dropping  out. Fox stuck with him anyway, and Beck, being a terrific  businessman, came up  with alternative revenue strategies. But that didn’t  stop the Obama  Administration.

Next, they moved into a joint attack on Rush  Limbaugh.  The Sandra Fluke affair was entirely coordinated from the first.  While Rush’s  comments on Fluke weren’t expected, they also weren’t  particularly controversial – leftists have routinely called conservative women  sluts. And Rush quickly  apologized for the comment. Nonetheless, the  President and his allies in the  501(c)3 world went into full attack mode,  with Media Matters leading the charge,  working covertly with third party  groups to lead astroturfed boycotts on Rush’s  advertising  base.

Now Obama is moving his  strategy  to the next level: he’s targeting major corporations for working  with political  groups of any stripe. This week, Democratic legislators  began calling for a  boycott of Coca-Cola over their funding of the  American Legislative Exchange  Council, which pushes for voter ID laws. The  Democratic Party, which courts  voter fraud, despises voter ID laws. Thus,  Coke entered the crosshairs. Lo and  behold, within five hours of the  boycott announcement, Coke  caved.

This is all fine and dandy under the First  Amendment,  of course. Private 501(c)3’s can lead boycotts. Government  officials can speak  on issues of public importance. But the Obama  Administration’s secret dealings  with such 501(c)3’s to impose  non-governmental sanctions on companies that  sponsor those with whom they  disagree doesn’t pass the smell or sight test. The  odor is rancid and the  transparency nonexistent.

Banned
sirjohn
Mensajes: 137,146
Registrado: ‎12-15-2005

Re: TO SRJOHN.

OBAMA'S MAFIA GET RICH WITH THE GREENBAKC ENERGY  PROGRAM

THE NEW CLASS OF OBAMA'S PROTECTED  BILLIONARES

Some  get rich off taxpayers in Obama's greenback energy  program

Under the Obama Energy Department, a lot of people are winning  big by losing the taxpayers’ money. In the government-sponsored green energy  industry, working Americans have effectively handed millions in salaries and  bonuses to executives of companies on the road to bankruptcy. At the most famous failed solar company, Solyndra—to which the Obama  administration gave a $530 million loan guarantee—several executives were making  nearly half a million dollars a year, including large bonuses taken in the  months before the company filed for bankruptcy. For them, the failed endeavor  was extremely lucrative. Solyndra was hardly the only  taxpayer-backed firm that paid big bonuses while stumbling to bankruptcy,  however. As ABC News and the Center for Public Integrity recently uncovered in a report, Beacon Power, which received a $43  million loan guarantee, paid bonuses of about $260,000 to three individuals  before going bankrupt last year. Another company, Ener1, the recipient of a grant worth $118 million, paid its CEO a $450,000 bonus. In January,  it, too, filed for bankruptcy. Supposedly, the  Department of Energy approved these loans to foster an industry which the market  didn’t come close to supporting. Certainly most Americans, if they knew about  the program at all, did not imagine leaders at these startups paying themselves  millions in taxpayer dollars.

 



 

In 2009, after bailing  out many of the country’s   financial institutions, President Obama made executive  compensation  a  major political issue, proposing rules to limit it for firms that   had  received the taxpayer money. He observed that “what gets people upset — and  rightfully so — are executives being rewarded for failure.  Especially  when those  rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers.” He  said these words  just weeks before  his administration made its  half-billion dollar  commitment to  Solyndra. Later that same year,  President Obama  demanded executives  at AIG return their bonuses, asking “How do they justify this  outrage  to  the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?”I   have a couple questions of my own. Why isn’t the   President just as concerned about the looting  of failed energy startups at   taxpayer expense? Why isn’t he demanding that   executives at Solyndra and the  other bankrupt green energy firms return their bonuses, since we were  keeping those firms afloat with  gigantic  and unjustified  loans? In truth, the real  scandal goes  far  beyond bonuses and salaries. Many of these companies were  dependent on  an  enormous amount of government support all along—far more  than  just a little  boost to get them going. Two   numbers give you a sense  of the scale of the bad energy bets the  Obama  administration is making. Several  weeks ago, in my newsletter  on the  transition to liquefied natural gas as a less  expensive  source of fuel, I  reported that Chesapeake Energy had invested more   than $150 million to  build a national network of LNG truck stops—an  investment  by a private  company to be supported by genuine  demand. President  Obama, on the other hand, is  putting taxpayer money into  dozens of risky  ventures. Last week yet  another green energy firm, Solar Trust  of America, declared bankruptcy after having  received  a  $2.1 billion loan guarantee from the Department  of   Energy. That loan guarantee is more than  the value of Regal Entertainment, the nation’s largest  chain of  movie  theaters, and about the value of HSN, the Home Shopping Network.  It’s one heck of a loan for a startup. And it put taxpayers on the   hook  for 14 times the amount Chesapeake invested in its far more  viable  project to  build a nationwide natural gas highway.Of course,  there could be a lot more where all this came  from.  The Energy Department’s  current loan program has approved  nearly $35  billion in total—more than $110  from every American  citizen. Feel like  you’re getting your money’s   worth?

Banned
sirjohn
Mensajes: 137,146
Registrado: ‎12-15-2005

Re: TO SRJOHN.

OBAMA'S WAR ON MOTHERHOOD,  DESPICABLE  ATTACK ON MRS. ROMMEY

Obama Advisor Attacks Cancer  Survivor,  Mother, Grandmother Ann Romney

By Katie Pavlich 4/12/2012

Photobucket

 

There's a war on women going on alright. Last week, I predicted the Left's next  attack  would land on Mitt Romney's wife, Ann Romney. Turns out I was  right. Appearing  on Anderson Cooper 360 last night, DNC and Obama advisor  Hilary Rosen claimed  Ann Romney had never "worked a day in her life,"  dismissing her work to raise  five healthy children. In case you're  wondering, stay at home moms are worth at  least $500,000 per year.

 

 

 

The attack was predictible because Ann Romney is capable  of  connecting to women on a very personal level. She's a breast cancer  survivor,  lives with multiple sclerosis, raised five children, has 16  grandchildren and  has been happily and faithfully married to a successful  businessman for 42  years. No wonder the Left sees her as a a threat,  especially the feminist Left,  who have been pushing women away from and  demonizing motherhood for decades. Not  to mention, Ann Romney is a  fighter. She created a Twitter account last night to  respond to Rosen's  attacks. Romney's son also jumped to defend his mom. Twitchy has more reaction.

 

Rosen implies Ann Romney isn't a qualified expert on women  and  the economy, but somehow "inside the Beltway looking out" Rosen is  qualified?  Please. Conservatives respect a woman's decision to choose a  career, motherhood  or both. Liberal feminists on the other hand see  choosing motherhood over a  career as a sin. Not to mention, maybe if  liberals weren't always demonizing and  punishing success, raising children  and having a career wouldn't be as hard as  they like to complain about. It  is hard, but would be easier without liberal  policies holding women and  families back.

Also, First Lady Michelle Obama has made   herself an "expert" by trying to reach out to military families when neither  she  nor her husband Barack Obama ever served in the military. Where is  Rosen on  that?

Photobucket

Banned
sirjohn
Mensajes: 137,146
Registrado: ‎12-15-2005

Re: TO SRJOHN.

READY FOR WAR? LA RAZA/BLACKPANTHERS ATTACK FORCE

La Raza President: Blacks,  Hispanics Should Team Up Against 'Common  Enemies'  

 

La Raza Head Advocates Black-Hispanic 'Attack'  Force



Calling for an African-American-Hispanic alliance  against "common enemies", La Raza President Janet Murguia used Wednesday's Al  Sharpton radio show to spread an incendiary message of hate. Happy to  conveniently overlook George Zimmerman's Peruvian ancestry, Murguia made her  divisive agenda abundantly clear. Though her  organization claims mainstream status, its name translates to "The Race" and is  always happy to aid campus radicalism. />Amazingly, sitting in for the Reverend (himself busy  spreading racial arson across the land) was Andre Eggelletion, the same host  recently behind a successful campaign to suspend KFI's John & Ken for  wisecracks about Whitney Houston after her recent death. Isn't brazenly planning  a race war over public airwaves far more inappropriate than calling  the late singer a "crack ho"? Below,  watch as the La Raza president and Sharpton crony casually toss words like  "attack" and "enemies" into the conversation:

 

JANET MURGUIA (PRESIDENT, LA RAZA) (36:39): I  think for us it’s about understanding that we have common interests and we have  to be able to understand that our demographics today, a lot of people want to  pit who’s the largest minority vs. who’s taking over as the largest demographic  and all that. We need to understand that when you put  those two demographics together you know when you put sixteen percent of the  Latino population now in the US combined with fourteen percent of the African  American population is what can we do together now to attack those common  enemies? To attack the common barriers that present themselves for  us.



WOULD OBAMA RETURN AZTLAN TO  MEXICO?

...IF THAT HAPPEN, WHERE ARE  THE MEXICANS GOING TO FLEE?

When violence results, will  these extremists take responsibility, or continue to deflect blame everywhere  else? Who will be hurt or killed thanks to their reckless rhetoric?