Wednesday, September 30, 2009

From Obama Worship to One World Religion

BLASPHEMY!

The Law of God says.. Exodus 20:3-6 3 “You shall have no other gods before Me. 4 “You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. 5 “You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.

This is not new…

Pledging to be a servant to “Barack Obama”

be the change…There’s a Shift taking place you see…”Shift” is the new hot word of this season…

Shift? Globalization…

Van Jones..

You are all gods…according to Van Jones. He’s truly not just about being ‘green’ he’s about shifting power and shifting consciousness among the masses so that everyone would realize this ‘movement’ is bigger than just going green. What is it about then Van Jones? Hear part two for the answer to that. It’s a Unifying One World Religion based on Works and serving the god of this world.

Remember he resigned. He’s more powerful now that no one can follow him then he was a the green czar.

New Age Spirituality merging with ‘Evangelical’  Christianity=

Is Bono Christian? ♦    Bill Hybels?

First 50 seconds Rick Warren says the Future of the World is “The Future of the World is NOT secularism, IT’S Religious Pluralism. You may not like that but you’re going to have to deal with it.” Matthew 7

13 “Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.

14 “For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

15 “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

16 “You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they?

17 “So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.

18 “A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit.

19 “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

20“So then, you will know them by their fruits.

21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.

22 “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’

23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’

BUREAU OF INDIAN EDUCATION ORDERS FEDERAL NATIVE AMERICAN EMPLOYEES NOT TO SPEAK TO PRESS

On 09/17/2009 a directive was put out from Stephanie Birdwell of  The Bureau of Indian Education Washington D.C. ordering Federal Native American Employees of Haskell Indian Nations University in Lawrence, Kansas and Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute including both Presidents of those two schools not to speak to the press, as of 09/30/209 this directive still has not been lifted.

PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT BIE STAFF ARE NOT TO RESPOND TO ANY PRESS OR MEDIA INQUIRIES MADE TO YOUR OFFICES. Stephanie E. Birdwell Bureau of Indian Education Deputy Director Policy, Evaluation & Post Secondary Education 1849 C St. NW MIB MS-3618 Washington, D.C. (202) 208-4397 (desk)

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Ignore Big Brother behind the Curtain

Sept 29th, 2009:

PROVIDENCE — U.S. Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy fears that supercharged passions fueling the national health-care debate may lead to violence.

Drawing on his family’s violent past, the Democratic congressman told roughly 75 people gathered at a private health-care forum Saturday morning that opponents of Democrat-backed health-care legislation had gone too far.

Patrick Kennedy is the last member of his storied family to hold federal office. His father, U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, died one month ago after battling a brain tumor. His uncles, former President John F. Kennedy and former presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, were assassinated.

“My family’s seen it up close too much with assassinations and violence in political life. It’s a terrible thing when people think that in order to get their point across they have to go to the edge of violent rhetoric and attack people personally,” Kennedy told the nurses, union officials and AARP members finishing their breakfasts at the invitation-only event in the Providence Marriott hotel. “It’s fine for people to debate the issue and attack the issue, but when they go and stoop to the level of the vitriolic rhetoric that we’ve seen this debate turn up, it’s very, I think, dangerous to the fabric of our country.”

Vitriolic rhetotic like calling protestors “Un-American”, “racist”, “sexist”, “stupid”, “ignorant”, “hicks”…

You mean that vitriol?

No. Of course you don’t.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Sept 18th, (near tears notes the ‘empathic’ media):

“I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw this myself in the late ’70s in San Francisco,” Pelosi told reporters, her voice catching in her throat at her weekly press briefing.”This kind of rhetoric is just, is really frightening and it created a climate in which we, violence took place and … I wish that we would all, again, curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made,”

The fact that Harvey Milk was assassinated by a Democrat is not worth mentioning I guess.

It made good Ministry of Truth press.

Fear the Tea-Baggers and the Protesters they are violent. Don’t listen to them, they will harm you!

In a subsequent interview, Kennedy went further in warning that angry opposition could create physical danger for elected leaders.

“I will note that there were a number of prominent security people in this country who spoke very openly this past week that … that there are consequences in terms of trying to protect public officials. There are consequences to violent rhetoric,” he said. “Some people can see through TV ratings and right-wing talk show hosts that just try to create some theater, but unfortunately, there are some that can’t see through it. And that’s the danger in it. There is definitely freedom of speech, but freedom of speech does not allow yelling ‘fire’ in the middle of a crowded movie theater.”

Very few, if any arrests at the Tea-Parties and Protests.

Enter the Violence:

The G-20 Summit in Pittsburgh.

A stretch of Forbes Avenue from Oakland Avenue to Atwood Street saw at least a half dozen storefront windows broken, most belonging to the type of big, corporate, chain retail considered prime targets by protest groups opposed to the global capitalist system. They included McDonald’s, American Apparel, FedEx, Subway, Panera and Rite Aid, among others.

Georgia Petropoulos, executive director of the Oakland Business Improvement District, said there was more damage than she expected given the fact that the neighborhood prepared as much as it could and that the police had a major presence to protect it.

“We didn’t anticipate this many,” she said. “We really didn’t.”

The biggest surprise to her was that it wasn’t just national chains that got hit but local independents and franchise operators.

That includes the popular Forbes Avenue location of Pamela’s Diner and the Irish Design Center, a local independent business on Craig Street for 30 years.(Pittsburgh Business Times)

The Quiznos owner had the best sign of the day:

“Please forgive the mess caused by the ‘Peace Loving’ ‘Save the Earth’ G20 Summit Protesters,” the sign said. “Even with broken windows, Quiznos Food is still the best!”

And who were these protesters?

Right wing mobs of racist, sexist , Un-American Insurance Company Lobbyists?

Gun toting tea baggers psychos?

The folks that organized Thursday’s unauthorized march, the G-20 Resistance Group, is encouraging members to spend the morning, before the march, to take unspecified actions against local offices of corporations deemed evil.”

Nope. Mostly, they are extreme leftists and anarchists!

Surprise!

The AP, one of the very few reports on the Ministry of truth at all:

The marchers included small groups of self-described anarchists, some wearing dark clothes and bandanas and carrying black flags. Others wore helmets and safety goggles.

One banner read, “No borders, no thanks,” another, “No hope in capitalism.” A few minutes into the march, protesters unfurled a large banner reading “NO BAILOUT NO CAPITALISM” with an encircled “A,” a recognized sign of anarchists.

Another one said “Eat the Rich.”

So why are we not seeing blame heaped upon documentary filmmaker and avowed socialist Michael Moore for yesterday’s G-20 riots in Pittsburgh? Moore does, after all, preach hateful and extreme anti-capitalist rhetoric. The cryptic slogan for his most recent movie, “Capitalism, A Love Story”, reads, “Capitalism is evil, and you can’t regulate evil.” This line is eerily reminiscent of many of the socialist-anarchist slogans chanted by the G-20 protesters.

Simple.

They aren’t “the enemy”, so ignore them.

Only people protesting Obama and The Democrats are prone to violence, and racism, and should be feared.

“Despite the use of rubber bullets, chemical weapons, and LRAD (noise) attacks, demonstrators remained on the streets for hours and actions continue across the city,” the group’s press release read.

By that they meant attacks on 13 pre-picked Starbucks stores, a Whole Foods, an American Apparel, a Trader Joe’s, U.S. military recruiting stations, check-cashing outlets, 13 PNC bank outlets and other institutions, all conveniently listed as possibilities on a Google map. Many of these places saw smashed windows and graffiti attacks after they turned up on the blacklist. (IDB)

So they planned ahead to wreck evil capitalist icons and just generally cause as much chaos as possible.

But how much of this was on the Ministry of Truth as compared to the “vitrioltic rhetoric” of people protesting Health Care Reform?

Did you know the origin of the “shocking” ‘Joker’ poster was a 20 year old Palestinian-American Democrat from Chicago!?

Probably not.

Did you know most of the most “hateful” signs the Tea bag protest (the few that there were) were also largley from Democrats?

Did you know Cindy Sheehan, Darling of the Media in 2007, now the scorned and ignored, was in Pittsburgh.

“I was telling the cops, ‘You’re facing the wrong way,’” said Sheehan, an anti-war protester who gained notoriety for camping near then-President George W. Bush’s Texas ranch after her son was killed in Iraq. “The wars were wrong under Bush, and they’re still wrong under Obama.” (Pittsburgh Tribune)

Probably not. Not newsworthy to the Ministry of Truth.

As Gov. Mike Huckabee said, journalism is dead. “I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism,The once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function.”

And what better example do you need than this.

Health Care reform: 10’s of thousands of protesters, very few arrests.

G-20 Leftists and Anarchists: approx 1,000 and 60+ arrests and damage aplenty.

But, the tea-baggers are the dangerous ones. The ones to watch out for, because they just might explode any minute now!

Ignore all the damage in Pittsburgh. Ignore the fact that the shop owners “prepared” for it ahead of time. That there shops were targeted on the internet beforehand.

The ones you have to fear are the racist, un-american tea-baggers!

Who just happen to be protesting Big Brother.

Fascinating.

This kind of violence is nothing new. It was found in Seattle in 1999, where former Obama administration green czar Van Jones got himself arrested. It was repeated at other summits in Turin, Italy; Washington, D.C.; and London. These leftists detest capitalism, abhor private property — and have ties to the Democratic Party. (IBD)

And the rhetoric will only get worse as the Democrats scramble to cram this, the Holy Grail of  Control Freakishism, down your throat whether you gag or not.

In fact, it’s starting to appear as if the stronger the opposition becomes, the harder the Democrats work on their plans. It’s as if they are legislating out of spite against citizens who must be governed by a heavy hand because they don’t know what’s good for them.

But we’ve heard that before. Just last week, Energy Secretary Steven Chu likened Americans to “teenage kids” who “aren’t acting in a way that they should act” in regard to carbon emissions. (IBD)

Doesn’t it though. And the Ministry of Truth (ABC,NBC,CBS,MSNBC,New York Times, et al) are right there with them.

Pushing hard for their Big Brother.

Orwell: “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act”

And those revolutionaries are, of course, violent, and they will harm you and your children. And destroy everything that is good, and right, and moral about Big Brother’s cause!

Their violent rhetoric will lead to violence. (Just ignore Pittsburgh, it never happened)

It’s a  War the Democrats must win, for the sake of humanity and the planet!

War is peace!

Freedom is Slavery!

Ignorance is Strength!

After all, how can health care for everyone that’s affordable be a bad thing….

HASKELL'S RED CENTER

Judith Gipp is the director of The Haskell Red Center. The Red Center help’s make Haskell the University that it is today. From The Haskell Web Site : The RED Center created by University President Dr. Linda Sue Warner was designed and developed for the purpose of promoting and building capacity in the area of indigenous research. It is the culmination of efforts generated by former Presidents Gerald E. Gipp, Robert Martin, and Karen Gayton Swisher, transitioning Haskell from a junior college to a baccalaureate degree offering institution.

The Center will serve to enhance the role the indigenous researcher plays in self-determination. By becoming the centerpiece for research, a repository for indigenous research by and about indigenous people, and the clearinghouse for contemporary thinking about native ways of knowing, the Center will disseminate research results widely. Academic focus include education, business, environmental studies, and health.

Capacity to engage in research opportunities is enhanced through the efforts of RED Center Advisory Board members who possess expertise in their specific area of study. Advisors include professors from Carnegie Research 1 institutions, the general academy, Federal Agencies, Corporations, and Indigenous Communities. Their role is to provide and create new knowledge and understanding of current and best research practices, contribute to policy planning and development, support indigenous knowledge and native ways of knowing, and offer insight on potential funding sources to aid research capacity building.

The RED Center will be a major source for ethical and equitable research relevant to indigenous people, serving to establish and to promote partnerships between Indigenous and non-Indigenous entities. By attending to the guiding principle of developing alternative ways of engaging in responsible and valued research to enhance lifelong learning opportunities, the RED Center will support Haskell’s core values of accountability, respect, cooperation, and honesty.

Monday, September 28, 2009

Afghan War takes back seat to Obama agenda

Source: Examiner

Afghan War takes back seat to Obama agenda

by Jim Kouri, CPP

While President Barack Obama hobnobed with the world’s elite in New York City during his speechmaking and Security Council chairing United Nations visit, his handpicked Afghanistan military commander’s request for more troops and more support simmered on the back-burner.

General Stanley McCrystal submitted his report to his Commander-in-Chief in late August, yet President Obama has failed to act. When it came to the stimulus plan, the health care plan, and other domestic initiatives, Obama and the Democrats openly rushed legislation not even read by those expected to vote on the bills in both houses of Congress. Yet, when the lives of US soldiers and the stability within Afghanistan hang in the balance, there appears to be a lack of the fervor shown for a takeover of health care in the US.

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have been learning experiences, forcing military leadership to reassess and modify tactics to effectively counter an irregular foe, according to Ian Graham, a spokesman for the American Forces Press Service in a terrorism report to the National Association of Chiefs of Police.

That was the assessment of military and civilian defense leaders who attended the “Counterinsurgency Leadership in Afghanistan, Iraq and Beyond” conference yesterday at the National Press Club here. The focus was lessons learned in Afghanistan and Iraq and how they can be applied to current counterinsurgency operations.

“The need for leadership goes beyond today’s conflicts and lies at the heart of current debates of the future of our national security organizations and strategy,” Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Robert B. Neller said. “Although most of the public discourse thus far has concentrated on questions of equipment and future threats, leadership will also be a crucial variable.”

Neller is the commanding general for Marine Corps Education Command and president of Marine Corps University in Quantico, Va., which hosted the conference.

“Selecting the right commanders became more important than ever to unit effectiveness” in 2002 and 2003, he said. “We have come a long way in recent years, but opportunities for further improvement in leadership development and command selection remain.”

Marine Corps University worked to get a group of counterinsurgency “all-stars” together to provide a wide scope of perspectives and opinions for the conference, said Mark Moyar, a professor of national security affairs and one of the organizers of the event.

“Counterinsurgency leadership seemed to be a subject that hadn’t gotten the attention it deserved,” Moyar said.

Military leaders including Army Gen. David H. Petraeus and Brig. Gen. H.R. McMaster, the commander and assistant to the commander, respectively, of Multinational Force Iraq in 2007 and 2008; representatives from “think tanks” including Robert Kaplan from the Center for a New American Security; and professors from military and civilian universities, including Moyar, weighed in on subjects ranging from specific methods for fighting an insurgency to the Afghan elections and how they affect strategy there.

“The fact that we can tie a lot of our discussion to current events in Afghanistan made the conference … it wasn’t just for academics, it showed our military options, what we need to do and some possible plans for moving forward in Afghanistan,” Moyar said.

Petraeus finished the conference by fielding questions about his experience in Iraq and his current work as commander of U.S. Central Command. Though he was careful not to make any statements about policy currently being debated, he gave some insight into ways the military can adjust its strategy.

Ultimately, he said, leadership needs to be flexible enough to adapt to the constantly changing landscape of counterinsurgency in order to win irregular wars. When the enemy is using cell phones to detonate explosives and use common street clothing as camouflage, 20th century tactics simply won’t cut it.

It’s hope that Obama will read transcripts of the presentations and discourse during the symposium; there’s much to learn.

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org).  In addition, he’s the former editor for the House Conservatives Fund’s weblog. Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.

He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations.  He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country.   Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com and PHXnews.com.  He’s also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com.   He’s appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc.

To subscribe to Kouri’s newsletter write to COPmagazine@aol.com and write “Subscription” on the subject line.

Obama Addresses Congressional Black Caucus on Health Care

Posted by Audiegrl

President Barack Obama is seen at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, Inc. dinner on Saturday Sept. 26, 2009 in Washington D.C. (AP Photo/Earl Gibson III)


Associated Press—President Barack Obama on Saturday resumed his push to overhaul the health care system, telling a Congressional Black Caucus conference that there comes a time when “the cup of endurance runs over.”

“We have been waiting for health reform since the days of Teddy Roosevelt. We’ve been waiting since the days of Harry Truman,” he said in remarks at the caucus foundation’s annual dinner. “We’ve been waiting since Johnson and Nixon and Clinton.”

“We cannot wait any longer,” Obama said.

Obama spent the past week largely focused on global and economic issues in meetings with world leaders in New York and Pittsburgh.

President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama, wave as they arrive at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation's Annual Phoenix Awards dinner, in Washington, Saturday, Sept. 26, 2009. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)


At the G-20 economic summit that wrapped up Friday in Pennsylvania, Obama told a story about an unnamed foreign leader who privately told the president he didn’t understand the at-times contentious debate over changing the health care system.

“He says, ‘We don’t understand it. You’re trying to make sure everybody has health care and they’re putting a Hitler mustache on you. That doesn’t make sense to me,’” Obama said, quoting the world leader he declined to identify.

The reference to Nazi leader Adolf Hitler was to signs some people have waved outside of often testy town hall meetings around the country this summer where lawmakers discussed Obama’s health care plan.

In the speech, Obama described his plan as one that would not require people with coverage to change anything but would make health insurance affordable for the millions of people who don’t have any. Republicans dispute those claims.

More @

Sunday, September 27, 2009

On Health Care-US

Intention is good, but it is doubtful whether the insured will really reap the benefits is a moot question.In India, there is a system where employers go in for insurance schemes for their employees with private companies.The process looks very simple, but the companies wiggle out of commitment quoting some clause or other.If service is bad in a private sector, I am afraid, it shall be worse in a cooperative system.Cooperative systems are found to be fount of corruption in India.
There is also no guarantee that the Insurance giants shall not gain entry through back door,which is exactly the insurance companies
s wanted.“>

Netanyahu Wastes His Breath

An email from UCI informed me of a transcript of remarks by Benjamin Netanyahu. I have selected several excerpts for analysis. David Ben Ariel has an excellent moral critique of the speech.

The struggle against this fanaticism does not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization. It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death. The primitivism of the 9th century ought to be no match for the progress of the 21st century. The allure of freedom, the power of technology, the reach of communications should surely win the day.

Islam vs Harbi is not a function of fanaticism. It is a function of the foundational doctrines of Islam as enshrined in the Qur’an and exemplified in the hadith. Islam began in the seventh century, 610. Muhammad first attacked camel caravans returning to Mekkah, later, as his army grew, he attacked the local Jewish settlements.  Muslims are commanded to conquer the entire world for Allah. Muslims are warned that they can not obtain admission to Paradise until they kill the last Jew.

That is why the greatest threat facing the world today is the marriage between religious fanaticism and the weapons of mass destruction, and the most urgent challenge facing this body is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Are the member states of the United Nations up to that challenge? Will the international community confront a despotism that terrorizes its own people as they bravely stand up for freedom?

Will it take action against the dictators who stole an election in broad daylight and gunned down Iranian protesters who died in the streets choking in their own blood? Will the international community thwart the world`s most pernicious sponsors and practitioners of terrorism? Above all, will the international community stop the terrorist regime of Iran from developing atomic weapons, thereby endangering the peace of the entire world?

Take action; what action? Sanctions will not have the desired effect. The Imams will continue their bomb project and their oppression regardless of sanctions and resolutions.  Bomb the centrifuge plants? That will result in a temporary delay at best. No, it is necessary to invade Iran and remove the regime from power. It is necessary to replace the regime with a secular democracy.

It won’t be done because the Security Council operates by consensus. Iran is a client state of China and Russia, who will veto any effective action. None of the mice has the courage to bell the cat.

The people of Iran are courageously standing up to this regime. People of goodwill around the world stand with them, as do the thousands who have been protesting outside this hall. Will the United Nations stand by their side?

No, the United Nations stands with dictators & tyrants, not with slaves yearning for freedom.

Never has a country gone to such extraordinary lengths to remove the enemy`s civilian population from harm`s way. Yet faced with such a clear case of aggressor and victim, who did the UN Human Rights Council decide to condemn? Israel. A democracy legitimately defending itself against terror is morally hanged, drawn and quartered, and given an unfair trial to boot.

The UNHRC is loaded with a Muslim majority. It serves the interests of Islam, not the interest of justice and human rights.


By these twisted standards, the UN Human Rights Council would have dragged Roosevelt and Churchill to the dock as war criminals. What a perversion of truth! What a perversion of justice!

Delegates of the United Nations, will you accept this farce? Because if you do, the United Nations would revert to its darkest days, when the worst violators of human rights sat in judgment against the law-abiding democracies, when Zionism was equated with racism and when an automatic majority could declare that the earth is flat.

That is no reversion, the institution has been co-opted and corrupted by the forces of evil, who have never released and will never release their grip on it.


If this body does not reject this report, it would send a message to terrorists everywhere: Terror pays; if you launch your attacks from densely populated areas, you will win immunity. And in condemning Israel, this body would also deal a mortal blow to peace. Here`s why. When Israel left Gaza, many hoped that the missile attacks would stop. Others believed that at the very least, Israel would have international legitimacy to exercise its right of self-defense.

What legitimacy? What self-defense?

The same UN that cheered Israel as it left Gaza and promised to back our right of self-defense now accuses us –my people, my country – of war crimes? And for what? For acting responsibly in self-defense. What a travesty!

Israel justly defended itself against terror. This biased and unjust report is a clear-cut test for all governments. Will you stand with Israel or will you stand with the terrorists? We must know the answer to that question now. Now and not later. Because if Israel is again asked to take more risks for peace, we must know today that you will stand with us tomorrow. Only if we have the confidence that we can defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace.

The UN will always stand with Muslims against Jews because 57 of its members are dominated by Islam and too many other nations are allied with them for economic reasons.

I am extremely offended by the expression: “risks for peace“. Israel can not possibly obtain peace by “taking risks”. Any and every concession Israel makes will be interpreted as a sign of weakness and lack of will. Any and every concession and “good will gesture” will pay dividends of escalating terror, not of peace.  Peace is at the end of a long road that leads to the Islamic cemetery.

Draw a circle around Israel, with a radius equal to the range of the most powerful rocket  in Iran’s arsenal. Remove all Muslims from the area within that circle and keep them out. Thus you will obtain temporary peace. Otherwise, you will never obtain peace.

There are some fatal facts which must be faced. Few  men have the courage to face them. [Emphasis added.]
Why did Umar invade Israel in 638?

Sunan Abu Dawud 14.2477
Narrated Ibn Hawalah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: It will turn out that you will be armed troops, one is Syria, one in the Yemen and one in Iraq. Ibn Hawalah said: Choose for me, Apostle of Allah, if I reach that time. He replied: Go to Syria, for it is Allah’s chosen land, to which his best servants will be gathered but if you are unwilling, go to your Yemen, and draw water from your tanks, for Allah has on my account taken special charge of Syria and its people.

Allah took special charge of the Levant on Moe’s account, It is Allah’s chosen land.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 53, Number 392:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

While we were in the Mosque, the Prophet came out and said, “Let us go to the Jews” We went out till we reached Bait-ul-Midras. He said to them, “If you embrace Islam, you will be safe. You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to expel you from this land. So, if anyone amongst you owns some property, he is permitted to sell it, otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle.”

Allah owns the whole world, and he gave it to Moe; the Hijaz was not the only place Moe wanted to rid of Jews.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177:
Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said, “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.”

“The Hour” means Judgment Day, when the Muslims hope for admission to Paradise.  They must kill the last Jew before they can gain admission.

7:167. And (remember) when your Lord declared that He would certainly keep on sending against them (i.e. the Jews), till the Day of Resurrection, those who would afflict them with a humiliating torment. Verily, your Lord is Quick in Retribution (for the disobedient, wicked) and certainly He is Oft­Forgiving, Most Merciful (for the obedient and those who beg Allâh’s Forgiveness).

Allah will continually send someone to humiliate and torment the Jews. Who will he send? Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir of this ayeh has a clue for us.

In the future, the Jews will support the Dajjal (False Messiah); and the Muslims, along with `Isa, son of Mary, will kill the Jews. This will occur just before the end of this world.

Allah made some promises to the Muslims, here is a sample.

3:125. “Yes, if you hold on to patience and piety, and the enemy comes rushing at you; your Lord will help you with five thousand angels having marks (of distinction).”

13:41. See they not that We gradually reduce the land (of disbelievers, by giving it to the believers, in war victories) from its outlying borders. And Allâh judges, there is none to put back His Judgment and He is Swift at reckoning.

8:66. Now Allâh has lightened your (task), for He knows that there is weakness in you. So if there are of you a hundred steadfast persons, they shall overcome two hundred, and if there are a thousand of you, they shall overcome two thousand with the Leave of Allâh. And Allâh is with As-Sâbirin (the patient ones, etc.).

Allah commanded perpetual war against the Jews. Allah will continually send Muslims to humiliate and torment the Jews. Allah will give them victory. Allah will give them an advantage disproportionate to their numbers. Allah will give them the land.

By recapturing a tiny fragment of her ancient patrimony, and defeating Muslims in five wars, Israel proves Allah’s promises to be vain. She points to the fact that Allah is an impotent idol.  That is the ultimate blasphemy. Muslims can never tolerate it. If Muslims lose their faith, the Imams and tyrants lose their power; they will never tolerate that!  They must reconquer Israel, and they will never cease from attacking her until they succeed.

The bottom line: get rid of Islam or suffer perpetual attack.  President Obama and the UN side with your enemy; they are not going to help you. You must help yourself.  Get a clue before  it is too late!

Saturday, September 26, 2009

Las hijas de ZP

Bromas aparte, copio y pego la reflexión que el periodista Javier Casal dejaba ayer sobre este tema, reflexión que comparto:

Anoche me fui para casa dándole vueltas a alguna de las portadas de la prensa de hoy. Lo diré claramente. Me importa un pepino cómo vistan las hijas del presidente Zapatero, si van de negro, se dejan greñas, se pintan las uñas u optan por polos de Lacoste. ¿No tenemos otras cosas más importantes en las que pensar? Viendo que el debate está desde el minuto uno también en la red, con algunos comentarios que, sinceramente, me dejan bastante sorprendido, quiero hacer un par de reflexiones profesionales. Uno de los ‘grandes males’ de la prensa española es que no existe la llamada prensa amarilla. Uno compra The Sun en el Reino Unido y sabe que al abrir o cerrar el periódico se va a encontrar lo que se va a encontrar. Punto. En España generalmente y salvo contadas excepciones, se mete todo en una Thermomix informativa y un periódico puede adoptar diferentes roles en función del día o incluso en una misma portada. La portería nacional se desahoga desde los mismos medios que tratan al día siguiente de convencernos de su seriedad y rigor (…) Si alguien tiene dudas profesionales sobre la publicación de una fotografía o noticia, sólo debe ponerse en la piel del protagonista. Sin entrar a valorar porqué se ordenó la retirada de la foto, me parece bastante normal que se proceda de tal forma si un padre (que además siempre ha evitado la aparición pública de sus hijas) quiere mantenerlas en el anonimato. Son menores y debemos actuar con responsabilidad. No se perjudica a un presidente. Se hace daño a unas chicas que no tienen ninguna culpa de que su padre resida en la Moncloa. ¿Es eso censura? Lo dudo bastante.

Dick Morris and Sean Hannity May Not Be Reptilians After All!

By Conspiracy Theorist Nicola Novakowsky

I was looking for the latest data concerning G20 conspiracy theories when I found this video!

I was aghast by what I was hearing! Bill Clinton’s former advisor Dick Morris was telling Sean Hannity that the April 2nd G20 London Summit would be the time when the blueprint would be laid for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to control the Fed and ultimately the world!

Does this mean that Dick Morris, Sean Hannity, and even the Fox News channel may not be under the control of Reptilians?

I wouldn’t come to this conclusion so quickly.

After all, Morris and Hannity both appeared completely wrong about how the world would be ruled. They don’t admit to the idea that Reptilians are behind it all. They also plainly do not believe that 9/11 was an inside job.

Hmmm….my conspiracy oriented mind just doesn’t know what to make of them. For once, I can’t seem to just read a conspiracy into something! Dammit!

Oh man, I think I know now!

There’s two possibilities, folks.

1) Grey aliens really do exist. And Hannity and Morris are Greys trying to expose the Reptilians, so that Morris and Hannity can later take control of things once the Reptilians are defeated.

2) Morris and Hannity are just the same ol’ Reptilians spreading lies. They’re trying to create an alternative scenario of how the world could be controlled. They’re saying the world could be controlled by the IMF, instead of the World Trade Organization (WTO). That way, all the conspiracy minded people can focus only on the IMF, while some other world group takes control. Thus creating just another distraction.

Whichever possibility we’re left with, I can only say that both are equally grim. Once the Reptilians are exposed and defeated, who can defeat the Greys? While I don’t usually believe in Greys or Zetas (as some call them), I am beginning to wonder. The other possibility that we’re left with is just as grim since if we’re all distracted by the IMF, then the WTO, or even the World Health Organization (WHO) might take control of everything.

Sorry to leave you guys on a dire note. Please stay tuned for more developing situations.

Don’t necessarily believe what Dick Morris is saying here because he might be feeding you another Reptilian lie. Or he might be just stupid and be an uninformed conspiracy theorist who is not yet aware of the Reptilians. Either way, watch this video with skepticism.

Don’t believe anything you hear. Do your own research. Discover your own facts. Homeschool your own kids (except if you’re a Reptilian, in which case, you should go back into the hollow earth from whence you came!).

Friday, September 25, 2009

Great message......Wake up America!!!!

This is a great video with a great message found on You Tube at Paul Williams World. It speaks volumes.
It should be a wake up call to all American’s.
Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press?
Sure, just as long as you’re on “their” side and it’s “their” speech and “their” press.
It’s almost as if these people have forgotten anything that happened prior to November 3, 2009.

God Bless the United States of America.
God help us.

Stimulus Funds Boost Number of Federal Jobs

By Matt Kelley, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — The $787 billion economic recovery package also is stimulating growth in the federal government as agencies hire thousands of workers and spend millions of dollars to oversee and implement the package, according to government records and spokesmen.

Fourteen of the top federal agencies responsible for spending under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act say they’ve hired about 3,000 workers with stimulus money. That’s helped fuel the continued growth of the federal government, which increased by more than 25,000 employees, or 1.3%, since December 2008, according to the latest quarterly report. During that time, the ranks of the nation’s unemployed increased by nearly 4 million, Labor Department statistics show.

Continue

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Quand des enfants font la propagande d'Obama...

La vidéo ci-dessous a été prise en Juin dans une école élémentaire du New Jersey. On observe un groupe d’enfants hauts comme 3 pommes executant leur chorégraphie à la gloire du président américain. Le tout sous l’oeil complice de peu scrupuleuses institutrices.

Ce lavage de jeunes cerveaux donne l’image d’une amérique devenue totalitaire. Autant dire que les américains peuvent s’abstenir de donner des leçons de démocratie à l’Iran, Cuba ou le Venezuela…

Obama's Time Warp: The U.S. Is Still the Bad Guy By Michael Barone

September 24, 2009

Obama’s Time Warp: The U.S. Is Still the Bad Guy

By Michael Barone

In the early 1980s, while planning a vacation in Latin America, I went to bookstores to look for histories of the region. All I could find were Marxist tracts arguing that “the people” were exploited by greedy corporations and military dictators, all propped up by the United States.

Available literature on Latin America today includes much more sensible accounts. But some people, including Barack Obama, whose college thesis written in those years has never been made public, seem stuck in a time warp in which the United States is the bad guy.

 

RECEIVE NEWS ALERTS

SIGN UP

Michael Barone RealClearPolitics

White House Latin America

[+] More

That, at least, seems to explain Obama’s latest foreign policy moves, starting with Honduras, where the president was ousted by the country’s supreme court for violating a constitutional provision that forbids any moves to seek a second term. (Other Latin countries, notably Mexico, have similar constitutional prohibitions.)

via RealClearPolitics – Obama’s Time Warp: The U.S. Is Still the Bad Guy.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition

The Wikipedia page on the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition.wase repeatedly ripped out by an anti-gun cabal. I seems that Wikipedia has become politicized and manipulated by the Politically Correct.

Below is the content, minus all the references, about Mayor Bloomberg’s coalition. Please go to Mayors Against Illegal Guns Conservapedia page to see it all. http://www.conservapedia.com/Mayors_Against_Illegal_Guns

There are a lot of indictments and felony convictions for members of a “crime fighting” organization!

The Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition is a leftist political coalition of mayors from about 400 United States cities, with a stated agenda of “making the public safer by getting illegal guns off the streets.” The group was formed by Boston Mayor Thomas Menino and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The coalition’s CEO is Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley.

The majority of members of the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition are Democrats.

Criticism of Methods and Hypocrisy

Bloomberg has been sued for defamation by a Smyrna, Georgia gun dealer represented by former congressman Bob Barr.[1][2]

Indicted, convicted, and scandalized members

A substantial number of member of the coalition have been indicted in recent months, on felony charges. Here in the US, conviction of felony means the immediate loss of both the right to vote and the right to own a gun for the rest of one’s life. This is an organization that espouses doing away with “illegal guns”, yet a surprising number of their members have made choices in their lives that have set themselves on the path to being disenfranchised from ever owning a gun.

Personal character and integrity are prerequisites for anyone entering public office, to serve in an elected position of “special trust and confidence”, such as a mayorship. Abuses of that trust, gross lapses of integrity, and forays into criminal conduct are not tolerated in our society. If anything, elected politicians are held to a higher standard than the general public, and their actions are closely watched. For an elected official to become a criminal, when they themselves are entrusted to protect us from criminals is nearly the most heinous and unforgivable thing imaginable in a democratically-ruled republic. For some of these same individuals to continue to be considered members in good standing of a “crime-fighting” organization–and not even censured by the organization–has been criticized as being hypocritical.

Four current and former members of the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition are currently under felony indictments, five others were recently convicted of felonies, one indicted member died of a heart attack before completion of his trial, and one member was recently convicted of a violent misdemeanor. The indicted and convicted members and former members include:

  • Former Mayor Gary Becker[3] of Racine, Wisconsin is under five felony indictments for child pornography, attempted child sexual assault and child enticement.[4] He resigned after pleading not guilty and being released on bond.[5] His location is currently being monitored electronically, as he awaits a trial scheduled to begin in October, 2009.[6]
  • Former Mayor David Della Donna[7], of Guttenberg, New Jersey was indicted under a Federal extortion and mail fraud charges.[8] He was convicted in 2008[9] and sentenced to four years and three months in federal prison.[10]
  • Mayor Sheila Dixon was indicted in 2009 on twelve counts[11], comprising four counts of perjury, two counts of misconduct, three counts of theft, and three counts of fraudulent misappropriations.[12] The felony theft charges stem partly from incidents in 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 in which she allegedly misappropriated gift cards intended for the poor and used them for personal purchases.[13][14] Dixon’s trial, originally scheduled for September 8, 2009, was postponed to November 9, 2009.[15]
  • Mayor Jerramiah Healy was convicted for obstruction of justice in 2007[16] and more recently was implicated in the corruption sweep in New Jersey involving the sale of body parts and money laundering. In all, 44 individuals were indicted. (Healy was named as “JC Official 4″ and implicated, but was not indicted, in the probe.)[17][18][19]
  • Former Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick was indicted, arrested, and convicted. and subsequently jailed for 99 days. Kilpatrick pleaded guilty to two felony obstruction of justice charges stemming from his efforts to cover up an extramarital affair. He also pleaded no contest to charges of assaulting a police officer attempting to serve a subpoena on a Kilpatrick friend in that case.[20] The charges and allegations (not all against Kilpatrick himself) were of marital infidelity, conspiracy, perjury, corruption and murder.[21] Following Kilpatrick’s conviction, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms called on Kilpatrick to resign from the Coalition.[22]
  • Mayor Larry Langford was investigated in 2007 by the SEC on corruption charges. In 2008 a lawsuit was filed against him for illegally accepting $156,000 in cash and benefits. On December 1, 2008, Larry Langford was arrested by the FBI on a 101 count indictment[23] alleging conspiracy, bribery, fraud, money laundering, and filing false tax returns[24] in connection with a long-running bribery scheme.[25][26][27] His trial date was postponed to October 2009, and the trial venue moved to Tuscaloosa, Alabama.[28]
  • Deceased Mayor Frank Melton at the time of his death was under felony indictment on civil rights charges.[29] (He died before a scheduled re-trial, following a mistrial.) In 2006, Melton pled guilty to a firearms charge, stemming from a raid (in which he was armed with a concealed pistol) on a suspected crack house. Melton conducted the extra-official Buford Pusser-style raid without a warrant to “bust up” a duplex apartment, accompanied by a group of youths that were not sworn law enforcement officers. That same event led to Melton’s civil rights indictment. In November 2006, he pleaded no contest to three misdemeanor charges: carrying a gun in a park and in a church, and carrying a concealed weapon.[30]
  • Mayor Eddie Perez was indicted on bribery, fabricating evidence, and conspiracy to fabricate evidence felony charges.[31] Perez turned himself in to state police, stating that he had a lapse in judgment but did nothing illegal, and vowed that he would not step down as Hartford’s mayor.[32] He was arraigned on September 8, 2009.[33] His trial date was postponed to November 2009[34], and then to February, 2010.[35] On September 2, 2009 Perez was again arrested, and additionally charged with first-degree larceny by extortion, stemming from a no-bid parking lot deal, unrelated to the other corruption charges.[36] He again proclaimed that he would stay in office, despite these new felony charges.[37]
  • Former Mayor Samuel Rivera, of Passaic, New Jersey was convicted of corruption, influence peddling, and extortion charges.[38][39] In August 2008 he pled guilty,and was sentenced to 21 months in prison.[40]
  • In 2008, former Mayor Will Wynn was convicted of Class C misdemeanor, for a choking assault on a man who had crashed a party.[41]

Five current members of the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition have been troubled by scandals that involved firearms:

  • As New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg came into office, he inherited a chronic firearms permit favoritism scandal from his predecessors that still remains an unresolved issue. Writing in the New York Sun, attorney David Kopel observed: “The problem is acute in New York City. Celebrities, the ultra-wealthy, and the politically influential get carry permits. But many of the people who need them the most — such as stalking victims, or crime witnesses who have been threatened by the criminal’s friends — often do not.”[42] There are currently only about 36,169 permits to keep firearms in private homes in New York City, with the majority issued to retired police officers. Of these permit holders, only 2,516 are more liberally licensed for concealed carry outside their homes. The issuance of permits is discretionary in New York City, per Penal Law 400[43]. (It is considered a “may issue” locality, unlike the “shall issue” policy used for concealed carry in most other localities.) Despite “tight” restrictions on “demonstrated need or special danger”, a who’s-who list of celebrities, billionaires[44], entertainers[45], professional athletes[46], and politicians[47] has somehow managed to get firearms permits. This list includes New York Times publisher Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, publisher Michael Korda, and talk show host Howard Stern.[48] In 2007, The New York Post reported that gun license holders include financier Donald Trump, his son Donald Trump Jr., Queens district attorney Richard A. Brown, Westchester County district attorney, Janet DiFiore, music executive Tommy Mottola, chief executive of Marvel Comics, Isaac Perlmutter, radio show host Don Imus, lawyer Barry Slotnick, lawyer Raoul Felder; publisher Robert Forbes, the cab-driving political activist Fernando Mateo, former new York Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno (recently indicted for fraud), actor Robert De Niro, actor Harvey Keitel, film producer Martin Bregman, cosmetics heir Ronald Lauder, and Aerosmith singer Steven Tyler.[49][50] All of these individuals have retained their gun licenses under Bloomberg’s “tough on guns” administration. The New York Post noted: “Television news anchor John Roland, who let his license lapse in 2006, got his gun permit back in 2007.”[51] A surprisingly high number of celebrities have concealed carry permits, rather than the more common “keep at home” (premise) permits. According to The New York Times, “Mr. Bloomberg asked Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly to look at the issue, and added: ‘If you want a gun permit, you should have to really show that your life is in danger, and that having a gun will protect you, will improve the chances of you surviving.’”[52] But despite Bloomberg’s publicly-stated concern, there have been no announcements of any celebrity gun permits being rescinded, or any reforms to prevent favoritism, cronyism, bribes, or other abuse of discretion in license issuance. With a city population of 8.3 million, the 36,169 gun permit holders represent just .043% of the population and the 2,516 concealed carry permit holders represent a scant .003% of the population.
  • Mayor Richard M. Daley has been criticized for the city of Chicago’s long-standing practice of providing armed bodyguards for a number of city politicians, including city clerk James “Jim” Laski. In the city clerk scandal, Daley was shamed into removing the perk of the armed bodyguards for the clerk. The Chicago Sun-Times reported: “The decision was made almost immediately after Laski became the first elected official to be caught up in the Hired Truck scandal. But Daley insisted that the bribery and extortion charges against Laski were not the trigger. It was the fact that, until this week, Laski had not been showing up for work.”[53] Laski was later convicted of taking $48,000 in bribes and received a two year sentence.[54] Former Mayor Eugene Sawyer, City Treasurer Judy Rice and Alderman Edward M. Burke, chairman of the City Council’s Finance Committee still have armed bodyguards.[55]
  • Mayor Gerald Jennings of Albany, New York was implicated in a scandal regarding the alleged illegal purchase of 52 machine guns.[56] It is unclear whether the weapons were purchased for departmental use or for the use of private individuals. Weapons were delivered to Police Department addresses but apparently paid for with private funds. The Department has not produced a list of weapons, their location, the names of the individuals who purchased them, or their disposition or destruction. At least one later turned up, illegally for sale to the public, in an area gun store. The police officer who sold the gun to the store has testified that he bought it from a Police Union official who was also the Department’s armorer.[57] The current Chief of Police is the fifth appointed by Jennings.[58] The case is still open.[59]
  • Following the illegal seizure of firearms in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Mayor Ray Nagin settled a lawsuit and had a permanent injunction issued prohibiting Nagin or any New Orleans employee from confiscating any lawfully possessed firearm and ordering the return of hundreds of illegally confiscated firearms. (They had been confiscated at Mayor Nagin’s order.).[60] Nagin’s administration has also been troubled by reports of improprieties with the police department evidence rooms, where guns were stolen, guns were allowed to rust, and $200,000 in cash was stolen.[61][62]
  • Mayor Bill White’s administration has been embarrassed by an ongoing scandal involving guns stolen from the Houston Police Department’s evidence room. In January 2009, the Houston Chronicle reported: “For months, maybe years, people with criminal backgrounds had access to secure areas of the police station, including a property room from which 30 guns disappeared within six months, according to internal police documents. The documents, obtained by the Houston Chronicle, indicated that lax security created an environment ripe for theft. No one has been charged in the gun thefts, although police suspected telephone repairmen who admitted stealing other items, and a temporary employee who had access to the property room while awaiting trial on aggravated robbery charges.”[63][64]
Resignations from the coalition Announced resignations

Twelve mayors that had been members[65] have withdrawn from the organization, claiming either that they were misled about the group’s anti-gun platform, or that they were enrolled in the coalition without their knowledge.[66][67][68] They are:

  • Idaho Falls, Idaho Mayor Jared Fuhriman[69]
  • Carmel, Indiana Mayor James Brainard
  • Rio Rancho, New Mexico Mayor Kevin Jackson[70]
  • Anchorage, Alaska Mayor Mark Begich[71]
  • Oldmans Township, New Jersey Mayor Harry Moore[72][73][74]
  • Walton Hills, Ohio Mayor Marlene Anielski,[75]
  • Williamsport, Pennsylvania Mayor Mary B. Wolf[76][77]
  • Madeira Beach, Florida Mayor Patricia Shontz[78]
  • Knoxville, Tennessee Mayor Bill Haslam[79][80]
  • Warsaw, Indiana Mayor Ernest B. Wiggins[81]
  • Sioux Falls, South Dakota Mayor Dave Munson[82]
  • Houston, Texas Mayor Bill White[83]

In her resignation letter, Mayor Patricia Shontz of Madeira Beach, Florida wrote, “I am withdrawing because I believe the MAIG is attempting to erode all gun ownership, not just illegal guns. Additionally, I have learned that the MAIG may be working on issues which conflict with legal gun ownership.” She added, “It appears the MAIG has misrepresented itself to the Mayors of America and its citizens. This is gun control, not crime prevention.”[78]

In his resignation letter to Bloomberg, Mayor Harry Moore stated: “It is simply unconscionable that this coalition, under your leadership, would call for a repeal of the Shelby /Tiahrt amendment that helps to safeguard criminal investigations and the lives of law enforcement officers, witnesses and others by restricting access to firearms trace data solely to law enforcement. How anyone, least of all a public official, could be willing to sacrifice such a law enforcement lifeline in order to gain an edge in suing an industry they have political differences with is repugnant to me. The fact that your campaign against this protective language consisted of overheated rhetoric, deception and falsehoods is disturbing.”[84]

The resignations of Kevin Jackson and Jared Fuhriman left the state of Idaho completely unrepresented in the organization, and Alaska with just one representative mayor. Since Mayor Rocky Anderson of Salt Lake City left office, it has also left Utah unrepresented. Mayor Kathy Taylor of Tulsa, Oklahoma has announced that she will not seek re-election[85], and as of September, 2009, her name has been removed from the coalition’s roster. This also leaves Oklahoma unrepresented. According to the U.S. Conference of Mayors there are 1,201 cities in the US with a population of 30,000 or more that are headed by mayors.[86] Several of the mayors in the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition represent even smaller towns and cities–particularly in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, which are disproportionately represented.

Legislative Initiatives

With the stated goal of reducing the number of straw purchase of guns, the coalition has favored new legislation to require mandatory reporting of lost or stolen guns.[87] As of September, 2009, seven states (Connecticut, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio and Rhode Island) and the District of Columbia have laws criminalizing failure to report lost and stolen guns to law enforcement. Several other states and local governments are working to pass similar laws.[88] Critics counter that straw purchases are already illegal, and hence mandatory theft and loss reporting laws are redundant.[89]

Former prosecuting attorney C.D. Michel analyzed mandatory reporting laws, using one in Ventura County, California as an example: “Ironically, the ordinance cannot be used against the real bad guys. No law can compel lawbreakers to report themselves. So a straw purchaser who legally buys a gun cannot be compelled to report that he resold it illegally. And since it wasn’t actually lost or stolen, he hasn’t violated the ordinance. Similarly, if a felon prohibited from possessing a gun illegally possesses one anyway, and it is lost or stolen, he can be prosecuted for having the gun in the first place, but cannot be prosecuted for failing to incriminate himself by reporting the loss. Enforcement of these ordinances places prosecutors in a precarious legal and ethical position. Say a straw-purchaser’s gun is recovered at a crime scene and traced back to him. If he lies to police claiming his gun was “stolen” when he really sold it on the black market, will we nonetheless prosecute him for something he did not do (fail to report the “stolen” gun — which wasn’t actually stolen) but to which he “confessed”? Ethics and legality aside, securing a misdemeanor conviction for failing to report a theft (that never occurred) likely prohibits prosecuting the straw purchaser for the more serious felony black market sale or for making a false statement to police. Perhaps worse, gun owners who truly are burglary victims must now hesitate to speak with police if their stolen gun is recovered at a crime scene. If the gun owner failed to report the loss at all, or on time, she faces possible criminal prosecution if she cooperates with police investigating the recovered gun. She should remain silent, get a lawyer and seek immunity first. Legal representation may also be appropriate when a gun is first discovered missing. The owner can be prosecuted if the theft is not reported within 48 hours of when the owner “should have known” the gun was missing. Proponents have made clear they believe “responsible” gun owners should know where their gun is at every single moment and “should know” a gun is gone immediately. And the fear of prosecution will encourage those who miss the 48-hour window not to report the loss at all. Effectively, these ordinances place the legitimate gun owner in jeopardy of prosecution for becoming a victim of a crime. In light of these liabilities, gun-rights groups and the criminal-defense bar have begun advising gun owners — who would ordinarily be happy to assist police with their investigation — that they need a lawyer if they are contacted by police.”[90]

ObamaCare Takes Form: Race to the Bottom vs. Our Aspirations

SF Gray Panthers Newsletter, October 2009

ObamaCare Takes Form: Race to the Bottom vs. Our Aspirations

SB 810 is a Single Payer bill for California.

In spite of recent news that 45,000 die each year in the US from lack of insurance, it’s clear that business and government want healthcare “reform” to control their costs while protecting and stabilizing the insurance, drug, and hospital industries. It’s not about providing everyone with comprehensive, affordable healthcare, let alone equal healthcare! It’s about forcing everyone to buy private insurance, with little assurance the insurance will cover them, or be affordable. It’s déjà vu of the bank bail-out; insurance companies will clean up. And forget undocumented workers.

Reducing healthcare costs for government and corporations is top priority. The House’s HR 3200 says half of the $1 trillion 10-year cost would come from savings in Medicare. Obama’s health speech said most of his $900 billion plan would come from savings in Medicare and Medicaid. And Max Baucus’ Senate Finance Committee plan doesn’t require any payment from companies that don’t offer insurance, unless the workers qualify for the skimpy government assistance.

Business and government are unwilling to do the things that could really control costs: (1) eliminate private health insurance with its outrageous profits and administrative costs (single payer), (2) negotiate drug prices and hospital charges, and (3) put doctors on salaries so their practices are no longer businesses with built-in incentives to either over-treat us or under-treat us.

So how do they plan to save at least $400-500 billion over ten years? Obama talks about eliminating the overpayments to HMO-based Medicare Advantage plans, which is good, but CBO estimates this will save only $150 billion. Obama talks about preventive and primary care, comparing drugs and treatments for effectiveness, systematic care of chronic disease, and electronic medical records. These would give better care, but don’t save much money, say knowledgeable experts.

Other suggested Medicare savings include an independent agency to set doctor and hospital rates; and encouraging or forcing doctors, hospitals, and nursing homes into accountable care organizations that would receive lump-sum payments for patients’ procedures like hip replacements or cardiac surgery, and be rewarded for cost savings and meeting care standards. HR 3200’s Medicare-friendly provisions, like eliminating major cuts scheduled for Medicare doctors, eliminating co-pays and deductibles for preventive care, reducing the Part D doughnut hole, and increasing Part B and D premium assistance, may be lost as Senator Baucus’ cheaper plan becomes the center of negotiation. However, without single payer, negotiated drug and hospital prices, and salaried doctors, the Medicare savings these plans need would require ending Medicare’s “entitlement” status; its budget would no longer grow automatically as enrollment increases. This is a major threat.

Even as Obama, Baucus, and Pelosi assure us that single payer is off the table, people continue to demand it. Obama officials, who organized the huge Sept. 2   rally at San Francisco City Hall for the public option, were openly hostile to the many people with single payer signs, asking some to move so as to “not block the view.” But the people whom the Obama officials brought to the rally loved the single payer signs, and cheered the people carrying them (including Gray Panthers).

Many public option supporters really wanted Single Payer.

Whatever private-insurance-based plan is chosen, it will neither provide care nor contain costs, as the Massachusetts plan shows. Meanwhile we must demand the plan include the Kucinich amendment so states can have their own single payer plans. This struggle will continue.

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

World Leaders Call for Action at UN Climate Summit, Offer Few Commitments

Many climate advocates (including me) tuned in this morning to listen to some of the world’s most influential political leaders chip in their two cents about the need for a strong, science-based international climate treaty coming out of the Copenhagen negotiations this December. President Obama, President Hu Jintao of China, and more spoke at the UN General Assembly in New York City this morning and, for the most part, stuck to the talking points they’ve been stressing for the last few months. “We need to act,” they seemed to say, “just don’t make me say how, when, or where.”

President Obama went first and, while his presence at the meeting is certainly historic and influential, his speech was actually a bit dull. As Emily Gertz over at Change.org says, “The president’s remarks were, perhaps predictably, long on generalities and short on substance.” Many climate advocates and international diplomats were hoping Obama might lay out a his strategy for pushing clean energy legislation through the Senate (after all, it was just over a week ago that he went to Wall Street to call on Congress to enact financial reform at some point in the future), but instead he opted to continue his standard refrain, “I look forward to engaging with others as we move forward.” The full text of Obama’s speech can be read here. I don’t mean to sound distraught or upset at Obama’s remarks — after all, we’re leaps and bounds ahead of where we were eight months ago and his speech was a sort of global coming-out party for him in the international climate arena — but I am nervous that without Obama’s trademark spunk and enthusiasm, the global climate talks could sputter a bit. This morning, Obama needed to sound like the “Be the Change, Get up and Go, Yes We Can” man that inspired me and so many people of my generation. I’m sorry to say that he fell a little bit short.

A few minutes later, the audience at the UN were treated to another textbook speech, this time from Chinese President Hu Jintao. Again, speculation abounded before the talks that President Hu might announce a new voluntary carbon market in China during his UN speech, but instead he opted to tout steps that China has already taken to combat climate change, including efforts to reduce energy intensity and produce 15% of energy from non-fossil sources by 2020. Of course, President Hu may unleash the carbon market announcement soon, even later today, but I was eager to see the reactions of Senators who claim America should not commit to climate action until China does. Oh well, we’ll have to wait another day.

Enthusiasm, details, and a sense of urgency were still communicated this morning, however. President Nasheed of the Maldives, a small island nation in the Indian Ocean that has pledged to cut 100% of its carbon emissions in the next ten years, refocused the debate in black-and-white. Among his many dire warnings, he pleaded, “If things go business as usual, we will not live. We will die. Our country will not exist. We cannot make Copenhagen a pact of suicide. We have to succeed.” UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon noted, “The climate negotiations are proceeding too slow. Glaciers melting faster than our efforts to protect them.” Djimon Hounsou, the actor of “Amistad” and “Blood Diamond” fame, gave an impassioned speech lamenting our inability to conceive of the scale of the challenge facing “our pale blue dot.” And representatives of the world’s youth — the three billion young people whose future are at stake — noted that “We are ready to come together to make a difference. Are you?”

Many young people from around the world are working together to ensure that the world’s leaders come together to safeguard the survival of all countries and peoples by agreeing to a strong climate agreement. The road that we have traveled (or better yet, make it a bike path) began in Rio in 1992, where the UN set up the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, and must go through Washington and Copenhagen before it ends. It is up to the young people of the world to help make sure the destination is prosperous and sustainable.

Orly Files Opposition To Dismiss

Orly has filed her opposition to dismiss and I must say its very good. A person doesn’t even need to be a lawyer to understand it. I don’t know if she had help with it or not but who cares?

Obama’s lawyers keep using the tiring excuse of no standing but never sites a law or where in the constitution it says that. Orly however uses past cases and the constitution to say we ALL have standing.

She more or less is giving the judge a choice. Do we or do we not have a constitution in this country?

scribd

Monday, September 21, 2009

Just in case America isn't fat enough...

As the debate over President Obama’s healthcare proposal rages on, Taco Bell continues to give Americans exactly what they crave….melty, crunchy, spicy and heart attack inducing.

I especially love the tagline at the end…

Of course, I would change it just a little bit.

.

If you like what you see here, click here for updates

.

Related Posts
  • 5 Bucks for a Can of Coke
  • NYC Declares War on Soda
  • Here Comes the Soda Tax
  • Better than the Biggest Loser
  • America’s Obesity Epidemic costs $147 billion
  • Having trouble sticking to your diet?
  • How the Free Market makes you FAT and why “Big Food” likes it that way
  • Nutritional Information on Restaurant Menus – Does it make any difference?
  • The Future of Fast Food
  • The status-quo is broken…We need a new model for burning fat and getting fit

How much will that cost the taxpayer?

President Obama was asked about the swine flu shot and claimed that he and his family “will stand in line like everybody else. And when folks say it’s our turn, that’s when we’ll get it.”

Great.  I sense another massive undertaking like the First Lady going vegetable shopping.

And, really, isn’t a bit absurd for him to claim that he’s pretty far down the priority list for the vaccine?  Geesh.  I’m pretty sure that the President of the USA is fairly damn high up the list.

Couldn’t Obama’s private physician (you know he has one!) just send a nurse over to immunize the first family in private?  Please?

Sunday, September 20, 2009

NewsReal Sunday: Mass Confusion: Chris Matthews’s Catholic Education—Wasted

For months, liberals have been looking for a way to start screaming “racism!”  Trial balloons have been floated, and flags run up the pole, but they were mostly ignored and only the already convinced saluted.

Now, they have decided that their way to get this into the general conversation is to use Joe Wilson’s “You lie” outburst as their excuse.  They formulated a three step process for their rhetorical two-step.

  1. Hyperventilate about the unprecedented, outrageous, abominably rude, sign of a lack of civility and good faith in our public discourse that Wilson represents.
  2. Pretend to believe that Wilson is motivated by race hatred (even if he doesn’t know it), going to the extent of declaring he must prove that he is not—he is from South Carolina after all.  He probably even lit the fuse to fire on Fort Sumter!
  3. Announce that everyone who expressed anger at Barack Obama’s false statements, his announcing a new trillion dollar program on a monthly basis, and the takeover of huge swaths of the American economy must be— RACIST!

But among the most bizarre of the condemnations of Joe Wilson had to come from the mouth of MSNBC’s Chris Matthews on Hardball last week.  Proving that the Irish-Catholic upbringing he once touted is fading fast, Matthews showed that like many of his political bent, liberalism is really his religion.

While interviewing Congressman Congressman Trent Franks of Arizona, Matthews trotted out his latest reason as to why Joe Wilson’s ill-timed declaration (of truth) was a baaaaad thing.

MATTHEWS:  Congressman Franks, I‘ve been on that floor as a staffer.   It‘s a hushed moment, as you know as a member…

FRANKS:  Yes.

MATTHEWS:  … when the president is in joint session.  It‘s very—almost a sacramental religious experience.  You‘re totally in awe of the moment that you‘re lucky enough to share or been elected to share. Do you really think that that wasn‘t an offense against the House, for a member of the House to speak against a guest of the House in public on national television in the way that Mr. Wilson did?  You say that‘s just an affront against the person of the president.

Those of us who made fun of Chris’s tingly leg while listening to the President speak, or thought it was darkly humorous when he make this declaration had no idea we were making fun of someone’s religion.  Maybe we should apologize…

It’s far less of a stretch, in light of  Chris Matthew’s declaration to Congressman Franks above to insert “Messiah” into that conversation somewhere than it was for Maureen Dowd to insert “Boy” at the end of Joe Wilson’s astonished outburst.

Of course, under that illegitimately “selected,” President who was a “war criminal,” the “torturer in chief,” who “lied us into a war by fixing the intelligence,” the chamber was a profane place, not the Holy of Holies, I guess.

Because if it were a sanctified place, Chris Matthews would have been especially outraged by the way his fellow Democrats observed the sacrament in the not too distant past:

Turn up the volume on this.  ”You lie” might seem pretty tame compared to this.  Mysteriously, no one distributed video to see who was acting up, and there we so MANY Democrats who didn’t feel a kind of hush at this moment, that no one can be singled out—not that any attempt was ever made.

But then, Republicans don’t consider the chamber a church.  I think Chris needs to find a real Church, and soon.  The MSNBC echo chamber is starting to have a seriously corrosive effect on him.

Obama Push for World Regulations

By Nicholas Johnston

Sept. 19 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama said tougher financial regulations are needed worldwide to protect consumers, provide economic stability and prevent future crises.

With the leaders from the Group of 20 nations set to meet next week in Pittsburgh, Obama said in his weekly address on radio and Internet that international cooperation has “stopped our economic freefall.”

“We know we still have a lot to do, in conjunction with nations around the world, to strengthen the rules governing financial markets and ensure that we never again find ourselves in the precarious situation we found ourselves in just one year ago,” Obama said.

The administration has proposed an overhaul of U.S. financial regulations including oversight of the systemic risk large financial institutions pose to the economy, new ways for the government to dismantle failed companies and a regulator to oversee financial products for consumers.

Obama reiterated his calls for Congress to act on his regulatory proposals, which he also made in a speech on Wall Street Sept. 13.

“As I told leaders of our financial community in New York City earlier this week, a return to normalcy can’t breed complacency,” Obama said in today’s address. “Our government needs to fundamentally reform the rules governing financial firms and markets to meet the challenges of the 21st century.”

Continue

Saturday, September 19, 2009

Obama Helps Russia Reassemble Iron Curtain

One of the things Obama has most wanted to prove was that he isn’t Bush — as though no matter how stupid his policies might be, as long as they aren’t Bush’s they must be good.

Well, Obama aint Reagan, either.

Obama appears to intend to not only roll back every Bush policy, but the fundamental victory of the Reagan presidency over the U.S.S.R.

Friday, September 18, 2009

Mark Steyn: Obama helping Putin restitch Iron Curtain

Scrapping of U.S. missile defense plans hands big victory to Russia’s new czar.

Was it only April? There was President Barack Obama, speaking (as is his wont) in Prague, about the Iranian nuclear program and ballistic missile capability, and saluting America’s plucky allies: “The Czech Republic and Poland have been courageous in agreeing to host a defense against these missiles,” he declared. “As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with a missile defense system that is cost-effective and proven.”

On Thursday, the administration scrapped its missile defense plans for Eastern Europe. The “courageous” Czechs and Poles will have to take their chances. Did the “threat from Iran” go away? Not so’s you’d notice. The dawn of the nuclear Ayatollahs is perhaps only months away, and, just in case the Zionists or (please, no tittering) the formerly Great Satan is minded to take ‘em out, Tehran will shortly be taking delivery of a bunch of S-300 anti-aircraft batteries from (ta-da!) Russia. Fancy that.

Joe Klein, the geostrategic thinker of Time magazine, concluded his analysis thus:

“This is just speculation on my part. But I do hope that this anti-missile move has a Russian concession attached to it, perhaps not publicly (just as the U.S. agreement to remove its nuclear missiles from Turkey was not make public during the Cuban Missile Crisis). The Obama administration’s diplomatic strategy is, I believe, wise and comprehensive – but it needs to show more than public concessions over time. A few diplomatic victories wouldn’t hurt.”

Golly. We know, thanks to Jimmy Carter, Joe Klein and many others, that we critics of President Obama’s health care policy are, by definition, racist. Has criticism of Obama’s foreign policy also been deemed racist? Because one can certainly detect the first faint seeds of doubt germinating in dear old Joe’s soon-to-be-racist breast: The Obama administration “needs to show more than public concessions over time” – because otherwise the entire planet may get the vague impression that that’s all there is.

Especially if your pre-emptive capitulations are as felicitously timed as the missile-defense announcement, stiffing the Poles on the 70th anniversary of their invasion by the Red Army. As for the Czechs, well, dust off your Neville Chamberlain’s Greatest Hits LP: Like he said, they’re a faraway country of which we know little. So who cares? Everything old is new again.

It is interesting to contrast the administration’s “wise” diplomacy abroad with its willingness to go nuclear at home. If you go to a “town hall” meeting and express misgivings about the effectiveness of the stimulus, you’re a “racist” “angry” “Nazi” “evilmonger” “right-wing domestic terrorist.” It’s perhaps no surprise that that doesn’t leave a lot left over in the rhetorical arsenal for Putin, Chavez and Ahmadinejad. But you’ve got to figure that by now the world’s strongmen are getting the measure of the new Washington. Diplomacy used to be, as Canada’s Lester Pearson liked to say, the art of letting the other fellow have your way. Today, it’s more of a discreet cover for letting the other fellow have his way with you. The Europeans “negotiate” with Iran over its nukes for years, and, in the end, Iran gets the nukes, and Europe gets to feel good about itself for having sat across the table talking to no good purpose for the best part of a decade. In Moscow, there was a palpable triumphalism in the news that the Russians had succeeded in letting the Obama fellow have their way. “This is a recognition by the Americans of the rightness of our arguments about the reality of the threat or, rather, the lack of one,” said Konstantin Kosachev, chairman of the Duma’s international affairs committee. “Finally the Americans have agreed with us.”

There’ll be a lot more of that in the years ahead.

There is no discreetly arranged “Russian concession.” Moscow has concluded that a nuclear Iran is in its national interest – especially if the remorseless nuclearization process itself is seen as a testament to Western weakness. Even if the Israelis are driven to bomb the thing to smithereens circa next spring, that, too, would only emphasize, by implicit comparison, American and European pusillanimity. Any private relief felt in the chancelleries of London and Paris would inevitably license a huge amount of public tut-tutting by this or that foreign minister about the Zionist Entity’s regrettable “disproportion.” The U.S. defense secretary is already on record as opposing an Israeli strike. If it happens, every thug state around the globe will understand the subtext – that, aside from a tiny strip of land on the east bank of the Jordan, every other advanced society on earth is content to depend for its security on the kindness of strangers.

Some of them very strange. Kim Jong-il wouldn’t really let fly at South Korea or Japan, would he? Even if some quasi-Talibanny types wound up sitting on Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, they wouldn’t really do anything with them, would they? OK, Putin can be a bit heavy-handed when dealing with Eastern Europe, and his definition of “Eastern” seems to stretch ever further west, but he’s not going to be sending the tanks back into Prague and Budapest, is he? I mean, c’mon …

Vladimir Putin is no longer president but he is de facto czar. And he thinks it’s past time to reconstitute the old empire – not formally (yet), but certainly as a sphere of influence from which the Yanks keep their distance. President Obama has just handed the Russians their biggest win since the collapse of the Iron Curtain. Indeed, in some ways it marks the restitching of the Iron Curtain. When the Czechs signed their end of the missile-defense deal in July, they found themselves afflicted by a sudden “technical difficulty” that halved their gas supply from Russia. The Europe Putin foresees will be one not only ever more energy-dependent on Moscow but security-dependent, too – in which every city is within range of missiles from Tehran and other crazies, and is, in effect, under the security umbrella of the new czar. As to whether such a Continent will be amicable to American interests, well, good luck with that, hopeychangers.

In a sense, the health care debate and the foreign policy debacle are two sides of the same coin: For Britain and other great powers, the decision to build a hugely expensive welfare state at home entailed inevitably a long retreat from responsibilities abroad, with a thousand small betrayals of peripheral allies along the way. A few years ago, the great scholar Bernard Lewis warned, during the debate on withdrawal from Iraq, that America risked being seen as “harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend.” In Moscow and Tehran, on the one hand, and Warsaw and Prague, on the other, they’re drawing their own conclusions.

I am still just as stunned by the Obama betrayal of a fundamental American commitment as the Poles and Czechs.  I mean, stop and think about it:

Obama announces his betrayal of Poland and Czechoslovakia on the anniversary of the inevitable result of Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s selling of Eastern Europe down the river to Hitler and Stalin.  The rationale?  That Iran is farther behind on its ballistic missile technology than had been previously believed.

And, yet, on that very same day, we learn that a confidential report from the International Atomic Energy Agency says that Iran – contrary to previous intelligence assessments – can now make a nuclear bomb whenever they damn well want to.  And we become even more aware that the IAEA has been more intent on covering up Iranian (and before that Iraqi) development of weapons of mass destruction.

And my gosh, wasn’t it Democrats who kicked Bush for relying too much on intelligence assessments that can well be faulty?  Even when not only U.S. intelligence, but every single major intelligence service in the world, supported the primary conclusion that Saddam Hussein had WMD?  Why on earth does the same Barack Obama who as a candidate demonized Bush over trusting faulty intelligence on Iraq now so implicitly trust intelligence that Iran is not working on long-range missiles?

And then the very next day following that terrible 70th anniversary of September 17, 1939, Iran – which by the way can make nuclear bombs – shows just how insane they are by releasing a statement that denies the Holocaust occurred and vows that Israel’s days are numbered.

On September 17, 2009, President Barack Obama unilaterally abrogated a security agreement with two of its key Eastern European allies – who have been so loyal to America that they have kept troops in Iraq and Afghanistan – in order to appease an unfriendly Russia.  And the only thing worse than this capitulation to Russia is the despicable timing of said capitulation.

As Mark Steyn states in his title, this will result in a seismic shifting of Eastern European nations away from the untrustworthy United States and toward Russia.  All of Eastern Europe is in play: Poland, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, Lithuania – and especially already-attacked Georgia – are now aware that they are basically on their own with a hungry Russian bear looming over them.

September 17, 2009 was a shameful day for Barack Obama and a shameful day for the nation that he represents.

Thu nhập người Mỹ tháng 6/2009 giảm mạnh nhất trong 4 năm

(GiaVang.com.vn – Giá vàng Việt Nam và Thế Giới) – Quan chức thuộc FED và một kinh tế gia đạt giải Nobel cảnh báo khi kế hoạch kích cầu của chính phủ giảm bớt, lương giảm có thể dẫn đến tiêu dùng giảm trong những tháng tới.

Ông Richard Berner, trưởng bộ phận nghiên cứu kinh tế tại Morgan Stanley ở New York và từng là chuyên gia nghiên cứu tại FED, nhận xét: “Người tiêu dùng đã bắt đầu thay đổi thói quen và tiết kiệm nhiều hơn. Họ phải chịu áp lực từ việc lương giảm và số lượng việc làm ngày một ít đi.”

Bộ Thương mại Mỹ công bố mức lương trong khoảng thời gian 12 tháng tính đến hết tháng 6/2009 giảm 4,7%, mức hạ mạnh nhất từ khi các chỉ số được tính toán vào năm 1960.

Kế hoạch giảm thuế của Tổng thống Obama, trợ cấp thất nghiệp tăng và chương trình an sinh xã hội tốt trước đây đã làm dịu tác động từ thời kỳ u ám nhất của thị trường việc làm tính từ Đại Suy thoái.

Thu nhập cá nhân, trong đó bao gồm thu nhập, cổ tức, tiền thuê nhà và mọi loại hình chi trả khác, hạ 1,3% trong tháng 6/2009, mức hạ cao hơn so với dự đoán và là mức hạ mạnh nhất trong 4 năm. Nếu trừ đi ảnh hưởng từ kế hoạch kích cầu của chính phủ, thu nhập tháng 6/2009 giảm 0,1% sau khi không thay đổi trong tháng 5/2009.

Các chuyên gia dự đoán đầu năm 2010, cứ 10 người Mỹ sẽ có 1 người thất nghiệp. Điều này sẽ ảnh hưởng không nhỏ đến niềm tin của người vẫn đang còn làm việc và khiến tiêu dùng giảm sút.

Ông Edmund Phelps, kinh tế gia đạt giải Nobel năm 2006, dụ báo sẽ phải mất 15 năm người Mỹ mới có thể khôi phục lại hoàn toàn khả năng tài chính đã chịu quá nhiều ảnh hưởng từ giá nhà đất, chứng khoán và số lượng việc làm ngày một giảm sút.

Source: Thu nhập người Mỹ tháng 6/2009 giảm mạnh nhất trong 4 năm

Friday, September 18, 2009

ObamaLiar-2

I am going to periodically mention reasons why you can’t trust anything this guy says.  Today’s entry is this article from the brilliant Charles Krauthammer that exposes the manner in which Obama doesn’t incessantly “lie” to the American people.

Does He Lie?

Charles Krauthammer

Friday, September 18, 2009

You lie? No. Barack Obama doesn’t lie. He’s too subtle for that. He … well, you judge.

Herewith [are] three examples within a single speech — the now-famous Obama-Wilson “you lie” address to Congress on health care — of Obama’s relationship with truth.

(1) “I will not sign (a plan),” he solemnly pledged, “if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future. Period.”

Wonderful. The president seems serious, veto-ready, determined to hold the line. Until, notes Harvard economist Greg Mankiw, you get to Obama’s very next sentence: “And to prove that I’m serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don’t materialize.”

This apparent strengthening of the pledge brilliantly and deceptively undermines it. What Obama suggests is that his plan will require mandatory spending cuts if the current rosy projections prove false. But there’s absolutely nothing automatic about such cuts. Every Congress is sovereign. Nothing enacted today will force a future Congress or a future president to make any cuts in any spending, mandatory or not.

Just look at the supposedly automatic Medicare cuts contained in the Sustainable Growth Rate formula enacted to constrain out-of-control Medicare spending. Every year since 2003, Congress has waived the cuts.

Mankiw puts the Obama bait-and-switch in plain language. “Translation: I promise to fix the problem. And if I do not fix the problem now, I will fix it later, or some future president will, after I am long gone. I promise he will. Absolutely, positively, I am committed to that future president fixing the problem. You can count on it. Would I lie to you?”

(2) And then there’s the famous contretemps about health insurance for illegal immigrants. Obama said they would not be insured. Well, all four committee-passed bills in Congress allow illegal immigrants to take part in the proposed Health Insurance Exchange.

But more importantly, the problem is that laws are not self-enforcing. If they were, we’d have no illegal immigrants because, as I understand it, it’s illegal to enter the United States illegally. We have laws against burglary, too. But we also provide for cops and jails on the assumption that most burglars don’t voluntarily turn themselves in.

When Republicans proposed requiring proof of citizenship, the Democrats twice voted that down in committee. Indeed, after Rep. Joe Wilson’s “You lie!” shout-out, the Senate Finance Committee revisited the language of its bill to prevent illegal immigrants from getting any federal benefits. Why would the Finance Committee fix a nonexistent problem?

(3) Obama said he would largely solve the insoluble cost problem of Obamacare by eliminating “hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and fraud” from Medicare.

That’s not a lie. That’s not even deception. That’s just an insult to our intelligence. Waste, fraud and abuse — Meg Greenfield once called this phrase “the dread big three” — as the all-purpose piggy bank for budget savings has been a joke since Jimmy Carter first used it in 1977.

Moreover, if half a trillion is waiting to be squeezed painlessly out of Medicare, why wait for health care reform? If, as Obama repeatedly insists, Medicare overspending is breaking the budget, why hasn’t he gotten started on the painless billions in “waste and fraud” savings?

Obama doesn’t lie. He merely elides, gliding from one dubious assertion to another. This has been the story throughout his whole health care crusade. Its original premise was that our current financial crisis was rooted in neglect of three things — energy, education and health care. That transparent attempt to exploit Emanuel’s Law — a crisis is a terrible thing to waste — failed for health care because no one is stupid enough to believe that the 2008 financial collapse was caused by a lack of universal health care.

So on to the next gambit: selling health care reform as a cure for the deficit. When that was exploded by the Congressional Budget Office’s demonstration of staggering Obamacare deficits, Obama tried a new tack: selling his plan as revenue-neutral insurance reform — until the revenue neutrality is exposed as phony future cuts and chimerical waste and fraud.

Obama doesn’t lie. He implies, he misdirects, he misleads — so fluidly and incessantly that he risks transmuting eloquence into mere slickness.

Slickness wasn’t fatal to “Slick Willie” Clinton because he possessed a winning, near irresistible charm. Obama’s persona is more cool, distant, imperial. The charming scoundrel can get away with endless deception; the righteous redeemer cannot.

David Horowitz-The Left's Campaign To Destroy Glenn Beck

The Left’s Campaign To Destroy Glenn Beck

The left has launched a massive campaign to destroy Glenn Beck — who right now, and along with Rush, is the most eloquent, fearless and effective warrior standing between Barack Obama and a collectivist state. The politics of personal destruction is what the left does best and in many ways it is all the left does. “Purge” — as in defame and then dispose of your political enemies — is a term that leftists invented in the 1930s when Stalin staged show trials of his political enemies, defamed and demonized them, and then buried them. Witch-hunts are a leftist specialty — identify your political enemy, freeze him, and isolate him by painting him as a racist, sexist, homophobe, Islamophobe, nutcase — whatever will work to banish him from the society of decent human beings and silence him. This is what the left is now trying to do to Glenn Beck, with its usual arsenal of malicious distortion, misrepresentation and made up “facts.” The new cover story in TIME portrays him as a Mad Man (you want to see a Mad Man? watch Olbermann). A feature in today’s  Salon portrays him as a Mormon nut job. How’s that for religious tolerance! (And by the way the two or three sentences about me are inventions of the writer as the interview he links shows if you bother to read it.) As for Olbermann he does a Beck lynching every night (and a Bachmann lynching, and a Coulter lynching, and a Limbaugh lynching. Even Jonah Goldberg has made Worst Person in the World four times). What we are witnessing is a political mob and its agenda is the destruction of anyone brazen enough to stand in its path and say no to its assault on Americans’ freedom .

via NewsReal Blog.

Thursday, September 17, 2009

New Revenue-Recognition Rules: The Apple of Apple's Eye?

While Steve Jobs was preparing to introduce the new Apple iPod nano last week, the company’s chief accountant, Betsy Rafael, was sending off a second letter to the Financial Accounting Standards Board related to revenue recognition. At issue: how FASB might rework the rules related to recognizing revenue for software that’s bundled into a product and never sold separately.

The rule is especially important to Apple because it affects the revenue related to two of the company’s most successful products — the iPod and the iPhone. If FASB’s time line holds to form, and the rules are recast in 2011 the way Apple hopes they will be, the company could be able to book revenue faster, yielding less time between product launches and associated revenue gains. In theory, a successful launch — and its attendant revenue — would drive up Apple’s earnings, and possibly stock price, in the same quarter the product is introduced, according to several news reports that came out earlier this week.

Apple and other tech companies have been lobbying for a rewrite of the so-called multiple deliverables, or bundling, rule for quite some time. They argue that current U.S. generally accepted accounting principles make it hard for product makers to reap the full reward of successful products quickly. That’s mainly because U.S. GAAP is stringent about when and how companies recognize revenue generated by software sales.

“The requirements are that when you sell more than one product or service at one time, you have to break down the total sale value in[to] individual pieces. Establishing the individual values under U.S. GAAP is solely a function of how the company prices those products and services over time,” PricewaterhouseCoopers’s Dean Petracca told CFO in an earlier interview. Contracts typically include such multiple “deliverables” as hardware, software, professional services, maintenance, and support — all of which are valued and accounted for differently.

Go to Article