Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘President Obama’

Obama Delivers on Promise to Make Electricity Prices Skyrocket


http://deneenborelli.com/2014/04/obama-delivering-promise-make-electricity-prices-skyrocket/#8bcXCfqTERfIi71f.99

By / 17 April 2014

Electricity Lines

Some Fixed Rate Plan Customers Also Getting Skyrocketing Electricity Bills

CBS Pittsburgh

Millions of Americans are dealing with skyrocketing electricity prices and it looks like costs will be going even higher.

CNSNews.com reported on information released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

The average price for a kilowatthour (KWH) of electricity hit a March record of 13.5 cents, according data released yesterday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That was up about 5.5 percent from 12.8 cents per KWH in March 2013.

The relative price of electricity in the United States tends to rise in spring, peak in summer, and decline in fall. Last year, after the price of a KWH averaged 12.8 cents in March, it rose to an all-time high of 13.7 cents in June, July, August and September.

If the prevailing trend holds, the average price of a KWH would hit a new record this summer.

Let’s not forget, President Obama promised to make electricity prices skyrocket and they are!

IN CASE YOU FORGOT, SEE THE VIDEO BELOW WHEN PRESIDENT ELECT OBAMA MADE THE PROMISE TO “SKYROCKET” ELECTRICITY BILLS.

skyrocket

 Community Organizer Two

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


Clinton/Obama cronies behind Bundy showdown


http://www.wnd.com/2014/04/clintonobama-cronies-behind-bundy-showdown/#XBYjO3ZhO227BIfy.99

High-level Democrats positioned to profit from ‘green’ projects

Published: 1 day ago

author-image

James Simpson is an investigative journalist, businessman and former economist and budget analyst for the White House Office of Management and Budget. Best-known for his exposé on the Cloward Piven Strategy of Manufactured Crisis, Simpson’s work provided background for Glenn Beck’s groundbreaking TV series on the subject. He is a frequent guest on radio talk shows and is featured in Curtis Bowers’ award winning documentary “Agenda: Grinding America Down.”

After a weeklong confrontation between protesters and armed agents of the Bureau of Land Management, events at the Bundy ranch in Bunkerville, Nev., came to an abrupt end Saturday when the BLM suddenly threw in the towel and left.

Speaking to a local TV news program Monday,  Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada declared: “This isn’t over.” And he is certainly correct. The showdown between BLM and Cliven Bundy – the last rancher in Clark County, Nev. – was but the latest battle in a long-running conflict.

Supposedly at issue was the desert tortoise, a reptile on the endangered species list that purportedly could not coexist on the land with Bundy’s cattle. But why, many asked, would the turtle suddenly be threatened by animals it had cohabited with for the 100-plus years the Bundy ranch has been in operation?

A BLM document unearthed last week discusses mitigation strategies for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone, just southwest of the Bundy ranch. The “mitigation strategy” proposed to use the grazing lands near the Bundy ranch as a kind of sanctuary for the desert tortoise, because the entire region is slated for a large number of solar, wind and geothermal energy generation facilities.

The solar projects will obliterate most of the turtle’s natural habitat.

Bloggers quickly made a connection between the effort to remove Bundy’s cattle and a solar energy project in Southern Nevada financed by the communist Chinese energy firm ENN. It was to be the largest solar farm in the U.S.

Reid had lobbied heavily for the company’s business, even traveling to China. Reid’s son, Rory Reid, formerly a Clark County commissioner, became a lobbyist for ENN, and the Senate majority leader’s former senior adviser, Neil Kornze, now leads the BLM.

But the solar energy complex financed by the communist Chinese was not at the heart of the Bundy Ranch fiasco after all. The project died last year.

Tyranney Alert

However, the BLM’s library of renewable energy projects revealed it was only one of more than 50 solar, wind and geothermal projects planned for Nevada, California, Arizona and other Western states. Reid was focused on at least one, and maybe more, of the projects, much closer to the Bundy ranch.

He was at the work site on March 21 to help break ground on the Moapa Southern Paiute Solar Project. A close inspection of the project reveals why there is so much interest in the area and why the BLM, presumably at Reid’s urging through his former aide, Kornze, is so intent on getting Bundy off the land.

The leaseholder for the project is K Road Power, LLC, a New York City-based energy company. An examination of its website finds the business development manager to be none other than Jonathan Magaziner.

Magaziner was formerly an associate at the Clinton Climate Initiative of the William J. Clinton Foundation. He is also the son of Ira Magaziner, former senior policy adviser for President Bill Clinton. The elder Magaziner now works for the Clinton Foundation on health and environment issues. There are likely other connections to Democratic insiders.

Tyranney Alert

But that is not all. A company called First Solar is listed on a BLM renewable energy project map of southern Nevada, one of 11 sited in Clark County. Additionally, the map shows six wind projects in Clark County and also lists the K Road Moapa project under “transmission projects.” In other words, there is a lot more going on than media have reported.

First Solar investors comprise a who’s who of Democratic insiders, including major Obama campaign bundlers, billionaire investor Paul Tudor Jones, Al Gore, Ted Turner and Goldman Sachs. First Solar’s CEO is Michael Ahearn, former fundraiser for both Obama and Harry Reid.

First Solar has at least three other solar projects in California. So it becomes apparent why the BLM, Reid and many other interested parties have such an intense interest in the desert tortoise.

Tyranney Alert

The lucrative business opportunities explain both why Cliven Bundy has been facing such intense intimidation and why all the other ranchers have been chased out. Bundy represents a financial threat not merely to Reid, but a whole gamut of Democrats tied to Obama, Clinton and Gore.

This is what has been discovered by examining only a few of the 50-plus projects. Doubtless there are similar stories behind some, if not all, of the others.

Tyranney Alert

If Democrat-linked entrepreneurs plan to turn the West into a massive arena for green projects, the implications are disturbing. The projects will eventually go as all others have gone before: failing as the unsustainable costs, maintenance problems and unseen environmental catastrophes they create become intolerable. The true goal of “green” energy, say cynics, is to make these people wealthier, not to save the environment.

Whether that turns out to be the case or not, the Bundy story needs far greater and deeper media scrutiny.

Tree of Liberty 03

Al Sharpton’s Blasphemous Easter Message: Compares Obama’s ‘Suffering’ to Jesus


http://www.tpnn.com/2014/04/16/al-sharptons-blasphemous-easter-message-compares-obamas-suffering-to-jesus/

Sharpton-Obama
Race baiting MSNBC host and former FBI informant Al Sharpton has never hidden there reverence with which he holds Barack Obama. In fact, Sharpton so likes to emulate Obama that he famously parrots Obama’s words his show Politics Nation. Still, no one would expect this strange and blasphemous analogy from a man who calls himself Reverend.

“I think that the message is, no matter what the world may do to unfairly, no matter how your crucified, nailed to the cross at home, or in your personal relationships, or on the job that you can rise if you don’t lose yourself during the hard times and the challenges.  

The story of Jesus on the cross. no matter what they humiliated him with. no matter how they mocked him he took it, because he knew he could rise. And the story of Easter and my message for this Easter session is no matter what unearned suffering you go through, that if you know you can rise above it, don’t become like the diseases that you fight.  

That’s not the worst of it. He is attempting, during an appearance on The Tom Joyner Show, to give some words of inspiration as Christians around the world prepare for Easter which celebrates the day Jesus Christ rose from the dead after being crucified on a cross. 

But, after this initial message, Sharpton’s idolatry of Obama took a blasphemous turn.

As I looked at President Obama at our convention last Friday where all he took he’s been able to rise politically again.. I’m not comparing him to Jesus, but I am saying that to every crucifixion there is a resurrection for those who believe…” 

Just a Quick Note.


My Own Two CentsI was just listening to President Obama speaking during his manipulated NEWS conference. I reminded of a problem we seem to have with our ENGLISH language.

A “LIAR” is someone who is incapable of telling the truth Jesus identified this as recorded in John’s Gospel; 42″ Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. 43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46 Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47 He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.”  (John 8:42-47; NIV)

After listening to President Obama and the words falling out of his mouth, led me to believe that he might have has lost all ability to tell the Obamabot Armytruth. Knowing that what he was saying, has already been proven true, he deliberately decides to tell the same lie again. Adding to that bad choice is his deliberate instructions to his “Obamabot” Army to follow his example and not tell the truth. 

Jerry Broussard

 

 

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


“Meanwhile”

 

President Obama’s Bogus Voting Rights Claims


http://blog.heritage.org/2014/04/16/president-obamas-bogus-voting-rights-claims/

Photo: Pete Souza

Last Friday, in a speech at Al Sharpton’s National Action Network conference, President Obama proudly announced that the Justice Department had taken on more than 100 voting rights cases since 2009. The problem with that claim is that, since 2009, the Justice Department has taken on only 39 voting rights cases—and as former Voting Section lawyer Christian Adams points out, only 13 were related to protecting minority voting rights. And, with respect to some of the cases in which the department has been involved, it lost spectacularly—such as its false claim that South Carolina’s voter ID law was discriminatory.

Perhaps President Obama misspoke when he overstated the number of voting rights cases by more than 60—or perhaps he was misinformed by his Attorney General, Eric Holder. In fact, the ever-criticized Bush administration had a much better enforcement record with much higher case numbers than the Obama administration, as was outlined in a report released by the Justice Department’s Inspector General in March 2013. President Obama also made no mention of his administration’s unjustified dismissal of the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party—that would, after all, not fit the narrative he is trying to propagate. Regardless, President Obama’s exaggerated claims come as no surprise, especially given the setting of this particular speech.

Al Sharpton’s National Action Network conference in New York City, where Bertha Lewis, the former CEO of ACORN, an organization convicted of numerous voter registration frauds, participated in a panel discussion earlier in the week, was the perfect arena for the President’s inaccurate claims. In her remarks, Lewis declared that there is a “great fear” of what she called the “darker…new majority” that she says wields power in America. She went on to say that supporters of voter ID laws are attempting to implement a “South African apartheid-type thing where the masters of the universe still rule.” She is apparently unaware that Nelson Mandela, South Africa’s former president, supported voter ID laws or that South Africa today has much stricter ID requirements than any state in America.

Consider also that Al Sharpton keynoted a voting rights rally in Ohio this March where convicted voting fraudster and former Ohio poll worker Melowese Richardson was brought onto the stage and given a hero’s welcome. Sharpton embraced Richardson, despite her 2013 sentencing in state court for six counts of voter fraud (as well as her previous convictions for intimidating and threatening a witness in a case against her brother, DUI, theft, and participating in a bar fight). During the investigation into Ms. Richardson’s fraud, she showed no remorse for abusing her role as a guardian of the polls. As Judge Robert P. Ruehlman of Ohio put it, Richardson’s actions diluted her fellow citizens’ votes and infringed on the sacred doctrine of “one person, one vote.”

In light of President Obama’s claim that voting rights “justice” is being administered by the Department of Justice, it is worth noting that Melowese Richardson was never charged by the Justice Department—even though she admitted, on camera, to having voted for President Obama multiple times in 2012, which is a felony under federal law. This type of behavior may explain another claim by President Obama at last week’s conference: that there were “only 10 cases of alleged in-person voter impersonation in 12 years.”

If the DOJ is going to ignore cases in which voter fraud is being openly admitted, their prosecution statistics will continue to lose any semblance of credibility. Not surprisingly, the President ignored the hundreds of people that North Carolina just discovered to have voted twice in the 2012 election and the numerous other cases of voter fraud that have been successfully prosecuted over the past decade by state and local authorities. That wouldn’t fit his narrative either.

The President denounces voter fraud as myth, while ignoring documented cases of blatant voter fraud. In his Friday speech, President Obama said that all Americans must have an equal right to vote and that he is in favor of common sense reform to secure the ballot. Voter fraud prevents Americans from holding an equal right to vote because, as Judge Ruehlman said, the votes of honest Americans are diminished when fraud is committed. And what could be a more common sense reform than requiring the same kind of ID that the government requires visitors to show when they enter a government building—such as the White House or the Department of Justice?

Posted in Front Page, Legal [slideshow_deploy

Obama’s Perfect Track Record on Crony Capitalism


http://lastresistance.com/5419/obamas-perfect-track-record-crony-capitalism/#WtdAXfgbyDesPLwt.99

Posted By on Apr 15, 2014

solyndra crony capitalism 

It seems like Obama would try to be a little less transparent about the crony capitalism that has marked his administration. But apparently, it doesn’t matter to his supporters what he does. A tip for big corporations jockeying for favors from Obama’s DoJ: Make sure you donate heavily to the Democratic Party and/or Obama favorites. If you do, you’ll get huge favors. But if your executives contribute to opponents of Obama, you’re not getting anywhere.

If this correlation were not so well-documented, I would be hesitant to make such a blanket statement. But I’m actually not exaggerating in the least. A report in Frontiers of Freedom outlines just a few of the most egregious examples of Obama’s crony capitalism at work: from Solyndra to Quality Software Services to Big Labor, the Obama administration has been perfectly faithful to reward its big donors and supporters. And, on the other hand, Obama has been equally faithful to punish its detractors.

Take the failed 2011 merger of AT&T and T-Mobile:

Processing of the application by the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Justice was expected to take at least twelve months.  But five months later, the Department of Justice announced it would file a lawsuit blocking the friendly merger.

Leading the merger quest was AT&T CEO Randall L. Stephenson.  Mr. Stephenson is well known to be a Bible Belt, pro-free market, Republican with a reputation as a fierce executive with a head for numbers.  He is a proponent of tax reforms that include broadening the tax base and lowering tax rates as a formula for economic growth, rather than the Administration’s position of making the rich pay more of their “fair share” while government makes subjective decisions about redistributing the wealth of the working class.

If only Stephenson had been an Obama supporter, he would been assured the success of his merger. Just look at Comcast and Time Warner. The merger looks like a shoe in, in spite of the fact that the merger is worth a few billion more dollars than the AT&T merger and would also result in a 40% market share for one company. The only significant difference between the cell phone merger and the cable company merger (aside from the fact that the Comcast merger has even more severe consequences to consumer choice) is that AT&T is led by a Republican and Comcast/Time Warner are headed by Democrats.

Community Organizer Two

Complete Message

 

Obama Politicizes Easter: Chooses Gay Priest who Works for Soros-Funded Group to Deliver Prayer


My Own Two CentsOnce again President Obama has deliberately, with forethought, insulted every Evangelical Christian around the world. Politically it might not hurt him, but remember the warning from the Apostle Paul ,, inspired by The Holy Spirit, when he wrote to the Galatian Church, Don’t be misled: No one makes a fool of God. What a person plants, he will harvest. The person who plants selfishness, ignoring the needs of others — ignoring God! —  harvests a crop of weeds. All he’ll have to show for his life is weeds! But the one who plants in response to God, letting God’s Spirit do the growth work in him, harvests a crop of real life, eternal life. (Galatians 6:7-8; (from THE MESSAGE: The Bible in Contemporary Language © 2002 by Eugene H. Peterson. All rights reserved.))

Jerry Broussard

Three Star Line

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/04/15/obama-politicizes-easter-chooses-gay-priest-who-works-for-soros-funded-group-to-deliver-prayer/

Obama
In the ultimate politicization of the Easter, a day on which Christians around the world celebrate Jesus Christ rising from the dead, Obama delivered a prayer which was beyond childlike, it was almost insulting, then turned to the controversial Episcopalian ‘priest’ Gene Robinson to deliver the closing prayer. 

As reported by Twitchy, here is the prayer that Obama said at Easter breakfast.

Easter 01

According to his tweet, Robinson was not expecting Obama to have him close out the breakfast in prayer.

Easter 02

Robinson married a woman in 1970, then divorced in 1986 after admitting his homosexuality. He became involved in an openly homosexual relationship with a Peace Corp volunteer in 1988. His actions caused a schism within the Episcopal Church. After delegates to the church convention ratified Robinson’s as bishop coadjutor, a large faction of the church split, forming the Anglican Church in North American, in opposition to having an openly and practicing homosexual as a spiritual leader in the church. Though he had, despite his homosexuality, thought that marriage should be a man and a woman, he eventually changed his mind and married his partner in 2008.

Robinson has since retired and now works for the George Soros funded, far-left, radical progressive ‘think-tank’ the Center for American Progress.

Leave it to Obama to turn the sacred Christian day of Easter into a political statement.

About Jennifer Burke

Jennifer BurkeJennifer Burke became politically active for the first time at the Porkulus Tea Party in Seattle in February 2009. She was a speaker at the Seattle Tax Day Tea Party at Westlake Center on April 15, 2010, was featured in a popular Tea Party video, Proud to be a Teabagger, that has gone viral on YouTube and many top conservative blogs, and was a speaker at the WA 4 WI rally in support of Scott Walker. View all Posts by Jennifer Burke

MUST READ AND SHARE!!!!! The Destructiveness of Obamacare in Pictures


http://www.tpnn.com/2014/04/14/the-destructiveness-of-obamacare-in-pictures/

Premiums_Age27

The Heritage Foundation has put together the impact of Obamacare in pictures. This is visual evidence that Obamacare is not only not working, but it is destructive. Above is but one of those pictures which reveals the economic impact of Obamacare on 27 year olds. 
The accompanying full pictures below looks at areas ranging from canceled policies, reduced choices, new taxes and more.

Slide Show

Complete Message

<!–

–>

 

New Yorker Mag Declares Obamacare Victory With Cartoon Cover of Obama Feeding ‘Petulant Children’ of the GOP


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2014/04/07/new-yorker-mag-declares-obamacare-victory-cartoon-cover-obama-feeding-pe#ixzz2yGDFQUHF

Tim Graham's picture

By Tim Graham | April 7, 2014 | 22:11

Here’s another bizarre “victory lap” for Obamacare, courtesy of the latest cover of The New Yorker magazine. It shows a happy Obama spoon-feeding his medicine to Republican children.

Cover artist Barry Blitt proclaimed “I enjoyed drawing Ted Cruz, John Boehner, and Michele Bachmann as petulant children—and I especially wanted to draw an open-mouthed Mitch McConnell being spoon-fed his meds.”

The cover has no relation to an article inside the magazine. It’s just meant to be topical — and is drawing none of the outrage that Blitt’s “Politics of Fear” cover with terrorist Michelle and Muslim Barack attracted in 2008, even though Blitt was mocking conservatives, then, too. Then announced that it “satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the Presidential election to derail Barack Obama’s campaign.”

Liberal journalists love mocking Republicans as in serious need of Obama’s wisdom and care.

About the Author

Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center

Complete Message

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


One Big-Gas Distraction

Posted on April 8, 2014

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/04/one-big-gas-distraction/#C2QduFyPy0q5RypC.99

One-Big-Gas-Distraction

Community Organizer Two

 

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


Titanic “Obamacare”

Posted on April 7, 2014

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/04/titanic-obamacare/#09rcVxZR4PX1dDzW.99

Titanic-ObamaCare

Complete Message

Community Organizer Two

Franklin Graham: Obama is Waging an “Anti-Christ” War Against God


http://conservativetribune.com/obama-war-against-god/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

 

We’ve reported extensively on Christian leaders’ comments on Barack Obama and his war on the Christian faith.

The Vatican has been a vocal opponent of Obama’s policies on life, marriage, and religious liberty.  The pope chewed Obama out over these issues when they met last week, and the Chief Justice of the highest court of the Vatican said that Obama was waging war on “Christian civilization.”

In the evangelical world, Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, has been going after Obama’s pushing the gay agenda down everyone’s throats.  He said that he and Holder have “turned their backs on God and His standards.”  He has also reiterated that despite becoming a minority in his views on homosexuality, he won’t cave, no matter the consequences.

Graham recently discussed how Obama has been pushing the gay agenda down the throats of the military, even threatening them with their jobs if they don’t accept gays.  This is part of a larger effort by some in the White House to secularize the military and push chaplains out of their former roles as ministers to soldiers.  He said that Obama’s administration is “anti-Christ” in what it says and does.

Via CNSNews.com:

Franklin Graham made his comments during a Mar. 24 interview with Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, which published an updated report on religious persecution in the U.S. armed forces this month.

During the interview on Washington Watch Weekly, Perkins asked Graham, “I would have to believe you’re also tracking, in fact I know you’re tracking because you were a part of it – when you were scheduled to speak at the Pentagon a few years ago they disinvited you – are you concerned about this intense religious hostility that we see manifesting in our nation’s military?”

Graham said, ““No question. And my son just got back from his seventh [military] tour this weekend.  So, I love the military. There has been huge pressure on the chaplains in our military – and our chaplains have been a wonderful thing for the military. But there is a move to get rid of the chaplains in our country, and to completely secularize our military. Actually, they are hostile to Christians.

“A lot of this is coming from this administration and is being pushed by people within the White House,” said Graham.  “And when I say White House, I’m not saying the president, because I’m not sure how much of this he’s aware of.  But it’s people that work for him that have power, that are sitting in offices, and they are hostile to Christ.”

“They are anti-Christ in what they say and in what they do,” said Graham.  “And they are pushing this agenda into the military. It’s scary.”

These are some bold statements from a prominent Christian leader.  Too often, we see theologians and pastors rationalize what’s happening in culture, whether it’s gays or other cultural trends, rather than taking a prophetic approach and speaking out against our increasingly destructive society.  Good for him for standing up for Obama and going after liberals for shoving their social agenda down the throats of Americans.

Obama Told Military Leaders: Accept Gays In Military Or Step Down, Admiral Says


http://www.buzzfeed.com/ellievhall/obama-told-military-leaders-accept-gays-in-military-or-step?sub=3128182_2704196

In a 2010 meeting in the Oval Office, the president told service chiefs they could “go do other things” if they didn’t support abolishing DADT, Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Robert Papp said.

posted on March 31, 2014 at 6:37pm EDT

<<<<<File: August 2010 / Pool / Getty Images

In a meeting with the heads of the five service branches in 2010, President Obama offered the leaders a choice: Support my efforts to end the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, or resign, the Commandant of the Coast Guard said.

In a video obtained by BuzzFeed via a Freedom of Information Act request, Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Robert Papp revealed that Obama was unwilling to compromise with service leaders over DADT during a meeting in 2010. “We were called into the Oval Office and President Obama looked all five service chiefs in the eye and said, ‘This is what I want to do.’ I cannot divulge everything he said to us, that’s private communications within the Oval Office, but if we didn’t agree with it — if any of us didn’t agree with it — we all had the opportunity to resign our commissions and go do other things,” he said.

Tyranney Alert

Papp talked about the meeting during a Q&A session with U.S. Coast Guard Academy cadets following a leadership address to the corps on Jan 8. The admiral was asked how officers should respond to policies that they disagreed with but were required to enforce. “If I disagree morally with [a policy], it’s my obligation to voice that, regardless of the risk it might give my career,” he said. “I’ve been in those situations. I’ve been fortunate to have good leaders that have appreciated that.” Using himself as an example, Papp said it was OK for leaders to “not be thrilled” with a certain regulation, but if they didn’t “see anything terribly wrong with it,” it was their job as officers to support and enforce it.

The admiral, who will be retiring from active duty on May 30, added that he thought the U.S. military made the right decision by abolishing DADT.

In a 2008 interview, then-Senator Obama told The Advocate that he wouldn’t make support of DADt’s repeal “a litmus test” for his military leaders. “What I want are members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who are making decisions based on what strengthens our military and what is going to make us safer, not ideology.”

SEE RECORDING OF Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Robert Papp;

DADT

BuzzFeed has reached out to the White House for comment.

Networks Snub Obama On Primetime Health Care Address


http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/the-white-house-tried-to-get-network-primetime-on

The White House sought primetime air the day Obamacare hit 7 million signups.

posted on April 3, 2014 at 4:24pm EDT

WASHINGTON — White House officials sought valuable primetime air for a rare, impromptu Tuesday night address to tout the accomplishment of signing up more than 7 million people under the Affordable Care Act.

But network officials refused to make the kind of accommodation they did previously for the announcement that Osama Bin Laden had been killed, for instance, and Obama was left instead cutting into the much smaller audiences of Ellen and other daytime shows.

Three sources familiar with the request confirmed the White House asked for the primetime slot in their effort both to emphasize a bright moment following the challenging roll out and, more important, to try to reintroduce the country to a law that remains unpopular. One top White House official referred BuzzFeed to another top official for comment on the conversation with networks, but the second official did not respond to a request for comment.

People familiar with the request declined to reveal which network blocked the primetime address, but broadcast networks have traditionally been much more reluctant than cable networks to provide the White House with evening air time.

Instead of the primetime speaking slot the White House wanted, Obama and Vice President Joe Biden lauded the accomplishment in a less formal Rose Garden address that was alternately celebratory and hard-edged.

“In the end, history is not kind to those who would deny Americans their basic economic security. Nobody remembers well those who stand in the way of America’s progress or our people,” Obama said.

The White House rarely asks for primetime broadcast TV time for Obama outside the traditional State of the Union address. Indeed, the Oval Office message is one of the traditional venues for presidential communications Obama’s team has shunned in favor of digital and nontraditional media tools that don’t require the help of established media. But while a primetime address remains a powerful tool available only to the sitting president, networks face a different imperative: protecting their profitable primetime lineup.

Complete Message

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


What A Sham

Posted on April 3, 2014

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/04/sham/#JJ3ZOPsHrYGGapWV.99

What-A-Sham

Community Organizer Two

Complete Message

No, Mr. President. The debate is NOT over.


http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/no-mr-president_786420.html

8:01 AM, Apr 2, 2014 • By WILLIAM KRISTOL

 

President Obama said yesterday:

“The debate over repealing this law is over. The Affordable Care Act is here to stay. … In the end, history is not kind to those who would deny Americans their basic economic security. Nobody remembers well those who stand in the way of America’s progress or our people. And that’s what the Affordable Care Act represents. As messy as it’s been sometimes, as contentious as it’s been sometimes, it is progress.

What Republican will stand up today and say something like this:

“No, Mr. President. No way, Mr. President. We do not accept, we do not acquiesce in, this deplorable piece of legislation. The debate is not over. The debate will continue. It must continue. What is at stake is sound health care policy for America. But what is also at stake is reversing your attempt, Mr. President, to transform a free country committed to limited government into merely another nation burdened with the worst aspects of big-government nanny-statism.’

“Mr. President, you have been elected our 44th president. We of course accept that, and we understand that you will continue to fight for your legislation and threaten to veto attempts to repeal and replace it.

  • But we do not accept that you get to decide that the debate is over.

  • We do not accept that you acquire any moral authority by claiming to enlist “history” on your side.

  • We do not accept that your attempt to expand welfare state at the expense of individual liberty and the rule of law is true “progress.”‘

“President Obama, you might wish the debate were over. You might think you can intimidate us into conceding the debate is over. But you are wrong. The Republican party stands committed, acting through democratic means and as the agent of a self-governing people, to repealing and replacing Obamacare.”

I don’t see anyone standing.

WE MUST NEVER FORGET

Complete Message

 

Three Quarters of Enrollees in Obamacare to See Premiums Rise


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/03/31/Three-Quarters-of-People-Enrolled-in-Obamacare-To-See-Premiums-Rise

The Affordable Care Act, which the president promised would reduce the typical American family’s health insurance by $2,500 per year, has in fact raised insurance costs for three-quarters of Obamacare policy holders, according to the CEO of the Cleveland Clinic.

In June of 2008, Barack Obama promised, “It’s time to bring down the typical family’s premium by about $2,500. And it’s time to bring down the costs for the entire country.” Moreover, four months later in October he said, “The only thing we’re gonna try to do is lower costs so that those cost savings are passed on to you. And we estimate we can cut the average family’s premium by about $2,500 a year.” Community Organizer Two

Indeed, Obama promised it many times, but Dr. Toby Cosgrove says it’s simply not true. “About three-quarters of them find that their premiums are higher than they had been previously with other insurance,” Cosgrove told Fox News.

Furthermore, Dr. Cosgrove asserted that Obamacare is having a  “major effect” upon health care providers. “We know for example that we’re going to get paid less for what we do,” the doctor explained. “Hospitals are going to be paid less for what they do. We also know that insurers are paying less for what we do.”

Meanwhile, on Monday, the last day of open enrollment for Obamacare and much like the first day of open enrollment, the federal website HealthCare.gov was shut down for several hours.

 

Complete Message

 

Rev. Graham: Obama and Holder ‘Have Turned Their Backs on God’


Franklin Graham on Gay Marriage: ‘God Will Judge This Nation for Our Refusal to Obey His Word’

Franklin Graham. (AP)

(CNSNews.com) – Rev. Franklin Graham said that Russian President Vladimir Putin was right to enforce a law to protect Russian children from gay propaganda, adding that President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder were wrong about homosexuality and have “turned their backs on God and His standards, and many in the Congress are following the administration’s lead.”

Rev. Graham, who heads the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association (BGEA) and is the son of the world-renowned preacher Billy Graham, made his remarks in a commentary in the March issue of Decision magazine, which is published by BGEA.

Graham noted that the Russian law is designed to protect children by banning the “propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations to minors,” and that “America’s response to Putin’s law was sadly predictable.”

“President Obama intentionally included homosexuals in his official U.S. delegation to Sochi [Olympics],” said Graham. “Then his attorney general stole headlines from the opening weekend with an announcement to the Human Rights Campaign” that as “far as the federal government is concerned, there is no longer any difference between traditional and same-sex marriage – even in the 33 states that outlaw those marriages.”

“It’s obvious that President Obama and his administration are pushing the gay-lesbian agenda in America today and have sold themselves completely to that which is contrary to God’s teaching,” said Graham.

President Barack Obama and Atty. Gen. Eric Holder

President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder (AP Photo)

“Isn’t it sad, though, that America’s own morality has fallen so far that on this issue – protecting children from any homosexual agenda or propaganda – Russia’s standard is higher than our own?” said the reverend.  Putin may be wrong on many issues, he continued, “but he has taken a stand to protect his nation’s children from the damaging effects of any gay and lesbian agenda.”

Forsake not the little children to come unto me

Forsake not the little children to come unto me

“Our president and his attorney general have turned their backs on God and His standards, and many in the Congress are following the administration’s lead,” said Graham. “This is shameful. The world used to look to America for moral leadership. But those days are long gone. “

In conclusion, he said,  “Today, we’ve abdicated our moral leadership. We defeated communism, only to relax and see secularism and progressives take over our country. Secularism is as godless as communism. Secularists and progressives have taken over our schools, media, and local and federal government. And it has all happened in the twinkling of an eye.”

In addition to running the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association (BGEA), Frankling Graham is the CEO of the international Christian charity Samaritan’s Purse.   Franklin Graham, 61, is married, has five children, and lives in Boone, North Carolina.  He  often speaks on cultural and political issues. He has been a strong critic of radical Islam

- See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/rev-graham-obama-and-holder-have-turned-their-backs-god#sthash.O6TXSX2N.dpuf

 

Condoleezza Rice Takes on Obama


http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joseph-klein/condoleezza-rice-takes-on-obama/

&lt;img src=”http://b.scorecardresearch.com/p?c1=8&c2=15579784&c3=65203&c15=&cv=2.0&cj=1&#8243; />condiFormer Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice – our last competent Secretary of State – has been aggressive in criticizing President Obama’s failed foreign policy. And she has the experience and expertise to do so with authority. While nobody really expects the Obama administration or most Democrats in Congress to pay Dr. Rice any heed, the Republican Party better be listening and raise its collective voice against the dangerous path that Obama is taking this country down. 

Dr. Rice is particularly concerned with the “vacuum” in world leadership resulting from the Obama administration’s leading from behind policies. The vacuum is being filled by the likes of Russian President Vladimir Putin. As Dr. Rice wrote in an op-ed article appearing in the Washington Post on March 7th, “dictators and extremists across the globe will be emboldened” if the United States abandons muscular diplomacy and eschews its global responsibilities as the leader of the free world.

The Obama administration’s attempt to extend “hands of friendship to our adversaries, sometimes at the expense of our friends,” such as the administration’s “reset” button with Russia, has obviously not worked, Dr. Rice has pointed out.

For those who might say that Condoleezza Rice is hypocritically skipping over Russia’s push into Georgia in 2008 during the presidency of George W. Bush while she criticizes the Obama administration’s ineffectiveness in dealing with the Ukraine crisis, Rice set the record straight in her op-ed article:

After Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, the United States sent ships into the Black Sea, airlifted Georgian military forces from Iraq back to their home bases and sent humanitarian aid. Russia was denied its ultimate goal of overthrowing the democratically elected government, an admission made to me by the Russian foreign minister.

But even those modest steps did not hold. Despite Russia’s continued occupation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the diplomatic isolation waned and then the Obama administration’s ‘reset’ led to an abrupt revision of plans to deploy missile defense components in the Czech Republic and Poland.

President Obama said last week in The Hague that he was “much more concerned when it comes to our security with the prospect of a nuclear weapon going off in Manhattan” than he was about any threat from Russia. Fair enough, but Obama’s agreement to fruitless negotiations with Iran and easing the pressure of sanctions in the meantime, while Iran advances its nuclear arms and missile delivery programs, is making that nightmare more likely. So is his failure to deal adequately with the spread of al Qaeda and its affiliates throughout the Middle East and Africa, as well as the infiltration of Iran’s proxy Hezbollah in Latin America. And rather than worry about the real threat of nuclear and chemical weapons of mass destruction in the hands of terrorists as the most significant threat to homeland security, why is Obama’s Secretary of State John Kerry foolishly declaring that “climate change can now be considered the world’s largest weapon of mass destruction, perhaps even the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction?”

Dr. Rice expressed particular concern that withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan without a reasonable amount of residual military presence may repeat the disastrous aftermath of the Obama administration’s precipitous decision to withdraw all American troops from Iraq. Al Qaeda returned with a vengeance to launch widespread lethal attacks in Iraq and threaten its viability after they had been largely defeated as a result of the successful surge that President George W. Bush had ordered in the face of opposition by then Senator Obama, John Kerry and many other members of the Democratic Party of Defeat.

Addressing more than two thousand people attending the National Republican Congressional Committee’s annual dinner on March 26th, Dr. Rice also warned about the dangerous consequences of a shrinking military budget:

Our values and our interests require defense. As Ronald Reagan famously said, peace really only comes through strength. What are we doing? What are we doing when we’re talking about a defense budget that is so small that our military starts to tell us that we may not in fact be able to carry out all of the requirements put upon it?

President Obama wants to reduce the force level of the United States Army to its smallest size since 1940 and drop an entire class of Air Force attack jets.

While understanding the weariness of the American people after two long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and more than a decade fighting global terrorism, Dr. Rice said that “leaders can’t afford to get tired. Leaders can’t afford to be weary.”

The Obama administration is operating on the dangerous assumption that America can lead from behind by relying on our European allies, even though they are unable to get their act together to take any effective measures against Russia over Ukraine, for example. President Obama also hides behind the apron strings of the fuzzy norms of international law, which he insists everyone in the 21st century is expected to follow as a matter of course. President Obama believes that even the Iranian regime can be dealt with rationally in good faith negotiations. This is the same regime ruled by Ayatollah Khamenei, who reportedly issued a fatwah declaring that he must be obeyed as the “representative of the Prophet Muhammad and [Shi'ism's] 12th Imam on Earth.”

Unfortunately, what President Obama says in his speeches regarding how he thinks all world leaders should act bears little resemblance to how the leaders of our adversaries are actually acting in the real world.

Republican leaders in Congress and elsewhere need to follow Dr. Rice’s example and directly challenge the basic tenets of Obama’s foreign policy. They need to clearly contrast Obama’s tenets with the principles that Republicans stand for, which if implemented will keep the United States and its allies free and secure. The United States must lead from the front, not from behind as Obama would prefer. An American president should give America’s allies such as Israel the benefit of the doubt, not those who time and again have proven that their word cannot be trusted as President Obama has tended to do. As Putin follows a more aggressive foreign policy and jihadists are expanding their bases of operations, now is not the time to radically cut America’s military defenses as President Obama wants to do. Peace is truly won through strength, not by planned weakness in cutting the U.S. military down to size in order to supposedly improve America’s image in parts of the world where we are not liked. As jihadists, who want to kill as many Americans as they can, get closer to possessing weapons of mass destruction, now is not the time for John Kerry to raise a red herring about climate change as possibly “the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction.” In fact, to achieve energy independence for the United States and our European allies, the radical environmentalists should be told to return to their environmentally protected shells while such initiatives as the Keystone Pipeline and the export of liquefied natural gas are finally allowed to go forward.

Few Republican leaders in Congress have been as bold to date as Dr. Rice in directly challenging the foundational principles that animate the Obama administration’s foreign policy and have led to disastrous outcomes. Some are all too willing to give President Obama the benefit of the doubt, a courtesy that Democrats including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, former Senator (now Secretary of State) John Kerry and Barack Obama himself refused to do in their relentless and at times vicious attacks on President George W. Bush’s foreign policies. It would be perfectly appropriate for Republicans to point out that while Bush’s surge was widely credited with winning the war in Iraq against the insurgents, Obama’s decision to withdraw all troops from Iraq managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. And it would also be perfectly appropriate for Republicans to point out that while Ronald Reagan helped win the Cold War, leading to the collapse of the Soviet Union, Obama is managing to midwife the rebirth of the Russian empire.

When some Republican congressional leaders such as Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham do level a sharp criticism, it tends to deal with specific episodes such as the Obama administration’s mishandling of the Benghazi debacle. Hopefully, as it becomes painfully obvious by mid-summer to all but the willfully ignorant that there will never be a verifiable deal with the Iranian regime to dismantle Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities and to curb its missile program, Republicans will insist on the passage of new sanctions against Iran and work with like-minded Democrats to ensure veto-proof majorities.

The world is a far more dangerous place than when President Obama first took office in 2009. A fundamental reason, as Condoleezza Rice said in her speech at the 2012 Republican Convention, is that under President Obama’s watch the world does not know where America stands. “You see,” she said, “when the friends or foes alike don’t know the answer to that question, unambiguously and clearly, the world is likely to be a more dangerous and chaotic place.”

This should be the key foreign policy message during both the 2014 midterm election campaign and in 2016. Particularly if Hillary Clinton runs for president, perhaps the Republican slogan against candidates from the Democratic Party of Defeat can be “Strong American leadership DOES make a difference.”

THE MOST IMPORTANT REPORT YOU WILL READ TODAY: America, Revolution is at hand


Reported by Matt Barber

on 29 March, 2014 at 19:00

http://barbwire.com/2014/03/29/america-revolution-hand/#o0mfQlHEaD2KYxki.99

 

obama-communist-sc A preferred ploy of left-wing change agents is to ridicule critics when they point out the undeniable parallels between the goals of today’s “progressive” movement, to include the Democratic Party in general, and the goals of the early, and very much still alive, communist movement.

If, for instance, one mentions the historical fact that nearly every adult who, at any time, was in any position of influence over a young, soon-to-be-radicalized Barry Soetoro was an avowed communist, to include his own parents, then one is immediately mocked and dismissed as a neo-McCarthyite hack pining for the bygone days of the Red Scare. This is an evasive, ad hominem strategy employed by those who are caught, for lack of a better word, red-handed.

To all this I say, if the jackboot fits, wear it. If it quacks like a commie and goose-steps like a commie, then a commie it is.

There are multiple layers within “progressivism’s” pseudo-utopian, truly dystopian Marxist philosophy. The left’s lust for redistributionist statism is well-known. Less understood, however, is the “progressive” rush toward cultural Marxism.

Cultural Marxism entails, among other things, that secularist aspect of left-wing statist ideology that seeks, within society, to supplant traditional values, norms and mores with postmodern moral relativism. Cultural Marxists endeavor to scrub America of her Judeo-Christian, constitutional-republican founding principles, and take, instead, a secular-statist Sharpie to our beloved U.S. Constitution.

Historian and U.S. military affairs expert William S. Lind describes cultural Marxism as “a branch of western Marxism, different from the Marxism-Leninism of the old Soviet Union. It is commonly known as ‘multiculturalism’ or, less formally, Political Correctness. From its beginning, the promoters of cultural Marxism have known they could be more effective if they concealed the Marxist nature of their work, hence the use of terms such as ‘multiculturalism.’”

Pastor, attorney and Massachusetts gubernatorial candidate Scott Lively is globally admired by liberty-loving traditionalists. Conversely, he’s universally reviled by cultural Marxists. He drills down a bit deeper: “Cultural Marxism is a variation of the Marxist strategy to build a utopian socialist order on the ashes of Christian civilization, but through subversion of the moral culture, especially the elimination of the natural family, rather than solely through destruction of capitalism.”

True though this may be, the ideological seeds of contemporary cultural Marxism nonetheless sprout from deep within the dead soil of historical communism. It is not economic redistributionism alone through which “progressives” seek to both “fundamentally transform America” and otherwise conquer the world, but, rather, and perhaps primarily, it is also through victory over the pejoratively tagged “social issues” (i.e., the sanctity of marriage, natural human sexuality and morality, ending the abortion holocaust, religious liberty, the Second Amendment and the like).

This is neither speculative nor hyperbolic. Both the historical record and the U.S. Congressional Record bear out this sinister reality. Regrettably, today’s “low-information voters” as Rush Limbaugh calls them – to include the useful idiots within the GOP’s “moderate” and libertarian wings – are simply too lazy, shortsighted or both to learn the facts.

“Surrender on the ‘social issues’!” demands the GOP’s cultural Marxist-enabling kamikazes.

In 1963, U.S. Rep. A.S. Herlong Jr., D-Fla., read into the Congressional Record a list of “Current Communist Goals” as enumerated by Dr. Cleon Skousen in “The Naked Communist,” penned in 1958. I encourage you to read the whole list, but for now let’s focus on those goals that most closely align with the seditious agenda of America’s “progressive” movement. It’s actually most of them. Though Herlong was a Democrat, the list reads like today’s Democratic Party Platform.

How far has fallen the party of the jackass:

  • Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
  • Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist [or, today, Islamic] affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
  • Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist [or Islamic] domination.
  • Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
  • Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.
  • Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
  • Do away with all loyalty oaths.
  • Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
  • Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
  • Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
  • Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
  • Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
  • Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. (An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”)
  • Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
  • Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
  • Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
  • Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
  • Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principal of “separation of church and state.”
  • Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
  • Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
  • Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.”
  • Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture – education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
  • Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
  • Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
  • Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
  • Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
  • Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
  • Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.
  • Internationalize the Panama Canal.
  • Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.

If achieving these specific communist goals was the final “progressive” step toward the larger goal of securing communist governance in America, then, tragically, “progressives” have realized that larger goal.

Look around. We are no longer the United States of America. We have become The Communist States of America.

Which means, for those who love liberty, revolution is once again at hand.

Report: Obama Admin Released Tens of Thousands of Illegal Immigrant Criminals


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/03/30/REPORT-Obama-Admin-Released-Tens-Of-Thousands-Of-Illegal-Immigrant-Criminals#

President Obama’s Department of Homeland Security caught then released 68,000 aliens who had previously been convicted of a crime, a new report from the Center for Immigration Studies shows. See video below;

illegal immigrants release

The report, provided to Breitbart News ahead of its late Sunday evening release, reviews internal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) metrics to conclude that the Obama administration released 35 percent—or 68,000—convicted criminal aliens back into the U.S. general population when they could have been deported. “The criminal alien releases typically occur without formal notice to local law enforcement agencies and victims,” CIS’s Jessica Vaughan, the report’s author, added.

By “criminal,” ICE means people who have been convicted of a misdemeanor or felony that is not a traffic violation. For instance, traffic violations like Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol or even vehicular manslaughter do not count toward this description of “criminal alien.” As for the definition of “alien,” ICE mostly means illegal aliens, though some are legal aliens when they are considered deportable legal aliens—which is possible for legal immigrants who have committed a serious crime, like a felony.

The documents also show ICE only deported a small fraction of the aliens they encountered overall. See Neal Cavuto interview with Sheriff Joe Arpaio below;

Joe

“In 2013, ICE targeted only 195,000, or 25 percent, out of 722,000 potentially deportable aliens they encountered,” CIS’s Vaughan wrote. “Most of these aliens came to ICE’s attention after incarceration for a local arrest.”

This report comes out on the heels of a report from the office of Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) last week which found that only .08 percent of the aliens deported in 2013 were not serial immigration law violators or convicted of serious crimes.

In response to these findings from CIS that follow up on his office’s report last week, Sessions said immigration law in America has essentially ceased to exist.

“The preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that immigration enforcement in America has collapsed,” Sessions said. “Even those with criminal convictions are being released. DHS is a department in crisis. Secretary [Jeh] Johnson must reject the President’s demands to weaken enforcement further and tell him that his duty, and his officers’ duty, is to enforce the law – not break it. As Homeland Secretary, Mr. Johnson is tasked with ensuring the public safety and the rule of law. But Secretary Johnson is not meeting these duties.”

The CIS report also contains a breakdown per city of percentages of criminal aliens who were released back into the population. San Antonio’s 79 percent is the highest, where ICE encountered 36,228 criminal aliens and released 28,680 back into the general population in 2013. New York City’s 71 percent is next, where ICE agents encountered 7,571 criminal aliens and released 5,391 of them. Washington, D.C. follows that, with ICE agents encountering 8,688 criminal aliens and releasing 64 percent, or 5,558, of them into the public. Other cities with high percentages include Salt Lake City, Houston, Phoenix, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Newark, and Buffalo. Notably, many of these cities are not in border states, which means visa overstays and illegal aliens who crossed the border but migrated further inward are as much a problem as the actual U.S.-Mexico border in terms of stopping the flow and enforcing the law.

“These findings raise further alarm over the Obama administration’s pending review of deportation practices, which reportedly may further expand the administration’s abuse of ‘prosecutorial discretion,’” CIS’s Vaughan wrote. “Interior enforcement activity has already declined 40 percent since the imposition of “prosecutorial discretion” policies in 2011. Rather than accelerating this decline, there is an urgent need to review and reverse the public safety and fiscal harm cause by the president’s policies.”

Sessions echoed Vaughan’s concerns, saying the lack of enforcement for immigration laws further hurts the ability of American citizens to obtain employment.

“American citizens have a legal and moral right to the protections our immigration laws afford – at the border, the interior and the workplace,” Sessions said. “The administration has stripped these protections and adopted a government policy that encourages new arrivals to enter illegally or overstay visas by advertising immunity from future enforcement.  Comments from top Administration officials, such as Attorney General Holder’s claim that amnesty is a civil right, or Vice President Biden’s claim that those here illegally are all US citizens (apparently including someone whose visa expired yesterday), demonstrate the administration’s increasing belief in an open borders policy the American public has always rejected.”

Community Organizer Two

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


The Window to Their Soul

Posted on April 1, 2014

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/04/window-soul/#3ROI6wV4z6Qi4Ijy.99

The-Window-to-Their-Soul

Obama dismissed by Saudi King Abdullah?


http://theblacksphere.net/2014/3/obama-dissed-saudi-king#ytIiKOo0sfdl78I7.99

Barack Obama, King AbdullahObama was scheduled to have what was described as an “intimate” dinner with King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia over the weekend, and stay the night in the Kingdom. Howvever the dinner abruptly ended, and Obama left Saudi Arabia after only two hours.
Was there a national emergency in Obama’s Final Four bracket?

The objective of the visit was to  mend fences, and get the relationship between America and the Saudi’s back on track, so why the abrupt end?

Although the White House denies there was  dinner scheduled, apparently scrubbing all references to the soiree; there is some evidence still out there. It is rumored that the Obama administration has even demanded the return of all materials related to the event from the media, like copies of the printed schedule. The White House has even deleted a tweet about the “intimate” dinner.

Saudi 2

However, there remains a bit of evidence of the dinner that never was, and that abruptly ended as you can see from the screenshot of part of the AP story.

Here are two references from the lamestream media, and I suggest you monitor these as they will undoubtedly disappear soon, in the spirit of Obama-defined “transparency.”

Was Obama propositioned by King Abdullah? Or did the Saudi King simply dispatch Obama’s wimpy butt back to the U.S. We may never know.

Community Organizer Two

Today’s Political Cartoon


US appeals court upholds new Texas abortion rules

Posted on March 31, 2014

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/03/us-appeals-court-upholds-new-texas-abortion-rules/#QUR6YUJVZ2QICP5A.99

Obamacare-Putin-Roll-outs

Complete Message

 

The Shared Agendas of George Soros and Barack Obama


http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1276

By Discover The Networks
February 2011

 
While George Soros was busy bankrolling his battalion of established activist groups and launching a few new ones of his own, he quite naturally looked toward the upcoming presidential election of 2008 with great anticipation, eagerly awaiting the day when George W. Bush would finally leave office. The question was, who would replace him? In recent years, all indications had been that Soros favored Hillary Clinton above most, if not all, other potential Democratic candidates for President. But now there was a new face on the scene¯a young, charismatic U.S. senator from Illinois named Barack Obama¯who seemed not only to share virtually all of Soros’s values and agendas, but also appeared to be a highly skilled politician who stood a good chance of getting elected to the nation’s highest office.

In December of 2006, Soros, who had previously hosted a fundraiser for Obama during the latter’s 2004 Senate campaign, met with Obama in Soros’s New York office. Just a few weeks later¯on January 16, 2007¯Obama announced that he would form a presidential exploratory committee and was contemplating a run for the White House. Within hours, Soros sent the senator a contribution of $2,100, the maximum amount allowable under campaign-finance laws. Later that week, the New York Daily News reported that Soros would support Obama rather than Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination, though Soros pledged to back the New York senator were she to emerge as the nominee.1 But it was clear that Soros considered Obama to be the more electable candidate of the two. Most importantly, Obama’s economic and political prescriptions for America were wholly accordant with those of Soros.

Anti-Capitalism

Obama’s anti-capitalist background and views are well documented: His father was a communist; his mother was a communist sympathizer;2 in his youth he was mentored by the communist Frank Marshall Davis; he sought out Marxist friends and professors at Occidental College; he attended Socialist Scholars Conferences in New York; he was trained in the community-organizing methods of Saul Alinsky, a communist fellow traveler; he developed close ties to the pro-socialist community organization ACORN; he developed close personal and political ties to the infamous Marxists (and former domestic terrorists) Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn; he was hand-picked for his first political office by Alice Palmer, a pro-Soviet figure in Illinois; in the 1990s he became a member of the New Party, a socialist political coalition; he had close connections to the Midwest Academy, a radical training ground which author Stanley Kurtz has described as a “crypto-socialist organization”;3 and he spent twenty years attending the church of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who preaches the Marxist doctrines of liberation theology. As President, Obama appointed Carol Browner, a former “commissioner” of the Socialist International as his “environment czar”;4 he employed a White House communications director (Anita Dunn) who cited Mao Zedong as one of her “favorite political philosophers”;5 he appointed a “science czar,” John Holdren, who views capitalism as a system that is inherently destructive of the environment;6 he appointed Van Jones, a longtime revolutionary communist, as his “green jobs czar”;7 and he strongly favors the redistribution of wealth, both within the U.S. and across international borders. The list, of course, could go on and on.

George Soros, too, harbors many negative views about capitalism and free markets. “The entire edifice of global financial markets has been erected on the false premise that markets can be left to their own devices,” says Soros. “We must find a new paradigm and rebuild from the ground up.”8 According to Soros, the capitalist “belief that everybody pursuing his self-interest will maximize the common interest … is a false idea.”9 Calling the global capitalist system “deeply flawed,” Soros maintains that “as long as capitalism remains triumphant, the pursuit of money overrides all other social considerations.”10 As Soros sees things, capitalism “is today a greater threat than any totalitarian ideology.”11 Lamenting that “the richest 1 percent of the world’s population receive as much as the poorest 57 percent,”12 Soros suggests that only by reining in “global capitalism” can that gap be narrowed. He further complains that global capitalism, by encouraging the free flow of money across international borders, reduces the vital “ability of the state to provide Social Security to its citizens.”13 “The globalization of financial markets has rendered the welfare state that came into existence after World War II obsolete,” Soros explains, “because the people who require a social safety net cannot leave the country, but the capital the welfare state used to tax can.”14

Soros’s proposed remedy for this problem is a worldwide war on poverty that would transform the entire planet into a global welfare state, a sort of open-society alliance where “a kind of international central bank” could redistribute wealth from rich populations to poor ones.15 Toward this end, Soros announced in September 2006 that he would donate $50 million to the United Nations Millennium Project, a massive redistributive scheme calling for the governments of wealthy countries to commit 0.7% of their GNP to promoting “the economic development and welfare of developing countries.”16 Heading this Project (from 2002-2006) was Jeffrey Sachs, the economist who had worked with Soros in Russia during the Bill Clinton administration. As evidenced by his participation in the Millennium Project,17 Sachs has radically altered his former pro-capitalist positions. Indeed, in recent times he has praised socialists as “both the heirs and the leaders of the world’s most important and most successful political path”; he has lauded their “strong commitment to universalist ethical principles and fiscal re-distribution”; and he has voiced regret that America’s lack of “commitment to re-distribution” has “enabled a massive underclass to develop.”18

Similarly, George Soros sees “the global capitalist system in its present form” as “a distortion of what ought to be a global open society.”19 He suggests that if the “market fundamentalism in America” were “eliminated,” then “the public interest would be better served” by way of “a more equal distribution of wealth.”20

In a November 2008 interview, Soros was asked whether he supported programs falling under the rubric of “big-government” or “European-style ‘socialism.’” He replied, “That is exactly what we need now. I am against market fundamentalism. I think this propaganda that government involvement is always bad has been very successful—but also very harmful to our society.”21

In October 2009, Soros told a Central European University audience that “there is a deep-seated conflict between capitalism and open society.” He observed, moreover, that “Karl Marx['s] proposition” of communist redistributionism “was a very attractive idea” that might well have succeeded if not for the unfortunate fact that “the communist rulers put their own interests ahead of the interests of the people.”22 “The failure of the central planning model did not prove the validity of the free enterprise model,” says Soros. “… There is a better way of looking at the world. It is based on the postulate of radical fallibility, according to which all our constructs are flawed in one way or another. Specifically, both models—Communism and free enterprise, or market fundamentalism, as I have rechristened it—are deficient; the deficiency in each one can be cured only by taking some elements from the other.”23
The Call for Global Government

Soros’s desire for a worldwide welfare structure is consistent with his general preference for some form of global government. In 1998 he wrote that “insofar as there are collective interests that transcend state boundaries, the sovereignty of states must be subordinated to international law and international institutions.” “The greatest opposition to this idea,” he added somberly, “is coming from the United States.”24

Soros has continued to espouse this perspective ever since. At a 2003 event, a questioner asked Soros whether he and his foundations could “help to bring more foreign influence into the United States instead of relying on what is essentially a balance between Democrats and conservative Republicans, which hasn’t worked and is not about to start working.” Soros replied:

“I think you put your finger on a very important flaw in the current world order. And that is that only Americans have a vote in Congress. And yet it is the United States that basically determines policy for the world. That is a flaw in the current setup. I don’t think you can correct it by giving the Chinese government a vote in Congress. But it is a flaw, and I think this is where American leadership is needed, to take into account and respect the interests of others as well, in order to retain the dominant position we currently enjoy.”25

This call for increased “foreign influence” in American political life is congruent with President Obama’s position on the matter. In March 2009, for instance, Obama appointed Harold Koh, the dean of Yale Law School, as legal advisor to the U.S. State Department. Koh is an advocate of transnationalism, a concept arguing in favor of “global governance” as opposed to the constitutional sovereignty of independent nation-states. This perspective holds that the world’s most challenging problems are too complex and deep-rooted for any single country to address effectively on its own. The solution, says Koh, is for all members of the international community to recognize a set of supranational laws and institutions whose authority overrides those of any particular government.26

In March 2007, Koh chastised the U.S. for having “unwisely disengaged from various institutions that promote fundamental human rights, chief among them the International Criminal Court [which would subordinate American criminal-justice procedures in certain cases to those of an international tribunal] and the newly established Human Rights Council” of the United Nations¯a Council whose membership includes a number of nations known for their unrestrained anti-Semitism and human-rights abuses.27 President Obama ultimately announced, in 2009, that the U.S. would join the Council for the first time.28 In November 2010, this Council made headlines when it harshly berated America for its alleged discrimination against Muslims, its barbaric police practices, its use of torture against enemies abroad, and its religious intolerance.29

Another Obama official¯Eric P. Schwartz, the administration’s assistant secretary of state for population, refugees and migration¯formerly served as director of the U.S. Connect Fund, a Soros-financed organization that promotes global governance.30

Fiscal Policy

Just a few days after Barack Obama was elected President, George Soros stated: “I think we need a large stimulus package which will provide funds for state and local government to maintain their budgets¯because they are not allowed by the constitution to run a deficit. For such a program to be successful, the federal government would need to provide hundreds of billions of dollars. In addition, another infrastructure program is necessary. In total, the cost would be in the 300 to 600 billion-dollar range….”31

Soon thereafter, as one of the first priorities of his presidency, Obama pressured Congress to pass a monumental $787 billion economic-stimulus bill whose text was 1,071 pages long­¯and which few, if any, legislators read before voting on it. Obama stressed the urgency of passing this bill at the earliest possible moment, so as to forestall any further harm to the U.S. economy. Notably, the legislation repealed numerous essentials of the 1996 welfare-reform bill against which George Soros had so strongly rebelled.32 According to a Heritage Foundation report, 32 percent of the new stimulus bill—or an average of $6,700 in “new means-tested welfare spending” for every poor person in the U.S.—was earmarked for social-welfare programs.33 Such unprecedented levels of spending did not at all trouble Soros, who said: “At times of recession, running a budget deficit is highly desirable.”34 In December 2009, Obama concurred again—outlining a set of new multibillion-dollar stimulus and jobs proposals while explaining that America must continue to “spend our way out of this recession.”35

Taxes

In a 2008 interview with Bill Moyers, George Soros derided wealthy Americans who wished to have their tax burden lightened. According to Soros, such people were selfishly eager to “enjo[y] the fruits” of their affluence even as they viewed the act of “paying taxes” as “an absolute no-no”—indeed something veritably “unpatriotic.”36

By Soros’s telling, taxes are inherently desirable in good times and bad alike. In 2010, for instance, he stated that although the U.S. economy was in the midst of a prolonged downturn, it would be imprudent for lawmakers to extend the Bush-era tax cuts which were due to expire on January 1, 2011; such a course of action, he warned, would be “the wrong policy” and would cause the recession to deepen further.37 Soros proposed, instead, that the existing tax rates be permitted to return to their previous, higher levels, and that whatever extra revenue those elevated rates might generate should be used to finance yet another federal “stimulus” program.38 This suggestion was consistent with the funding priorities Soros has long pursued through his Open Society Institute. A substantial percentage of the organizations bankrolled by OSI favor high taxes to fill the coffers of an ever-expanding, government-run welfare state.

Likewise, Barack Obama’s long track record in support of high income taxes, capital gains taxes, and estate taxes for “the wealthy” is well documented.39 Thus it was not surprising that Obama, through most of his early presidency, adamantly opposed any extension of the Bush tax cuts beyond their scheduled expiration date. But as the economy foundered and the President’s popularity waned—to say nothing of the historic losses suffered by congressional Democrats in the midterm elections—Obama began to restrict his calls for a tax hike only to those in the highest income brackets.40 In the end, the President, recognizing that the electorate fiercely opposed higher taxes for anyone, pragmatically agreed to extend all the Bush tax cuts for two more years—a move that displeased George Soros greatly.41

Soros’s public stance in favor of higher tax rates for the wealthy is nothing short of remarkable, in light of the fact that he himself has taken some noteworthy measures to avoid paying taxes of his own. Consider, for instance, that his multi-billion-dollar Quantum Fund is actually incorporated on the tiny island of Curacao in the Netherlands Antilles, located in the Caribbean. As such, Soros avoids paying U.S. taxes on it. Americans who invest in his Fund likewise escape the tax man entirely. Their interest, dividends, and capital-gains earnings are taxed only if they are brought into the United States.42 And these investors are precisely the types of high earners who, according to Soros, should be willing to do their “patriotic” duty and pay the taxes that they can well afford; the minimum investment for the Quantum Fund is $100,000.43

By no means has the Quantum Fund been Soros’s only foray into tax-avoiding, offshore business enterprises. Indeed, Soros’s real-estate company, Mapeley Steps, is headquartered in yet another tax haven, Bermuda. In 2001 this firm purchased more than 600 buildings from Inland Revenue (Britain’s equivalent of the IRS) and then leased them to the British government for a princely sum—but paid no taxes, thanks to the Bermuda address.44

Just as Soros has spoken out against calls to reduce income taxes, so has he consistently sided against proposals to lower or eliminate the estate tax (a.k.a. “death tax”), calling it “a valuable taxation” because it “does not interfere with wealth creation” and it “increases social equality.”45 In 2003, Soros and some fellow billionaires went so far as to sign a public letter stating that a repeal of the estate tax “would enrich the heirs of America’s millionaires and billionaires while hurting families who struggle to make ends meet.”46 Yet Soros has creatively found a way for his own heirs to avoid paying any estate taxes, as he once explained:

“A charitable trust is a very interesting tax gimmick. The idea is that you commit your assets to a trust and you put a certain amount of money into charity every year. And then after you have given the money for however many years, the principal that remains can be left [to one's heirs] without estate or gift tax. So this is the way I set up the trust for my children.”47

Environmental and Energy Policy

George Soros is an avid proponent of cap-and-trade,48 a tax-based policy proposal designed to reduce Americans’ consumption of fossil fuels—coal, oil, and natural gas—and to speed up the nation’s transition to alternate forms of energy such as wind and solar power. The idea of cap-and-trade is founded on the planted axiom that the carbon-dioxide (CO2) emissions generated by human industrial activity create a greenhouse effect that is causing the earth’s climate to grow dangerously warm. Under cap-and-trade regulations, companies would be subject to taxes or fees if they exceed their government-imposed limit for CO2 emissions. Economists predict that such legislation, if enacted, would impose colossal costs on businesses¯costs that would be passed on to consumers, who in turn would pay anywhere from several hundred to several thousand extra dollars each year in energy costs.49 But to Soros, such a policy is well worth the price. “Dealing with global warming will require a lot of investment” and thus “will be painful,” he acknowledges, but “at least” it will enable humankind to “survive and not cook.” When asked in 2008 whether he was proposing energy policies that would “create a whole new paradigm for the economic model of the country, of the world,” Soros replied succinctly, “Yes.”50 By Soros’s reckoning, America today has “a great opportunity,” through cap-and-trade, “to finally deal with global warming and energy dependence.”51

In 2009, Soros announced that he intended to spend $10 million over a ten-year period to fund the formation of a new Climate Policy Initiative, designed to address global warming by “help[ing] nations achieve low-carbon development” in “the new energy economy.”52 In remarks he made at a January 2010 Investor Summit on Climate Risk at the United Nations, Soros impugned the U.S. as “the laggard” that, by not endorsing the initiatives which that been proposed a month earlier at an international climate-change conference in Copenhagen, had failed to provide adequate leadership with regard to environmental policy.53

Barack Obama, like Soros, is an unwavering backer of cap-and-trade. During his 2008 presidential campaign, Obama said: “[U]nder my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations.”54

The principal motive underlying the cap-and-trade policies that Obama and Soros support has been articulated by Obama’s “regulation czar,” Cass Sunstein, a longtime proponent of “distributive justice” whereby America would transfer much of its own wealth to poorer nations as compensation for the harm that U.S. environmental transgressions have allegedly caused in those countries. Sunstein speculates that “desirable redistribution” can be “accomplished more effectively through climate policy than through direct foreign aid.”55

Transforming America Through Immigration

In the spring of 2006 and again a year later, television viewers were treated to innumerable images of massive throngs of demonstrators flooding the streets of cities all across the United States, as they protested America’s allegedly unjust and punitive immigration policies. The participants in these rallies demanded such things as amnesty for illegals, paths to citizenship, expanded guest-worker programs, loosened border controls, an end to workplace immigration raids, and a generalized expansion of rights and privileges for illegal immigrants in the United States. These grievance-filled spectacles generated considerable public anxiety; in their size, scope, and execution, they were reminiscent of the “velvet revolution” demonstrations that Soros had bankrolled in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. The following groups — all heavily funded by, or otherwise affiliated with, George Soros and his Open Society Institute — were among the key organizers of the “immigrant-rights” demonstrations: ACORN, the American Friends Service Committee, the Center for Community Change, the League of United Latin American Citizens, the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the National Council of La Raza, and the Gamaliel Foundation.56

The immigration-related agendas of Barack Obama fit hand-in-glove with those of the foregoing Soros-affiliated activist groups. Indeed, the President has repeatedly called for “comprehensive immigration reform” — a euphemism for incremental amnesty. This is but an extension of the voting record that Obama compiled in the U.S. Senate, where he opposed workplace immigration raids; favored a “path to citizenship” so as to “bring people out of the shadows”; advocated laws that would permit illegal aliens to obtain driver’s licenses; supported the DREAM Act, which would allow illegals to attend college at the reduced tuition rates normally reserved for in-state legal residents; and opposed a Senate amendment calling for the withdrawal of federal assistance to “sanctuary cities” that flout federal immigration laws.57

In 2007 and 2008, Obama was a featured speaker at the annual conventions of the National Council of La Raza, which lobbies for racial preferences, mass immigration, and amnesty for illegal aliens. He lauded those in attendance for having worked so hard to “strengthe[n] America together.” “It’s been the work of this organization for four decades,” Obama said, “lifting up families and transforming communities across America. And for that, I honor you, I congratulate you, I thank you, and I wish you another forty years as extraordinary as your last.”58

While generally adorned with carefully crafted rhetoric of human rights and “family reunification,” there is in fact a more politically sinister motive underlying Obama’s and Soros’s support for groups that would not only transform illegals into U.S. citizens, but would also open the floodgates to further mass immigration from impoverished countries below America’s southern border. Obama and Soros alike are well aware that the vast majority of first-generation Hispanic immigrants, once naturalized, tend heavily to vote Democrat. Thus there is a great imperative to import, naturalize, and register as many of these voters as possible in the most expedient practicable manner.59 The ultimate, long-term objective is to establish a permanent Democratic voting bloc in the U.S. for generations to come.

A “Living” Constitution

With fidelity to his “open society” tenet that truth is an ever-evolving and ever-elusive concept, George Soros firmly rejects the notion that the U.S. Constitution is a document of unique or unrivaled merit¯or, by logical extension, that its original intent must be permanently revered and adhered to, rather than deconstructed or reinterpreted as the changing needs and preferences of the times may dictate. In April 2005, Soros’s Open Society Institute was a leading financial sponsor of a Yale Law School conference called “The Constitution in 2020,” promoted as an effort to produce “a progressive vision of what the Constitution ought to be.” Other major sponsors of the event included the American Constitution Society and the Center for American Progress¯both major recipients of Soros funding.60 Speakers at the conference repeatedly stressed the “evolutionary character of constitutional law”¯a premise crucial to the work of anyone who, like Soros, seeks to fundamentally transform a society.61

Barack Obama, who himself has openly vowed to “fundamentally transform” the United States, shares precisely this same view of the Constitution. In his 2006 book The Audacity of Hope, Obama wrote that the Constitution “is not a static but rather a living document and must be read in the context of an ever-changing world.” Moreover, he asserted that, if elected to the White House, he would not appoint a strict constructionist — one who seeks to apply the Constitution’s text as it is written and without further inference — to the Supreme Court.62 True to his word, President Obama has thus far appointed two Supreme Court Justices — Sonya Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — both of whom reject strict constructionism.

Sotomayor, for her part, is an advocate of legal realism, which the Traditional Values Coalition (TVC) describes as a judicial philosophy that is “diametrically opposed to the concept of strict construction/originalism as advocated by conservative legal thinkers and judges.” TVC adds that according to legal realism: “[J]udges should do more than interpret the law or look to the original intent of the writers of the law or the Constitution. Judges should bring in outside influences from social sciences, psychology and politics, plus their own views, to craft the law….” Suggesting that the public wrongly expects “the law to be static and predictable,” Sotomayor contends that courts and lawyers are “constantly overhauling the laws and adapting it [sic] to the realities of ever-changing social, industrial and political conditions.”63 Meanwhile, Elena Kagan has approvingly cited former Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall’s assertion that the Constitution, “as originally drafted and conceived,” was “defective.”64

Promoting Socialized Medicine in the United States

As noted earlier, George Soros has long favored a greater role for government in the American healthcare system. During the political debate over “Obamacare” in 2009 and 2010, one of the most influential pro-reform coalitions was Health Care for America Now (HCAN), a vast network of organizations supporting, ideally, a “single-payer” model where the federal government would be in charge of financing and administering the entire U.S. healthcare system.65 HCAN’s strategy was to try to achieve such a system incrementally, first by implementing a “public option”—i.e., a government insurance agency to “compete” with private insurers, so that Americans would be “no longer at the mercy of the private insurance industry.”66 Because such an agency would not need to show a profit in order to remain in business, and because it could tax and regulate its private competitors in whatever fashion it pleased, this “public option” would inevitably force private insurers out of the industry.

In August 2009, Soros pledged to give HCAN $5 million to promote its campaign for reform.67 HCAN’s organizational members include a host of Soros-affiliated organizations, among which are such stalwarts as the ACLU, ACORN, the AFL-CIO, the AFSCME, the American Federation of Teachers, the Center for American Progress Action Fund, the Center for Community Change, the Gamaliel Foundation, the League of United Latin American Citizens, MoveOn.org, the NAACP, the National Abortion Federation, the National Council of La Raza, the National Education Association, Planned Parenthood, the Progressive States Network, and USAction.68 Many of these member groups regularly receive large amounts of Soros funding directly from the Open Society Institute. Some of that money was undoubtedly used to bankroll the healthcare reform crusade, thus we can say with certainty that Soros’s real contributions to the cause far exceeded the $5 million he gave to HCAN.

Terrorism As a Criminal Matter, Rather Than an Act of War

Ever since the al Qaeda attacks of 9/11, George Soros has emphasized that it is “more appropriate” for the U.S. government to treat such events as “crimes against humanity” rather than acts of war, and that a proper response thus involves “police work, not military action.”69 Numerous Soros-funded organizations espouse this view as well, as evidenced by their efforts to ensure that suspected terrorists are tried in civilian courts rather than in military tribunals.70 The latter venues, where military officers serve as the judges and jurors, are designed specifically to deal with offenses committed in the context of warfare. Significantly, they permit prosecutors to use secret evidence that may have been obtained by means of enhanced interrogation methods, whereas civilian courts forbid the admittance of such evidence. Among the Soros-funded groups that look with strong disfavor upon military tribunals are the American Constitution Society,71 the Center for Constitutional Rights,72 the American Civil Liberties Union,73 and Human Rights Watch.74

Their perspective is very much in line with that of Barack Obama. Immediately following his inauguration, in fact, Obama’s first act as U.S. President was to order the suspension of all military tribunals that had been established to adjudicate the cases of terror suspects at the Guantanamo Bay detention center, which continued to house more than 200 al Qaeda and Taliban combatants captured by the American military during its post-9/11 wars in the Mideast.75 Obama, like Soros, favors a criminal-justice-oriented approach to terrorism and thus would prefer to try the perpetrators in civilian court¯where they would enjoy the enhanced rights and protections that such courts afford to all defendants.

This approach to terrorism has set the tone for every member of the Obama administration. In March 2009, for instance, Department of Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano broke with her agency’s traditional practice of warning the American public about potential “terrorist” threats, and instead began referring to acts of terrorism as “man-caused disasters.”76 Two months later the Obama Justice Department¯again demonstrating its preference for treating terrorism as a law-enforcement issue rather than as a military matter¯ordered the FBI to read Miranda warnings to enemy combatants captured on the battlefield in Afghanistan.77 In November, the Obama administration announced that it planned to try five Guantanamo detainees with alleged ties to the 9/11 conspiracy in a civilian court.78

Then, on Christmas Day of 2009, a Nigerian al Qaeda operative boarded a Northwest Airlines flight (from Amsterdam to Detroit) and attempted, without success, to blow up the plane in midair with a powerful chemical bomb. In public remarks soon after the incident, President Obama referred to the man as an “isolated extremist” rather than as a terrorist or a jihadist. In subsequent days the administration announced that it would offer the perpetrator a plea agreement to persuade him to reveal what he knew about al Qaeda operations in Yemen; if such an arrangement could not be worked out, the government planned to try him in federal civilian court.79

In November 2010, al Qaeda terrorist Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani¯responsible for the deaths of 224 people in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania¯became the first Guantanamo detainee to be tried in civilian court and was acquitted on all but one of the charges against him.80
The “Responsibility to Protect

In March 2011, President Obama, without consulting Congress, authorized the involvement of the U.S. military in imposing a “no-fly zone” over Libya, to prevent President Moammar Qaddafi’s forces from bombing rebels who were challenging his regime. On March 21, the White House announced the initiation of “a limited and well-defined mission in support of international efforts to protect civilians and prevent a humanitarian disaster.”

According to reports, Samantha Power, Obama’s National Security Council special adviser on human rights, was instrumental in persuading Obama to take this action against Libya. Power is a longtime advocate of the doctrine known as the “Responsibility to Protect,” which encourages the international community to intervene in a particular country’s internal affairs — with military force if necessary — in order to thwart genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, or ethnic cleansing. The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, which is the world’s leading advocate of this doctrine, is funded by the Open Society Institute. In a 2004 Foreign Policy magazine article, George Soros himself discussed the fundamentals of the Responsibility to Protect, writing:

“If governments abuse the authority entrusted to them and citizens have no opportunity to correct such abuses, outside interference is justified. By specifying that sovereignty is based on the people, the international community can penetrate nation-states’ borders to protect the rights of citizens.”


Organizations Where the Soros and Obama Agendas Intersect

By way of the many hundreds of pro-Obama groups that George Soros funds on a regular basis, there are literally thousands of political and financial ties that exist between Soros and the President. A comprehensive discussion of these connections could more than fill the pages of a large book. Nevertheless, a few key entities that serve as vital contact points in the Obama-Soros relationship are well worth noting here.

Center for American Progress

The Soros-funded Center for American Progress (CAP) may well have more influence on the Obama presidency than any other organization in existence. This left-wing think tank formulates policy for the administration and supplies the White House with a steady stream of talking points designed to make that policy palatable to the public. In fact, as of December 2008, before then-President-elect Obama had even taken his oath of office, he had already pledged his intent to fulfill some of CAP’s chief policy recommendations. These included the Center’s call for a gradual withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq coupled with a buildup of forces in Afghanistan, a plan to implement universal health coverage, and a plan to create “green jobs” designed to combat “global warming.”81 According to Bloomberg.com, CAP “has become … an intellectual wellspring for Democratic policy proposals, including many that are shaping the agenda of the … Obama administration.”82

Emblematic of this was the synergy that Obama and CAP displayed in dealing with the disastrous BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in the spring of 2010.83 In May and June of that year, when the crisis was at its height,84 Obama took his cue from the Center on a number of important occasions. For example:

  • On May 4, CAP’s energy and environment expert, Daniel Weiss, advised Obama to create an independent commission to examine the causes of the crisis; eighteen days later, the President did exactly that.
  • On May 21, CAP president John Podesta privately exhorted White House officials to name someone to be the public point person for the oil-spill response. A week later, the Obama administration announced that Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen would fill that role.
  • On May 26, Daniel Weiss advised the White House to demand that BP immediately set up a multi-billion-dollar escrow account to pay damage claims to Gulf-state residents harmed by the spill. Some three weeks later, Obama issued precisely that demand.85

On virtually every policy matter—health-care reform, fiscal policy, civil rights, immigration, housing, labor, national security, foreign policy, media, energy, or the environment—CAP’s recommendations fit hand-in-glove with the Obama administration’s values and agendas. In many cases, as in the examples cited above, the administration actually follows CAP’s instructions. In a very real sense, George Soros dictates his policy recommendations to the Obama White House through the Center for American Progress.
International Crisis Group

One of the more significant beneficiaries of George Soros’s funding is the International Crisis Group (ICG), a nonprofit organization that makes policy recommendations ostensibly designed to foster goodwill among nations.86 In 2008, the Open Society Institute gave a whopping $5 million to this entity,87 on whose executive committee Soros himself sits.88 One of ICG’s leading figures is its Mideast director, Robert Malley, a Harvard-trained lawyer who in 2007 was named as a foreign-policy advisor to the Obama presidential campaign.

Obama has long held Malley, who formerly served in the Clinton administration, in high regard as a policy analyst. Over the years, Malley has penned numerous articles and op-eds condemning Israel, exonerating Palestinians, urging the U.S. to disengage from Israel to some degree, and recommending that America reach out to negotiate with its traditional Arab enemies such as Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas.89 These views are of a piece with George Soros’s “open society” ideal, whose moral relativism leads inescapably to the conclusion that one man’s terrorist is indeed another man’s freedom fighter¯and, by logical extension, that no nation should be so proud as to be unwilling to conduct diplomacy with its foes. In mid-2008, however, the Obama campaign severed its ties with Malley after the Times of London revealed that the ICG official had quietly been in regular contact with Hamas leaders as part of his work for ICG.90

Notwithstanding Malley’s fall from grace, Barack Obama’s foreign policies have been, from the outset of his presidency, very much in line with the recommendations of the Soros-funded ICG. For one, Obama has often emphasized his willingness to negotiate with even the most unyielding enemies of the United States, and has sought to persuade Israel to take that same approach. Six days after his inauguration, for instance, Obama granted his first television interview as U.S. President to Al Arabiya, a Dubai-based network, where he stated: “[A]ll too often the United States starts by dictating … and we don’t always know all the factors that are involved. So let’s listen.” He subsequently called on Israel to drop its “preconceptions” and negotiate for peace with Hamas, the terrorist organization whose founding charter remains irrevocably committed to the permanent destruction of Israel and the mass murder of Jews. Obama further signaled an eagerness to conduct “unconditional talks” on nuclear matters with Iran91¯even as that nation was actively supplying high-tech weaponry to Hamas and Hezbollah, and even after its president had repeatedly declared that “Israel must be wiped off the map.”92 Not long thereafter, the Obama administration announced its desire to negotiate with Taliban “moderates,” with the aim of bringing the war in Afghanistan to a close.93

J Street

J Street was founded in 2008 “to promote meaningful American leadership to end the Arab-Israeli … conflicts peacefully and diplomatically.” Key to achieving this objective, says the organization, will be the development of “a new direction for American policy in the Middle East,” a direction that recognizes “the right of the Palestinians to a sovereign state of their own”—where Palestine and Israel exist “side-by-side in peace and security.”94 Toward this end, J Street supports “diplomatic solutions over military ones,” “multilateral over unilateral approaches to conflict resolution,” and “dialogue over confrontation.”95 Israel’s partner in such a dialogue would necessarily be Hamas, which holds the reins of political power in Gaza and steadfastly denies Israel’s right to exist. Yet J Street has cautioned Israel not to be too combative against Hamas, on grounds that the latter “has been the government, law and order, and service provider since it won the [Palestinian] elections in January 2006 and especially since June 2007 when it took complete control.”96 In the final analysis, J Street traces the Mideast conflict chiefly to the notion that “Israel’s settlements in the occupied territories have, for over forty years, been an obstacle to peace.”97

The foregoing positions are largely indistinguishable from those of President Obama, who likewise favors a two-state solution whereby Israel and “a sovereign Palestine” would live “side by side—in peace.”98 To achieve such a resolution, he says, initiatives to construct additional Israeli settlements in the West Bank “have to be stopped.”99 In October 2009, Obama signaled his support for J Street’s agendas when he sent national security advisor James Jones to deliver the keynote address at a J Street conference.100

Another avid supporter of J Street is George Soros, though the billionaire initially tried to conceal that support from the public—for fear that his controversial reputation might scare off other potential backers. But in September 2010 The Washington Times revealed that from 2008-2010, Soros and his two children—Jonathan and Andrea—had given a total of $750,000 to the organization.101 It is worth noting, moreover, that J Street’s Advisory Council includes a number of individuals with very close ties to Soros.102 Among them are the following:

 

Soros shares J Street’s belief that Israel should recognize, and negotiate with, the Hamas-led Palestinian government. In the April 12, 2007 issue of the New York Review of Books, Soros penned an article titled “On Israel, America and AIPAC,”103 wherein he derided the Bush administration for “committing a major policy blunder in the Middle East” by “supporting the Israeli government in its refusal to recognize a Palestinian unity government that includes Hamas, which the U.S. State Department considers a terrorist organization.” In Soros’ calculus, “This precludes any progress toward a peace settlement at a time when progress on the Palestinian problem could help avert a conflagration in the greater Middle East.” Added Soros:

“Israel, with the strong backing of the United States, refused to recognize the democratically elected Hamas government and withheld payment of the millions in taxes collected by the Israelis on its behalf. This caused great economic hardship and undermined the ability of the government to function. But it did not reduce popular support for Hamas among Palestinians … [B]oth Israel and the United States seem to be frozen in their unwillingness to negotiate with a Palestinian Authority that includes Hamas. The sticking point is Hamas’s unwillingness to recognize the existence of Israel; but that [recognition] could be made a condition for an eventual settlement rather than a precondition for negotiations.… The current policy of not seeking a political solution but pursuing military escalation—not just an eye for an eye but roughly speaking ten Palestinian lives for every Israeli one—has reached a particularly dangerous point.”104

By no means is Hamas the only Islamic terrorist organization which Soros views as a legitimate political entity and a suitable negotiating partner for Israel. Indeed, in early February 2011 he cast Hamas’s ideological comrade, the Muslim Brotherhood,105 in much the same light. At the time, a massive wave of violent riots were taking place in Egypt—ostensibly triggered by public discontent over Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak’s autocratic rule, governmental corruption, and the country’s widespread poverty.106 Meanwhile, there was much speculation that if Mubarak were to be forced out of office, the Brotherhood was likely to fill the power vacuum. Said Soros:

“President Obama personally and the United States as a country have much to gain by moving out in front and siding with the public demand for [a new Egyptian government of] dignity and democracy. This would help rebuild America’s leadership and remove a lingering structural weakness in our alliances that comes from being associated with unpopular and repressive regimes [such as Mubarak's]. Most important, doing so would open the way to peaceful progress in the region. The Muslim Brotherhood’s cooperation with Mohamed ElBaradei, the Nobel laureate who is seeking to run for president, is a hopeful sign that it intends to play a constructive role in a democratic political system.”107

Soros made that assertion even though:

(a) The Muslim Brotherhood—a supporter of Hamas, al Qaeda, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad108—had made it explicitly clear that it favored the dissolution of the 1979 peace treaty between Egypt and Israel.

(b) The Muslim Brotherhood’s Supreme Guide, Muhammad Mahdi ‘Akef, had stated that his organization has never recognized Israel and never will, adding: “Our lexicon does not include anything called ‘Israel.’ The [only thing] we acknowledge is the existence of Zionist gangs that have occupied Arab lands and deported the residents. If they want to live among us, it will have to be as [residents of] Palestine. If they want their own state, our only option is to object.”109

(c) Muhammad Ghannem, a leading member of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, told the Iranian news network Al-Alam that “the people [of Egypt] should be prepared for war against Israel,” emphasizing that “the Egyptian people are prepared for anything to get rid of this regime.”110

Notwithstanding the Brotherhood’s unequivocal contempt for Israel and the Jews, Soros lamented that “the main stumbling block” likely to prevent that organization from becoming part of a new “democracy” in Egypt “is Israel.”111 “In reality,” said Soros, “Israel has as much to gain from the spread of democracy in the Middle East as the United States has. But Israel is unlikely to recognize its own best interests because the change is too sudden and carries too many risks. And some U.S. supporters of Israel are more rigid and ideological than Israelis themselves. Fortunately, Obama is not beholden to the religious right, which has carried on a veritable vendetta against him.”112

As Aaron Klein reported in WorldNetDaily on February 6, 2011, the Middle East and North Africa Initiative of the Open Society Institute had recently provided “numerous grants to a wide range of projects that promote so-called democratic issues across the region, including in Egypt.”113 Some four months before the rioting started, OSI was seeking to expand its work in Egypt by hiring a new project manager for its Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, which was run in partnership with the Open Society Justice Initiative.114 OSI had also bankrolled the main opposition voice in Tunisia, Radio Kalima,115 a leading promoter of the January 2011 riots that forced Tunisian president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali to resign on January 14.116


American Constitution Society

Heavily funded by the Open Society Institute, the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy (ACS) is a Washington, DC-based think tank that seeks to push American jurisprudence ever-further to the left politically.
In June 2008, ACS board member Eric Holder, whom president-elect Barack Obama would name as his choice for Attorney General five months later, spoke at an ACS convention. Predicting an Obama victory in the November election, Holder told his audience that the U.S. soon would be “run by progressives”¯of whom a “substantial number” were likely to be ACS members.117 By December 2008, several major ACS figures already had secured positions in the forthcoming Obama administration.118 That very month, in fact, one particularly influential former member of the ACS board of advisors, Hillary Clinton, was chosen to serve as Obama’s secretary of state.

ACORN and Project Vote

Manhattan Institute scholar Sol Stern writes that the Shadow Party member-group ACORN, while professing its dedication to “the poor and powerless,” in fact “promotes a 1960s-bred agenda of anti-capitalism, central planning, victimology, and government handouts to the poor”¯pushing for “ever more government control of the economy” and “anti-capitalist redistributionism.”119 ACORN’s Independent Advisory Council has featured such Soros-affiliated luminaries as Andrew Stern, former president of the Service Employees International Union, and John Podesta, president of the Center for American Progress.120

Obama, for his part, was the attorney for ACORN’s lead election-law cases before joining the Illinois legislature.121 Also in the early to mid-1990s, he helped train ACORN’s staff in the art of radical community organizing.122 In 1995 Obama sued, on behalf of ACORN, for the implementation of an Illinois motor-voter law which ultimately would become a breeding ground for voter fraud.123 He also served for several years on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, which awarded a number of sizable grants to ACORN.124 When ACORN officially endorsed Obama for U.S. President in February 2008, the candidate welcomed the endorsement and told an audience of ACORN workers and supporters: “I’ve been fighting alongside ACORN on issues that you care about my entire career.”125 That same year, Obama’s presidential campaign quietly gave one of ACORN’s front groups some $800,000 to fund a voter-registration drive on the senator’s behalf.126 As of October 2008, ACORN was under investigation for voter-registration fraud in 13 states.127

Project Vote is ACORN’s Soros-funded voter-mobilization arm. From April to November of 1992, Barack Obama was director of the organization’s Illinois chapter.128 In 2008, Obama’s presidential campaign furnished Project Vote with a list of donors who had already given the campaign the maximum sum of money permitted by law. In turn, Project Vote representatives contacted those donors and urged them to make contributions to the ACORN affiliate¯funds which could then be used to support Obama’s candidacy while technically complying with election-law limits on campaign donations.129 That same year, the Open Society Institute gave Project Vote $400,000.130

MoveOn.org

In a massive mobilization aimed at helping Barack Obama win the presidency in 2008, this powerful Soros-affiliated organization dispatched approximately a million volunteers to work on Obama’s campaign nationwide¯600,000 in battleground states and 400,000 in non-battleground states. In addition, MoveOn registered more than half a million young Obama supporters to vote in the battleground states, while adding a million young people to its membership rolls during the summer of 2008. All told, MoveOn and its members contributed more than $58 million directly to the Obama campaign, while raising and spending at least an additional $30 million in independent election efforts on behalf of other Democrats across the United States.131 In November 2003, Soros pledged $5 million to MoveOn.132


More Soros-Obama Connections

Following is a brief overview of some prominent individuals with close political ties to Barack Obama on the one hand, and who also have been influenced in some significant way by George Soros’s money, on the other.

Van Jones

A self-professed revolutionary communist who has long endeavored to ignite transformative revolution in the United States,133 Van Jones spent six months as President Obama’s “green jobs czar” in 2009, until public controversy over his recently exposed radical past forced him to resign.

From 1996-2007, Jones headed the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, which, claiming that the American criminal-justice system was infested with racism, sought to promote alternatives to incarceration.134 Between 1999 and 2009, the Baker Center received more than $1 million from George Soros‘s Open Society Institute.135

In 2007 Jones launched Green For All (GFA), an organization “dedicated to building an inclusive green economy” that would provide a vehicle for large-scale wealth redistribution.136 One of GFA’s major funders is the Open Society Institute ($75,000 in 2008).137

Over the years, Jones has been a board member of numerous environmental and nonprofit organizations, including the Soros-funded Free Press and the environmentalist group Apollo Alliance, which was launched by the Soros-backed Tides Foundation.138 The Apollo Alliance helped craft portions of the $787 billion “stimulus” legislation that President Obama signed into law in early 2009. Specifically, the organization had a hand in writing the “clean energy and green-collar jobs provisions” of the bill, for which $86 billion was earmarked.139

Today, Jones serves as one of twenty advisors to the Colorado-based Presidential Climate Action Project, which makes climate-policy recommendations for the Obama White House.140 Jones is also a senior fellow at the Soros-funded Center for American Progress (CAP)¯the think tank that promotes virtually all of Obama’s political agendas.141

Andrew Stern

Former New Leftist Andrew Stern served as president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the second-largest labor union in North America, from 1996 until April 2010. He was trained in the tactics of radical activism at the Midwest Academy, which received $10,000 from Soros in 1997. Stern also helped form America Votes, a Soros-funded coalition of grassroots, get-out-the-vote organizations.
And he sat on the executive committee of America Coming Together, to which Soros famously gave $10 million in 2003.142

In 2008, Stern’s SEIU spent approximately $60.7 million to help elect Barack Obama to the White House¯deploying some 100,000 pro-Obama volunteers during the campaign.143 Stern went on to become an immensely influential advisor to President Obama. As of October 30, 2009, the union magnate had visited the White House 22 times since Obama’s inauguration¯more than any other individual.144
In February 2010, Obama appointed Stern to sit on a National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform.145

David Axelrod

David Axelrod serves as a key strategist for Barck Obama. In 2004, Axelrod’s political consulting firm received at least $229,000 from the Media Fund, a Soros-backed Shadow Party organization which ran some $53 million in pro-John Kerry presidential campaign ads.146

Carol Browner

On January 22, 2009, President Obama named Carol Browner to serve as his “environment czar.” Browner previously had been a “commissioner” with the Socialist International, an umbrella group for scores of “social democratic, socialist and labor parties” in 55 countries. She is currently a board member of the Alliance for Climate Protection, the Center for American Progress, and the League of Conservation Voters¯all of which are funded by George Soros.147



Anna Burger

Called “the most powerful women in the labor movement” by Fortune magazine and nicknamed the “Queen of Labor,” Anna Burger is dedicated to building the progressive movement in the United States. She has had a long career with the SEIU, where she currently serves as international secretary-treasurer.148 In February 2009, President Obama appointed her to his Economic Recovery Advisory Board.
 Burger is also vice chair of the Soros-affiliated Democracy Alliance.149

Kevin Jennings

In 1990 Kevin Jennings established the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), a Boston-area organization that is funded, in part, by the Open Society Institute.150 In June 2009, President Obama appointed Jennings as assistant deputy secretary of education¯or “education czar.”

Mark Lloyd

A great admirer of Venezuela’s Communist president Hugo Chavez, Mark Lloyd has served as a consultant to the Open Society Institute and as vice president of strategic initiatives at the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, a legislative advocacy group that receives financial backing from George Soros. In July 2009, Lloyd, a senior fellow at the Soros-funded Center for American Progress, was appointed as President Obama’s diversity chief at the Federal Communications Commission.151

Jim Wallis

A former member of the radical Students for a Democratic Society, this self-described activist preacher has long championed the cause of communism. Unremittingly critical of the free-market system, Wallis has often impugned capitalism for its historical lack of success. “Our systems have failed the poor and they have failed the earth,” he says. “They have failed the creation.”152 In a January 2006 radio interview with Interfaith Voices, Wallis was asked to clarify whether he was in fact “calling for the redistribution of wealth in society.” He replied, “Absolutely, without any hesitation. That’s what the gospel is all about.”153 Today Wallis is a spiritual advisor to President Obama.
George SorosOpen Society Institute has made grants to Sojourners, the leftist publication that Wallis founded, in the amounts of $200,000 in 2004,154 $25,000 in 2006,155 and $100,000 in 2007.156
NOTES:

1 http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_43/b4055047.htm

2 http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/barack_obama_red_diaper_baby_1.html

3 Stanley Kurtz, Radical In Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism (2010)

4 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2364 (The reference is to Carol Browner.)

5 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2434 (The reference is to Anita Dunn.)

6 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2368 (The reference is to John Holdren.)

7 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2406 (The reference is to Van Jones.)

8 http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1293869054.pdf

9 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBbF09-ZkII

10 George Soros, The Crisis of Global Capitalism (1998), p. 102

11 George Soros, The Crisis of Global Capitalism (1998), pp. xvii

12 George Soros, George Soros on Globalization, p. 10

13 George Soros, The Crisis of Global Capitalism (2000), p. 203

14 George Soros, George Soros on Globalization, p. 3

15 George Soros, “Avoiding a Breakdown: Asia’s Crisis Demands a Rethink of International Regulation,” Financial Times of London (December 31, 1997); George Soros, Open Society: Reforming Global Capitalism (2000), p. 276.

16 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/13/AR2006091300283.html ; http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/press/07.htm

17 http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/who/sachs.htm

18 http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2010/12/confirmed-soros-associate-jeffrey-sachs.html

19 George Soros, George Soros on Globalization, p. viii

20 http://www.theblaze.com/stories/open-society-soros-explains-the-anti-capitalist-pro-marxist-tactics-he-uses-to-fundamentally-transform-countries/

21 http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,592268,00.html

22 http://www.theblaze.com/stories/open-society-soros-explains-the-anti-capitalist-pro-marxist-tactics-he-uses-to-fundamentally-transform-countries/

23 George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy (2004), pp. 168-169

24 George Soros, The Crisis of Global Capitalism (2000), p. xxix

25 http://www.apj.us/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3208&Itemid=2

26 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2385 ; http://pcr.hudson.org/files/publications/2008_Bradley_Symposium_Fonte_Essay.pdf

27 http://www.internationalrelations.house.gov/110/koh032907.pdf ; http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/227209/obama-joins-human-rights-charade-anne-bayefsky (Among the member nations are China, Cuba, Libya, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.)

28 http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/227209/obama-joins-human-rights-charade-anne-bayefsky

29 http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/11/04/united-nations-human-rights-council/

30 http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=185013

31 http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,592268,00.html

32 http://articles.mcall.com/1996-10-01/news/3126013_1_legal-immigrants-welfare-reform-law-rosalind-gold

33 http://townhall.com/Common/PrintPage.aspx?g=f52c747b-298a-465b-9d26-bce95f296633&t=c ; http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=33989

34 http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,592268,00.html

35 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9CF8SIO0&show_article=1

36 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBbF09-ZkII

37 http://www.cnbc.com/id/39614125/Extending_Bush_Tax_Cuts_Hurts_the_Wealthy_Soros

38 http://www.wnyc.org/articles/wnyc-news/2010/oct/05/george-soros-dont-extend-bush-tax-cuts/

39 http://www.issues2000.org/Economic/Barack_Obama_Tax_Reform.htm#Voting_Record

40 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/08/us/politics/08obama.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print

41 http://www.cnbc.com/id/39614125/Extending_Bush_Tax_Cuts_Hurts_the_Wealthy_Soros

42 Michael T. Kaufman, Soros: The Life And Times Of A Messianic Billionaire, 2002, p. 135; Peter Schweizer, Do As I Say (2005), pp. 164-165.

43 Charles Ellis and James Vertin, Wall Street People: True Stories of Today’s Masters and Moguls, Volume 2 (2001), p. 112.

44 “Revenue Sells 600 Buildings to Bermuda-Based Company.” Trends and Developments, Volume 8, Issue 10 (October 2002); Cited in Peter Schweizer, Do As I Say (2005), p. 165.

45 http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0214-01.htm; http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/politics/taxation/3218-the-estate-tax-non-repeal.html

46 David Kay Johnston, “Dozens of Rich Americans Join in Fight to Retain Estate Tax,” New York Times (February 14, 2001)

47 Quoted in Michael T. Kaufman, Soros: The Life And Times Of A Messianic Billionaire; Cited in Peter Schweizer, Do As I Say (2005), pp. 165-166.

48 http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,592268,00.html

49 http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2007/12/Beware-of-Cap-and-Trade-Climate-Bills

50 http://keywiki.org/index.php/George_Soros_-_Political/Financial_Stances

51 http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,592268,00.html

52 http://keywiki.org/index.php/George_Soros_-_Political/Financial_Stances ; http://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/mission.html

53 http://keywiki.org/index.php/George_Soros_-_Political/Financial_Stances

54 http://tv.breitbart.com/obama-vows-electricity-rates-would-necessarily-skyrocket-under-his-plan/

55 http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=112243

56 Ben Johnson, “Who’s Behind the Immigration Rallies?” FrontPageMag.com (March 29, 2006)

57 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1511

58 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/15/AR2008071501138_pf.html

59 David Horowitz and Richard Poe, The Shadow Party (2006), p. 103

60 Richard Poe, “Soros Rewrites U.S. Constitution,” MoonbatCentral.com (April 9, 2005)

61 Scott Johnson, “The $80,000 Misunderstanding,” PowerlineBlog.com (April 9, 2005)

62 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1511

63 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2396

64 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2398

65 http://healthcareforamericanow.org/site/content/statement_of_common_purpose

66 http://healthcareforamericanow.org/site/content/about_us/

67 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/30/us/politics/30dems.html; http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/george-soros-pledges-5-million-to-bankroll-health-care-reform-push-group-says/; http://nation.foxnews.com/george-soros/2009/08/11/soros-gives-5-million-liberal-health-care-group; http://www.newsmax.com/LowellPonte/obama-pelosi-acorn/2009/12/12/id/341854

68 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7488

69 George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy (2004), p. 18

70 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=546; George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy (2004), p. 38.

71 http://www.acslaw.org/taxonomy/term/1476

72 http://ccrjustice.org/learn-more/faqs/faqs%3A-military-commisions-act

73 http://www.aclu.org/national-security/john-adams-project-american-values

74 http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/07/08/us-revisions-can-t-fix-military-commissions

75 http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-mr-obamas-international-overtures-deserve-a-response-1488579.html; http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/22/washington/22gitmo.html?hp

76 http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2009/03/19/obama-speak-homeland-security-secretary-replaces-terrorism-term-man-caus

77 http://jewishworldreview.com/david/limbaugh061209.php3

78 http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/13/khalid.sheikh.mohammed/index.html

79 http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/ag_crotch_bomber_civilian_trial_M0RMk1i43uPTx2BUykCxAO

80 http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/11/027710.php

81 http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aF7fB1PF0NPg

82 http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aF7fB1PF0NPg

83 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jun/29/bp-oil-spill-timeline-deepwater-horizon

84 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jun/29/bp-oil-spill-timeline-deepwater-horizon

85 http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/06/14/wh-takes-cues-from-liberal-think-tank-on-spill/

86 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6218

87 http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org//990pf_pdf_archive/137/137029285/137029285_200812_990PF.pdf

88 http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/about/board.aspx

89 http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/barack_obamas_middle_east_expe.html

90 http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64162

91 http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=33893

92 http://townhall.com/columnists/BenShapiro/2009/01/28/the_day_america_lost_the_war_on_terror

93 http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=33893

94 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7458

95 http://www.jstreet.org/about/about-us

96 http://www.jstreet.org/page/are-israel’s-goals-attacking-hamas-militarily-achievable

97 http://www.jstreet.org/page/settlements

98 http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=7694664&page=1%20;

99 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6315072.ece

100 http://frontpagemag.com/2009/12/30/blaming-israel-first-by-p-david-hornik/

101 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/sep/24/soros-funder-liberal-jewish-american-lobby/

102 http://www.jstreet.org/supporters/advisory_council

103 http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2007/apr/12/on-israel-america-and-aipac/

104 http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2007/apr/12/on-israel-america-and-aipac/

105 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6386

106 http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4020717,00.html

107 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/02/AR2011020205041.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

108 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/Muslim%20Brotherhood.pdf

109 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/Public%20Debate%20on%20the%20Political%20Platform.html

110 http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=206130

111 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/02/AR2011020205041.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

112 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/02/AR2011020205041.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

113 http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=260577

114 http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=260577; http://www.soros.org/initiatives/justice/about

115 http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=260577

116 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12157599

117 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/11/us/politics/11network.html; http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6707

118 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/11/us/politics/11network.html (Executive Director Lisa Brown had been named as Obama’s White House Staff Secretary. ACS Board of Directors member Goodwin Liu had been named to the Obama-Biden transition team. Joining Liu on the transition team was another ACS Board of Directors member, Dawn Johnsen. Former ACS staffer Melody Barnes had been selected to direct the Obama administration’s Domestic Policy Council. Former ACS Board member Ronald Klain had been named chief of staff to Vice President Joe Biden.

119 http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_2_acorns_nutty_regime.html

120 http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2009/09/21/acorn-independent-advisory-council-member-stern-lets-loose-acorns-critic

121 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NmaZIdz6Vo

122 http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/224610/inside-obamas-acorn/stanley-kurtz; Frank De Zutter, “What Makes Obama Run?” Chicago Reader (December 8, 1995)

123 http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/09/acorn_fannie_mae_and_motor_vot.html

124 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1511 (These grants included $45,000 in 2000, $75,000 in 2001, and $70,000 in 2002.)

125 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1511

126 http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1225223330.pdf ; http://michellemalkin.com/2008/08/22/acorn-watch-pt-ii-obama-hid-800000-payment-to-acorn-through-citizen-services-inc/

127 http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/225978/identification-required-deroy-murdock

128 http://michellemalkin.com/2008/08/22/acorn-watch-pt-ii-obama-hid-800000-payment-to-acorn-through-citizen-services-inc/

129 http://www.politicsdaily.com/2008/10/29/witness-obama-camp-gave-acorn-like-group-donor-list/ ;
http://netrightdaily.com/2010/05/obama-acorn-and-stealth-socialism-dire-domestic-threat/

130 http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org//990pf_pdf_archive/137/137029285/137029285_200812_990PF.pdf

131 http://techdailydose.nationaljournal.com/2008/11/obama-benefits-from-moveons-88.php

132 http://www.dailykos.com/story/2003/11/11/55615/610

133 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2406

134 http://www.ellabakercenter.org/page.php?pageid=19&contentid=151

135 http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/31/obamas-desecrators-of-911/1

136 http://www.greenforall.org/about-us ; http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7554

137 http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org//990pf_pdf_archive/137/137029285/137029285_200812_990PF.pdf; http://www.aim.org/aim-column/soros-money-financed-communist-van-jones/

138 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2406

139http://apolloalliance.org/feature-articles/clean-energy-provisions-of-stimulus-are-consistent-with-apollo-economic-recovery-act/

140 http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=117548

141 http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/02/van_jones.html

142 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1830

143 http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/28/nation/na-stern28

144 http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/10/30/seius-stern-tops-white-house-visitor-list/

145 http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-names-members-bipartisan-national-commission-fiscal-responsibility-

146 http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/09/the_sorosaxelrod_axis_of_astro.html ; http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0910/Axelrod_and_the_outside_groups.html

147 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2364

148 http://www.seiu.org/a/ourunion/anna-burger.php

149 http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2445

150 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-jennings

151 http://www.netcaucus.org/biography/mark-lloyd.shtml

152 http://www.reachingout.org/programs_5_text.html

153 http://www.examiner.com/political-transcripts-in-national/president-s-spiritual-advisor-obama-feels-he-hasn-t-had-a-chance-video

154 http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/137/137029285/137029285_200412_990PF.pdf

155 http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/137/137029285/137029285_200612_990PF.pdf

156 http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/137/137029285/137029285_200712_990PF.pdf

Today’s Political Cartoon


Hoarder in Chief

Posted on March 29, 2014

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/03/hoarder-chief/#2rw4W8e7T98dIdQt.99

Hoarder-590CI

Community Organizer TwoComplete Message

 

 

The little President who cried, ‘I didn’t know’


http://joeforamerica.com/2014/03/little-president-cried-didnt-know/#paGsckKpTp9BTl5a.99

Posted by Jeremy Richards on Mar 27, 2014 in Email, Politics

Scandal after scandal and all he says is, “I didn’t know.” The lefties have snickered into their hands as time after time their leader repeats the manta like one of the stoned morons at one of his campaign rallies chanting, “Yes we can”. But now that the FBI has unleashed a wave of arrests on politicians with a D after their name, from Charlotte, NC Mayor Patrick Cannon and Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick to California State Senator Leland Yee, I think we conservatives all owe Mr. Obama an apology.

Community Organizer TwoWe accused him of lying about not knowing about all the scandals within his administration and never stopped to consider that it might be true.

Now with the luxury of retrospect, let’s take a look back at where we made our mistake.

Start with the prerequisite knowledge and experience he brought into the office. That should have been our first clue that the man didn’t know what was going on. He probably didn’t even know that half of these entities even existed. A good portion of those who’s existence he was aware of were complete mysteries to him. He probably couldn’t have told you the difference between the NSA and the CIA. Yet when he said he didn’t know that the democrat party within the IRS was targeting conservative groups illegally, we found that very hard to believe. When he said he didn’t know that a veritible tidal wave of money was being wasted on a government website that turned out to be useless, we found that very hard to believe.

However, now we know he couldn’t have known that the FBI was investigating widespread corruption and anti-American activity within the Democrat party, or we wouldn’t be hearing about it. He would have stopped it. He would have fired everybody from the top down if that’s what it took to stop it. He simply didn’t know.

We should still be mad at him for having the audacity to make himself a candidate for the highest office in the land when he knew he wasn’t qualified to run a convenience store. We should still be mad at him for lecturing us about taking care of our fellow Americans while his blood-brother lives in poverty in Africa. We should still be mad at him for using his race card 30 years after it expired. Yes, there are plenty of reasons for America to be angry at Barak Hussein Obama, but not knowing isn’t one of them. He really doesn’t know anything about anything that’s going on. He really believed it when they told him it would be a gravy job where he could hang out with celebrities, play golf, and fly around the world acting important. He really believed it when they told him they would take care of everything.

So, today while you’re sending out a silent apology into the universe for Barak Obama, use your hand to stifle your snicker if you happen to think of the democrats being burned by their once favorite quote from their once favorite puppet — “I didn’t know.”Community Organizer Two

29th Obamacare Delay: WH Uses ‘Honor System’ to Extend Deadline


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/03/26/29th-Obamacare-Delay-WH-Uses-Honor-System-to-Extend-Deadline

Last month, the Obama administration said it lacked “the statutory authority to extend the open enrollment period” for Obamacare. Moreover, when embattled Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was asked by Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) during testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee if she planned to delay the Obamacare enrollment deadline, Sebelius said flatly, “No, sir.”

On Tuesday, however, the White House announced it has decided to extend Obamacare’s open enrollment period another two to three weeks, marking this at least the 29th Obamacare delay. The White House says it plans to use the “honor system” for those wishing to enroll past the March 31 deadline. According to the Washington Post, the Obama White House will “not try to determine whether the person is telling the truth.”

The Obama administration’s deadline extension is merely the latest in what has become a regular pattern of delays and blown deadlines. Insurance executives say they are frustrated with the White House’s endless changes because they affect their ability to accurately analyze risk pools for enrollees to calculate and project future premium rates.

“We’re exasperated,” one senior insurance executive told The Hill. “All of these major delays on very significant portions of the law are going to change what it’s going to cost.”

Insurance industry officials now predict that many Obamacare premiums will double over the next several months leading up to the Nov. 4 midterm elections.

Obamacare remains deeply unpopular. According to the RealClearPolitics average of polls, just 39% of Americans now support Obamacare.

Less than 2% of the 48.6 million uninsured in America – the people the law was purportedly created to help – have enrolled in Obamacare.

Complete Message

HOPEFULLY THE FOLLOWING REPORT WITH MOVE YOU TO ACTION. THIS MUST BE STOPPED.


Obama secretly negotiating away U.S. sovereignty
2-pronged assault on economy, consumer rights, domestic law

http://www.wnd.com/2014/03/obama-secretly-negotiating-away-u-s-sovereignty/#Pk561KTZmQjkgpTj.99

Reported by Aaron Klein (Published: 21 hours ago)

Aaron Klein is WND’s senior staff reporter and Jerusalem bureau chief. He also hosts “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” on New York’s WABC Radio.

Consumer protections and the use of domestic law in the U.S. may drastically change as President Obama forges ahead with two secretive international deals that impact major aspects of the economy, privacy and beyond.

Wednesday, Obama defended a proposed mega free-trade zone between the world’s two largest economies, the United States and the European Union.

“I have fought my entire political career, and as president, to strengthen consumer protections. I have no intention of signing legislation that would weaken those protections,” Obama said during a visit to the EU headquarters in Brussels.

Obama was responding to criticism of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or TTIP, which the U.S. has been negotiated with the EU since last July.

Besides creating the world’s biggest free-trade zone, the TTIP will also bring about closer cooperation between EU and U.S. regulatory bodies while more closely integrating the two economies.

One leak about the TTIP revealed a proposed “Regulatory Cooperation Council” that would evaluate existing regulations in the U.S. and EU and recommend future rules while coordinating a response to the current regulations.

Writing in the left-leaning the Nation magazine, foreign policy analyst Andrew Erwin said the TTIP was less about reducing tariffs and “more about weakening the power of average citizens to defend themselves against corporate labor and environmental abuses.”

Erwin took particular issue with a section in the TTIP called the Investor-State Dispute Settlement, which stipulates foreign corporations can sue the government utilizing a special international tribunal instead of the country’s own domestic system that uses U.S. law.

“The tribunals are not accountable to any national public or democratically elected body,” wrote Erwin.

Last December, a coalition of more than 200 environmentalists, labor unions and consumer advocacy organizations drafted a letter asking for the Investor-State Dispute Settlement section to be dropped.

The New York Times, meanwhile, reported earlier this week that some American companies “are concerned that protections for investors will not be part of a deal.”

While Obama is negotiating the TTIP largely in secret, talks continue to forge ahead with the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP. The expansive plan is a proposed free-trade agreement between the U.S., Australia, Brunei, Chile, Canada, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.

The agreement would create new guidelines for everything from food safety to fracking, financial markets, medical prices, copyright rules and Internet freedom.

On Tuesday, the leaders of Canada and Japan reportedly met on the sidelines of a nuclear summit at the Hague to discuss the TPP.

The TPP negotiations have been criticized by politicians and advocacy groups alike for their secrecy. The few aspects of the partnership leaked to the public indicate an expansive agenda with highly limited congressional oversight.

A New York Times opinion piece previously called the deal the “most significant international commercial agreement since the creation of the World Trade Organization in 1995.”

Last October, the White House website released a joint statement with the other proposed TPP signatories affirming “our countries are on track to complete the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations.”

“Ministers and negotiators have made significant progress in recent months on all the legal texts and annexes on access to our respective goods, services, investment, financial services, government procurement, and temporary entry markets,” the White House said.

The statement did not divulge details of the partnership other than to suggest a final TPP agreement “must reflect our common vision to establish a comprehensive, next-generation model for addressing both new and traditional trade and investment issues, supporting the creation and retention of jobs and promoting economic development in our countries.”

Secrecy

In February, the Open the Government organization sent a letter to Obama blasting the lack of transparency surrounding the TPP talks, stating the negotiations have been “conducted in unprecedented secrecy.”

“Despite the fact the deal may significantly affect the way we live our lives by limiting our public protections, there has been no public access to even the most fundamental draft agreement texts and other documents,” read the letter.

The missive was signed by advocacy groups such as OpenTheGovernment.org, Project On Government Oversight, ARTICLE 19 and the Global Campaign for Freedom of Expression and Information.

The groups warned issues being secretly negotiated include “patent and copyright, land use, food and product standards, natural resources, professional licensing, government procurement, financial practices, healthcare, energy, telecommunications, and other service sector regulations.”

Lack of oversight

Normally free-trade agreements must be authorized by a majority of the House and Senate, usually in lengthy proceedings.

However, the White House is seeking what is known as “trade promotion authority” which would fast track approval of the TPP by requiring Congress to vote on the likely lengthy trade agreement within 90 days and without any amendments.

The authority also allows Obama to sign the agreement before Congress even has a chance to vote on it, with lawmakers getting only a quick post-facto vote.

A number of lawmakers have been speaking out about the secret TPP talks.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., recently proposed legislation requiring the White House to disclose all TPP documents to members of Congress.

“The majority of Congress is being kept in the dark as to the substance of the TPP negotiations, while representatives of U.S. corporations – like Halliburton, Chevron, PHRMA, Comcast, and the Motion Picture Association of America – are being consulted and made privy to details of the agreement,” said Wyden.

However, Obama has so far refused to give Congress a copy of the draft agreement.

Regulates food, Internet, medicine, commerce

The TPP is “more than just a trade deal,” wrote Lori Wallach and Ben Beachy of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch in a New York Times op-ed last June.

“Only 5 of its 29 chapters cover traditional trade matters, like tariffs or quotas. The others impose parameters on nontrade policies. Existing and future American laws must be altered to conform with these terms, or trade sanctions can be imposed against American exports.”

Wallach and Beachy spotlighted several leaks in the proposed TPP text, including one that would regulate the price of medicine.

“Pharmaceutical companies, which are among those enjoying access to negotiators as ‘advisers,’ have long lobbied against government efforts to keep the cost of medicines down. Under the agreement, these companies could challenge such measures by claiming that they undermined their new rights granted by the deal.”

Amnesty International USA warned draft TPP provisions related to patents for pharmaceuticals “risk stifling the development and production of generic medicines, by strengthening and deepening monopoly protections.”

Another leak revealed the TPP would grant more incentives to relocate domestic manufacturing offshore, Wallach and Beachy related.

Jim Hightower, a progressive activist, wrote the TPP incorporates elements similar to the Stop Online Piracy Act.

Hightower wrote the deal would “transform Internet service providers into a private, Big Brother police force, empowered to monitor our ‘user activity,’ arbitrarily take down our content and cut off our access to the Internet.”

Indeed, Internet freedom advocacy groups have been protesting the TPP, taking specific issue with leaked proposals that would enact strict intellectual property restraints that would effectively change U.S. copyright law.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation argued the TPP would “restrict the ability of Congress to engage in domestic law reform to meet the evolving IP needs of American citizens and the innovative technology sector.”

In a petition signed by more than 30 Internet freedom organizations, the group warned the TPP would “rewrite global rules on intellectual property enforcement.”

With additional research by Brenda J. Elliott.

Community Organizer Two

Today’s Political Cartoon


In Case of World in Crisis

Posted on March 27, 2014

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/03/case-world-crisis/#GVwSblxacd28IuF1.99

Break-Glass-600-wLogo

Community Organizer Two

Putin’s Real Intentions: Re-Establish the “Evil Empire”


http://patriotupdate.com/articles/putins-real-intentions-re-establish-evil-empire/#Wedb3UXcueSYZZ1y.99

Written on Wednesday, March 26, 2014 by David L. Goetsch

Students of World War II are finding dangerous parallels between the events leading up to that war and what is now happening in Ukraine. Vladimir Putin is using precisely the same tactics used by Adolf Hitler in the run up to World War II, and like Hitler he is betting on and benefiting from a weak response from the west. As I observe the idle threats being made by President Obama and John Kerry painful memories of a sniveling Neville Chamberlain come to mind. While the West impotently talks about sanctions and even imposes a few, Putin continues to mass troops on the Ukrainian border for what he calls “military maneuvers.”

I fear there is much more at stake here than the Crimea. To understand what is happening in Ukraine it is necessary to first understand Vladimir Putin’s real intentions: He wants to re-establish the “evil empire.” Putin has stated publicly that the greatest tragedy of the 20th Century was the fall of the Soviet Union. It’s a tragedy President Putin would like to erase from Russian history in the same manner that Adolph Hitler sought to eradicate what he saw as the shame of the Treaty of Versailles following World War I. Just as Hitler wanted to reincorporate land lost to Germany in the aftermath of the Great War—thus the bloodless takeover of Austria followed close on by the forced annexation of the Sudetenland—Putin wants to take back what was lost when the Soviet Union collapsed. His Crimean adventure was just the first step along these lines. It won’t be the last.

You can be sure that Putin has studied Hitler’s actions in the years leading up to World War II as well as the weak-kneed, impotent response of the west. Putin seems to know history better than today’s Western leaders who allowed World War II to happen when Hitler could have been easily stopped in his tracks. Neville Chamberlain and other Western leaders thought they could negotiate with Hitler. They were fools. But even a fool knows you cannot negotiate with a hungry bear, and the Russian bear with prodding from Putin is obviously hungry. Unfortunately, President Obama and John Kerry seem to be cut from the same cloth as Neville Chamberlain. They want to negotiate and threaten and talk, talk, talk. If anyone in the Obama administration had an ounce of foreign policy sense they would understand that all a hungry bear ever wants is more.

Community Organizer Two

In the years leading up to World War II, Hitler first brought Austria under the Nazi jackboot with the Anschluss. Anschluss is German for political annexation. It worked like this. First Hitler stirred up pro-German sentiment in Austria. Then he massed troops and tanks along the Austrian border. Finally, he “allowed” Austria to annex itself to Germany in lieu of being invaded by Nazi Storm Troopers and Panzers. If you have been paying attention, the Crimean Region of Ukraine just had its own Anschluss, but this time it was Putin and the Russians who demanded a vote while pointing guns at the voters. Unfortunately, as they did prior to World War II, western leaders—most auspiciously President Obama—are responding with words and weakness. Putin on the other hand is taking action.

Hitler’s next annexation was the Sudetenland, a small sliver of land that was part of Czechoslovakia. Like the Crimea, the Sudetenland had a large contingent of citizens loyal to the invading country. The German speaking, pro-Nazi citizens of the Sudetenland—led by Konrad Henlein—agitated for annexation and, of course, Hitler was only too happy to oblige. Surrounded by Nazi tanks and troops, the Sudetenland acquiesced to Hitler’s demands and became part of Germany. The people of the West adopted a who-cares attitude toward Hitler’s annexation of the Sudetenland. France and Britain were not willing to go to war over a sliver of land in which many of the people spoke German and were loyal to Hitler. The West basically said to Hitler, “You can have the Sudetenland.” This would have been a small enough tragedy had Hitler been content to stop there, but of course he wasn’t. Nor will President Putin be content to stop his expansion efforts with the Crimea. As it did with the Sudetenland, the West has adopted a who-cares attitude toward the Russian annexation of the Crimea. Just as it was with the Sudetenland, this would be only a minor tragedy if Putin’s aggression stopped there. But it won’t, and Western leaders are fools if they think it will.

It is a good bet that Vladimir Putin now has his sights set on Ukraine. If he can bring that sovereign country back into the fold, then there are Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia; all of which have significant Russian-speaking populations left over from the old Soviet days. These Russian-speaking citizens can be counted on to support Putin in his takeover efforts, and Putin can be counted on to claim that he is invading these sovereign nations for the sole purpose of protecting oppressed Russians. If Putin can manage to re-incorporate these three tiny nations, the bear’s next meal will be the one that finally brought the West to its senses and triggered a military response and, eventually, World War II. That meal is Poland, which is the prize Putin really wants in the first place.

History is repeating itself in part because we have raised several generations of Americans who do not know their history. While American students were being taught how they should be ashamed of the United States and studying the lives of celebrities instead of American heroes, Vladimir Putin and his generation of Russians were studying history—real history. Now he is using that knowledge of history to re-establish what Ronald Reagan called the “evil empire.” With the Crimean annexation, history is simply repeating itself. The only difference is the tyrant who is seeking territory and the weak-kneed Western leaders who are letting him take it.

Law of the Land? Obama Unconstitutionally Changes March 31st Deadline to ‘sometime in mid-April’


http://www.tpnn.com/2014/03/26/law-of-the-land-obama-unconstitutionally-changes-march-31st-deadline-to-sometime-in-mid-april/

Obama-Depressed
In President Obama’s world, words and promises are meaningless. He has altered the language, mandates, and parameters of his signature legislation Obamacare, otherwise known as the unaffordable ‘Affordable Care Act’, so many times that one would be left to wonder what exactly does ‘law of the land’ mean. After all, when Texas Senator Ted Cruz attempted to filibuster back in October 2013 in order to stop implementation of a law that he believed to not only be unconstitutional, but not ready for primetime if implemented, Obama proclaimed that the train of Obamacare was going forward and there was no way to stop it.

Since that date, the train of Obamacare has become more of a train wreck as we have heard countless stories of people losing the insurance and doctors that Obama told them they could keep. The train wreck became one that you could not stop looking at, as frightening as it was, as Obama began unconstitutionally changing what he previously deemed as ‘settled law’ in hopes of salvaging what was fast becoming a mangled mess.

Community Organizer TwoAs the nation neared Obama’s self-imposed March 31st deadline for enrollment, one thing became clear. The Obama regime was not going to reach its initial goal of 7 million enrolled. In fact, not only did they need 7 million enrolled in order for the government takeover of 1/6 of the American economy to potentially be financially solvent, they needed 40% of those enrolled to be from the key demographic area of 18 – 35 year olds. As of last week, there were only 6 million enrolled in Obamacare and less than 25% were from that key demographic area. Even then, the numbers given by the Obama regime were inflated since they were counting as enrollees individuals who had created a Healthcare.gov profile, perhaps also looked at plans, maybe even placed a potential plan in their shopping cart, but never sealed the deal with a finalized payment.

Critics of Obamacare likened the regime’s counting of such individuals as similar to Amazon.com counting as a sale a book that was left in someone’s shopping cart without the buyer clicking ‘proceed to checkout’ and ‘place your order’. If a private company pulled some of the shenanigans with funny numbers like the Obama regime has, they would likely be hauled before Congress for a hearing.

On Tuesday night, as Obama approached his self-imposed deadline with less than a week left, he quietly came out with a decision in an early evening news dump. Obama has graciously decided to give those who have not yet completed purchase of Obamacare a little more time to finalize their purchase. The real kicker is, similar to people being granted the ability by edict to claim hardship in not being able to afford the so-called ‘Affordable Care Act,’ Obama is going by the honor system with allowing people to check a box that they ‘tried’ to enroll by the 31st, but could not, for whatever reason, complete the purchase.

Community Organizer Two

The newly imposed deadline by Barack Obama isn’t quite a deadline at all. People have until ‘about mid-April’ to finalize their purchase and the government will not try to determine if you’re telling the truth or not.

According to the Washington Post, Obama is graciously offering an extension in preparation for a potential massive surge of individuals onto Healthcare.gov.

Administration officials said the accommodation is an attempt to prepare for a possible surge of people trying to sign up in the final days before the deadline. Such a flood could leave some people unable to get through the system.

“We are ... making sure that we will be ready to help consumers who may be in line by the deadline to complete enrollment — either online or over the phone,” said Julie Bataille, director of the office of communications for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the agency overseeing the federal health-care exchange.

The extra time will not be restricted, though, to people who wait until the last minute to try to sign up. Although no one will be asked why they need an extension, the idea is to help people whose applications have gotten held up because of the Web site’s technical problems — or who haven’t been able to get the system to calculate subsidies to help them pay for coverage.

According to a Health and Human Services official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity about decisions that have not been made public, an exact time frame for this extension has not been set, and depends in part on how many people request it. Nor have officials decided precisely how long people will have to select a health plan after they get the extra time.

Perhaps Obama is recognizing the programming shortcomings of his signature legislation’s website with its tendency to be non-functional. Or, it could be that he’s hoping that the two weeks he’s spent targeting millennials with an embarrassing last-minute push for enrollment will all of a sudden produce the enrollment numbers that he has hoped for.

Even if this extension to a non-deadline deadline bolsters his faux enrollment numbers to 7 million people, Obama himself said over and over again that America had 46 million people uninsured. These people, according to the president, were desperate for coverage. By his analysis, Americans should have been clamoring for coverage and flocking to Obamacare as their savior. Instead, the country has witnessed false figures related to enrollment from Obama and an estimated 5 million people, so far, who have lost the very insurance that they were promised they could keep.

One thing is certain, in Obama’s America, the law of the land is open to activist interpretation and supposedly ‘settled law’ is meaningless if it doesn’t work in favor of Obama’s quest to fundamentally transform America or if it could negatively affect the outcome for his party in the 2014 mid-terms.

Complete Message

Today’s Political Cartoon


Shoes to Fill

Posted on March 26, 2014

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/03/shoes-fill/#Dt7sGr0oISl6kK0C.99

Two-Shoes

Community Organizer TwoComplete Message

Almost 4 in 5 Believe Proof of Citizenship Should be Required to Vote


Share

Voter ID

In a blow to the Democrat Party and the Obama regime, who are against presenting any form of identification prior to voting, and in fact call the practice somehow racist, a new Rasmussen Reports national poll finds that 78% of likely U.S. voters believe that proof of citizenship should be required to be presented prior to voting.

In the survey, only 19% oppose the requirement to present proof of citizenship. Rasmussen points out that the number in favor of the requirement is on the rise. Last year, 71% were in favor of the requirement.

Just last month, Obama Vice President, Democrat Joe Biden, equated laws requiring voter identification to “hatred.”

Complete Message

Romney attacks Obama for ‘faulty judgement’ and accuses the president of naivety over Russia’s annexation of Crimea


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2587459/Romney-attacks-Obama-faulty-judgement-accuses-president-naivety-Russias-annexation-Crimea.html#ixzz2x0uVHCvU

  • Failed 2012 Republican presidential nominee Romney said Obama could have done more to try and deter Russia’s annexation of Crimea
  • He did acknowledge that such steps may not have been enough though to hold back Russia President Vladimir Putin
  • During the 2012 campaign, Romney took criticism from Obama for saying Russia was America’s ‘number one geopolitical foe,’ rather than al-Qaida

By Associated Press Reporter

Mitt Romney said on Sunday that President Barack Obama is naive when it comes to Russia, has shown ‘faulty judgment’ about Moscow’s intentions and could have done more to try to deter its annexation of Crimea.

The 2012 Republican presidential nominee said Obama didn’t have the foresight to anticipate Russia’s moves and should have been working earlier with allies to make clear the penalties that Russia would face if it moved into Ukraine.

Community Organizer Two

Romney did acknowledge that such steps may not have been enough though to hold back Russia President Vladimir Putin.

Mitt Romney said President Barack Obama is naive when it comes to Russia and has shown 'faulty judgment'

 ‘Had we communicated those things, there’s always the potential that we could have kept them from invading a country and annexing it into their own,’ Romney said on CBS’ Face the Nation.

During the 2012 campaign, Romney took criticism from Obama for saying Russia was America’s ‘number one geopolitical foe,’ rather than al-Qaida. Now Romney seems to be claiming the right to say, essentially, ‘I told you so.’

‘There’s no question but that the president’s naivety with regards to Russia, and his faulty judgment about Russia’s intentions and objectives, has led to a number of foreign policy challenges that we face,’ Romney said.

Community Organizer Two

‘And unfortunately, not having anticipated Russia’s intentions, the president wasn’t able to shape the kinds of events that may have been able to prevent the kinds of circumstances that you’re seeing in the Ukraine, as well as the things that you’re seeing in Syria.’

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who just returned from Ukraine, said it was Romney who was naiveSen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who just returned from Ukraine, said it was Romney who was naive

He said the U.S. should now welcome nations that seek entry into NATO, should forgo cuts to the U.S. military budget and reconsider putting a missile defense system into the Czech Republic and Poland, as once planned.

During the 2012 campaign, Romney had tried to portray the Democratic incumbent as soft on Russia. Writing in Foreign Policy magazine, he said that ‘for three years, the sum total of President Obama’s policy toward Russia has been: “We give, Russia gets.”’

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who just returned from Ukraine, said it was Romney who was naive.

Durbin, referring to Putin, a former officer in the Soviet KGB, said Putin is ‘a bully and we’ve got to call him for what he is. But this notion that some sanction is going to stop a former colonel in the KGB from his ambitions of a Russian empire is naive.

Romney also used the appearance to criticize Hillary Rodham Clinton, Obama’s first secretary of state who now is considering a presidential run in 2016.

Failed 2012 Republican presidential nominee Romney said Obama didn't have the foresight to anticipate Russia's moves and should have been working earlier with allies to make clear the penalties that Russia would face if it moved into Ukraine

Romney said he couldn’t think of a major country that had greater respect and admiration for the U.S. than it did ‘after five years of the Obama administration and Secretary Clinton.’

‘You look over the past five years and say, “what’s happened?” Good things have not been bursting out all over,’ he said.

Durbin, the second-ranking Senate Democrat, said on CBS that Romney suffered from ‘political amnesia.’

‘Osama bin Laden is gone. The war in Iraq is over. Afghanistan is coming to a close. And this president has worked with many of these nations successfully to put pressure on Iran, the sanctions, bringing them to the negotiating table,’ Durbin said.

He said Romney has ‘forgotten those facts.’

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


Sanctions Bear Little

Posted on March 25, 2014

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/03/sanctions-bear-little/#hqhcR2CxabEaCiMm.99

Sanctions-Bear-Little

Community Organizer Two

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


“World Famous Bear Trainer Barack Obama”

Posted on

http://conservativebyte.com/2014/03/world-famous-bear-trainer-barack-obama/

 

BearCommunity Organizer Two

Is Obama President, King, Dictator, or Tyrant?


 http://patriotupdate.com/articles/obama-president-king-dictator-tyrant/#KP3dh9GFrjru4ffd.99

Written on Friday, March 21, 2014 by

obamacampaigning

President Obama is breaking all precedents in steamrolling a complacent Congress as he governs by executive orders. With Obama, we the people has been replaced by me the president.  In recent speeches, the president has been forthright in saying that in every case where he can act without Congress he will do so.  Not only is this an extraordinary statement coming from a man who is supposed to have been a professor of Constitutional law, it shows a dangerous disregard for government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

Ever since the U.S. Constitution was established as the law of the land, there has been tension—some would say power struggles—between the executive and legislative branches of government.  In fact, this tension is a necessary part of the checks and balances our Founders put in place to ensure that each branch of government plays its assigned role without encroaching on the prerogatives of the other branches.  If the president gains too much of the upper hand over Congress, the voice of the people is replaced by the voice of just one person: the president.  If Congress gains too much of the upper hand over the executive branch, we have government by committee, and nothing gets done.  Consequently, it is important to maintain the proper Constitutionally-prescribed balance between the executive and legislative branches of government.

Barack Obama knows this. He probably taught the concept when he was moonlighting as a professor of law.  But knowing about a concept and complying with it are two very different things.  In President Obama’s defense, working with Congress can be a frustrating experience.  Congress can be ponderous, self-protective, parochial, self-serving, and excruciatingly slow to act.  It is governance by committee with all of the shortcomings inherent in that concept.  President Obama is hardly the first person to be elected president only to find that his hands are often tied by an unresponsive Congress.  I am sure that many of his predecessors would have loved to simply by-pass Congress and—like him—govern by executive order.  But most had the good sense to understand that governing by executive order is one of those concepts where the solution is worse than the problem.

When the President of the United States by-passes Congress by issuing executive orders or by using the regulatory process—things Barack Obama does frequently—he undermines the concept of we the people that is the foundation of our form of government and of the freedoms Americans have traditionally enjoyed.  Congress, with all of its warts and blemishes, is still composed of the representatives of the people.  By-passing the elected representatives of the people is the same as by-passing the people.  Rulers who by-pass the people are dictators, kings, and often tyrants, but they are not presidents. Barack Obama was elected president, not dictator nor king, but by governing through executive orders and bureaucratic regulations, he is behaving like one or the other, or both.

One measure of an effective president is that he understands the governing process and is sufficiently adept politically that he can work with Congress to implement his programs and make good on his campaign promises.  Some presidents have had the political skills to accomplish this and some have not.  Barack Obama falls into the latter category, but where he differs from his predecessors is that he has made no effort to learn the way Congress and Washington, D. C. work.  Rather, if he cannot get what he wants when he wants it—regardless of whether the American people want it—he simply by-passes Congress using executive orders or bureaucratic regulations.  What makes this tyrannical situation especially dangerous is that at a time when our country has a president who thinks he is a king, we also have a weak, complacent Congress that lacks the fortitude to stand up to him.  As a result, government of the people, by the people, and for the people has been replaced by government of the president, by the president, and for the president.

Community Organizer Two

Obama Has Made the World a More Dangerous Place


 http://patriotupdate.com/articles/obama-made-world-dangerous-place/#XKSdAyFlyguAC3KG.99

Written on Saturday, March 22, 2014 by

wimp

Once again President Obama has proven who the world leader is and who is the pansy in mom jeans.  Obama loves all the tough talk and rhetoric but he is really upset with Vladimir Putin for running Russia the way Obama would like to run the United States: as a dictator with a spine. Comparing Obama and Putin you get Pee Wee Herman on a bike (Obama) versus a strong, tough leader on a horse (Putin).  What happened to this president saying he was going to restore respect for the United States in the International community?  Instead we see another example of how the Obama apology tour failed to impress world leaders and was perceived as a sign of weakness and lack of leadership.  The ineptness of this president has caused the stature of the United States to slip further into the outhouse.  If Obama really wanted to get Putin’s attention he would threaten to leave Joe Biden and John Kerry in Moscow and sign Putin up for Obamacare.

For all the religious quoting of this administration and its talking heads they missed the Golden rule which states “Treat others the way you want to be treated.” This is sound advice to live by.  Instead they want to treat others their way and remain exempt from retribution.  Watching the Obama administration respond to receiving the same treatment that they have been giving the American people is entertaining.  The administration was upset with Putin forcing his will on the country of Ukraine, calling it “,,,unfair and not listening to the people.” That’s rich.  The very issues they are complaining about were just fine with them until the shoe was on the other foot.  Bullying, intimidation, spying, reckless spending, forcing their will on people instead of listening to them; these are all actions the administration has complained about recently but had no problem inflicting on the American people.  The only time they seem to take issue with bullying is when someone is doing it to them.

  • Senator Diane Feinstein is right to complain about the CIA spying on the Senate but she had no problem with the US government’s warrantless spying on the American people.
  • Lois Lerner had no problem stomping on the US Constitution as she used the IRS to go after the Obama administration’s perceived enemies, but was quick to hide behind her constitutional rights when going before Congress. 
  • The administration is decrying Putin’s intimidation of opponents but had no problem with the IRS intimidating Americans. 
  • The State Department is complaining about the ballot used in the election to see if Crimea should succeed from the Ukraine having no option for a No vote, but the administration saw no problem forcing Obamacare on the American people and sees no problem with the president using his “pen and phone” to force new rules and regulations on the American people without no vote. 
  • The unilateral decision making regarding which laws to enforce and what new rules to impose has brought us closer to
    • the national legalization of pot,
    • the destruction of the traditional family,
    • and the moral decay of our military
    • as well as the destruction of morale among our troops.

About two years ago the DNC Chairperson called for The Republican National Committee Chair, Reince Priebus, to apologize for his remarks on Meet the Press, where he compared President Obama to the Italian cruise ship captain who abandoned his ship rather than stay with it and lead the people to safety after the tragic accident.  The Left felt his comments were insensitive, but I guess the truth hurts as today the comments seem prophetic.   The RNC Chair’s words were more accurate than even he realized as the President has effectively taken our world standing which was pretty sound, the economy that was ailing, our credit rating which was good, and our healthcare that needed some adjustments and scuttled it all by running it upon the rocks.  Sadly all the missteps have been fueled by his massive ego coupled with a complete lack of leadership ability.  To make matters worse, just like the captain who ran away after the incident, instead of leading by making some tough decisions Obama prefers to be on vacation, on the golf course, campaigning, or anywhere else instead of being in Washington where he can be held responsible for his incompetence.  What is important to Obama is golfing, fundraising, vacationing and watching movies instead being in the National Security briefs or doing his job. His slothfulness and desire for celebrity, while hosting multiple and White House parties, is overshadowed by his cries of “income inequality” while millions of Americans are still out of work.   Is it then a coincidence that Obama’s actions send the world financial markets down but Putin’s comments ignoring US sanctions settled the markets?

What is sure is that Obama has been successful in undoing 200+ years of world leadership and sending this nation into a downhill slide.  His celebrity life free of leadership, responsibility, with no international respect is filled with hollow threats for our adversaries, and has reignited the Cold War, making this world a much more dangerous place.

What Did You expect

What Happened to Uncle Sam?


http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/what-happened-to-uncle-sam/

Mar. 21, 2014 9:30am

Molli Nickell is the author of “Uncle Scam Want$ Your Money & Your Country,” a collection of Politically Incorrect Fables. Her daily rants and fables also are available at her blog where she writes as a Granny Guerrilla to entertain and enlighten low-information voters, amuse patriots, and piss off progressives.

 

 

Once upon a time, in a country of good and hardworking people, everyone felt a kinship with Uncle Sam who represented a supportive, benevolent, and trustworthy government. No matter what the circumstances, We-the-People knew we could count on Uncle Sam who honored the Constitution, and always represented our best interests.

In those not-so-long ago days, America’s brave warriors had fought against tyranny and for freedom in Europe and Asia. We prospered with manageable taxes, smallish government, and opportunities galore to launch and expand business. Jobs and career opportunities were plentiful. Parents socked dollars away for retirement and college funds for their children. American students BDE (Before the Department of Education) consistently placed #1 in worldwide rankings of academic achievement.

We-the-People continued to trust Uncle Sam to protect our best interests and make correct decisions about when and where to send our brave warriors to help other countries fight for freedom on their soil.Uncle Sam

Does this sound like never-never land? It wasn’t. These were the “good old days,” before progressive liberals came into power.

This was America at a time when it seemed our best days stretched out into the future, toward an endless horizon of possibilities. Safe, secure and comfortable, We-the-People shifted into snooze control.

Zzzzzzz.

We failed to notice how our values, formerly shared with Uncle Sam, no longer were quite so shared.

We failed to notice the gradual erosion of adherence to our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the Rule of Law.

We failed to notice destructive actions being taken by our elected representatives who:

  • Tossed aside campaign promises and supported policies that enhanced their personal wealth but diminished it for everybody else.

  • Broke into grandma and grandpa’s piggy banks and stole Social Security and Medicare dollars to redistribute to “favored” supporters.

  • Shifted allegiance to new “best” friends (special interest groups) who supported re-election campaigns to keep their bought-and-paid-for representatives in positions of power for happily ever after.

  • Turned our government into an uncontrolled debt machine.

  • Passed legislation that chip-chip-chipped away at our Judeo/Christian traditions.

  • Promoted involvement in foreign wars with no clear cut objective or end plan that squandered blood and treasure, and resulted in defeat and retreat.

  • Supported intervention of teachers’ unions and federal regulations that dumbed down our education system and trapped America’s children in government-controlled “flunk factories.”

How could this have happened?

While We-the-People were snoozing, Uncle Sam was shoved over a cliff and replaced by his evil twin, Uncle SCAM, the poster child for something gone terribly wrong in America.

He and his cohorts represent the most powerful, ruthless, and corrupt political machine seen in our recent history. Their goal? The fundamental transformation of our country, by hook or by crook (mostly the later).uncle sam

Those who comprise Uncle SCAMs corrupt core occupy our White House and include Chicago socialist liberals, left-wing, current-and-former congress people, community organizers, Ivy League endowment babies, heads of powerful commissions and congressional committees, bureau chiefs, lobbyists, advisors, bankers, socialists, labor union thugs, and a communist or two: all of whom hate unlimited freedom for anyone but themselves.

Their agenda involves control over everything from freedom of speech to education to healthcare. They rub their greedy hands together in glee with “Mawwaaaahahaha” (evil laugh), as they snatch power and become more entrenched as the “political elites.”

America’s president and his misses are perfect examples of this privileged class. The “first couple” enjoy luxurious, taxpayer-funded vacations for themselves and friends in Hawaii, Spain, Africa, Ireland, China, Mexico, etc. They throw lavish parties for celebrity pals and foul-mouth rappers, but lock the doors of our White House to keep out We-the-Riffraff. (The reason for the lockout? Budgetary concerns. Really? The cost to keep the White House open for one year is $2 million dollars: less than the cost of a typical Obama family-and-friends vacation.)

You gotta’ hand it to Uncle SCAM. His minions have been quite successful in achievement of fundamental transformation. Their programs of redistribution of wealth, esteem-based education, free food, free cell phones, free contraceptives, free abortions, politically correct speech, promotion of class, race, and gender warfare, and penalties for success drag America down to the lowest common denominator.

Their shining accomplishment is almost complete. We-the-people have been duped.

Complete Message

We’ve lost our doctors and healthcare we could afford. Our 1st Amendment to freedom of religion is being destroyed. Sad to say, Uncle SCAM’s promised solution to fix America’s economic and healthcare woes is doing just the opposite (which was the plan all along). We’ve become a nation of part-time workers, have suffered massive job loss, and millions of families have become enslaved to Uncle Scam’s handouts of welfare and food stamps. But wait, it gets worse, much worse.

The final blow is on the way . . . discover the meaning of worse in “Uncle SCAM, Part II.”

P.S. Want a little more snark in your day? Additional fables are posted on Molli’s blog. You’ll enjoy the story about Prince Hope-n-change and his ascension to the throne. Molli tweets @grannyguerrilla.

Molli for JoeP.S. Want a little more snark in your day?

Additional fables are posted on Molli’s blog, www.grannyguerrillas.com.

You’ll enjoy the story about Prince Hope-n-change and his ascension to the throne.

Molli tweets @grannyguerrilla.

 

TheBlaze contributor channel supports an open discourse on a range of views. The opinions expressed in this channel are solely those of each individual author.

WE MUST NEVER FORGET

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


“No Laughing Matter”

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/03/laughing-matter/#VxjQWXqsieqEKBLU.99

 

No-Laughing-Matter

Complete Message

BETS ANYONE?


ussr

Obama administration now classified as “PRANKSTER”. Thank you Mr. Putin, Number One Imperialistic Dictator, for telling it like it is! My personal definition may be a little less PC when I say, simply, that Obama is a JOKE!!! Of course, the truth is there is no difference, only a matter of semantics.

For a little perspective on the current state of international affairs that hold monumental consequences for the future of this globe let us revisit a scene just a few short decades ago: the confrontation of then U.S. President Reagan and the USSR Czar “Mr. Khrushchev”. Let’s see, I was young then, perhaps in my late twenties or early thirties and uninvolved in politics, especially worldwide matters of importance! BUT, I do recall President Reagan having the balls to tell Mr. Khrushchev to “TEAR DOWN THE WALL”. As I recall, the Czar did not take kindly to President Reagan’s demands and in one confrontation became so angry that he proceeded to beat the hell out of the table at which he was sitting.

Oh what a difference true leadership makes. Reagan displayed strength and insisted on freedom; Obama apologizes for America’s strength and tells today’s dictator that he will be more accommodating. Under Reagan the wall came down and the USSR dissolved; under Obama Crimea falls and Obama’s reaction is considered a joke!

Makes one wonder if Mr. Putin can get the USSR rebuilt during the remaining Obama tenure. Any one care to place a bet??

What Did You expect

Mr. President, how about those job thingys


President Obama is about due for another “pivot toward job creation”. We can’t remember just when the last pivot but hey, we’re old and our memory is not what it used to be. We think. Anyway, it seems like there was another jobs pivot just a couple of weeks ago and it came and went in about a heartbeat.

The point of all this snark is that Reuters is reporting today about the first of President Obama’s “manufacturing innovation hubs” in Youngstown, Ohio.

The President announced, with appropriate fanfare, in his 2013 State of the Union address that he was creating these hubs to attract new manufacturing and create great, middle class jobs that would revitalize the area where the hubs are located. Youngstown was the first hub and seven more are planned by the end of the year in Chicago, Detroit, Raleigh, and four other US metro areas hard hit by unemployment and economic problems.

With this Presidential initiative, you should think “O’manufacturing”. This plan appears to be about as well thought out as “O’healthinsurance”.

One of the biggest challenges is the nature of factory innovation itself, which often reduces, rather than bolsters, the need for workers who aren’t very skilled. That means the manufacturing initiative could help create jobs for people with highly specialized skills, such as engineers, but it may do far less to help people struggling to find work after the shuttering of local steel mills.

Three-D printers, the focus of the Youngstown project, are an example of this. Once they are programmed and loaded with raw materials, they work their magic with nary a human hand. If they are ever widely adopted, researchers say a big reason will be that they use less labor than traditional manufacturing.

Heck of a job Sparky.

What Did You expect

The President asked Congress for $1B to set up 45 of these thingys, the money is tied up in Congress, thankfully, and he’s stealing money from the military for the first seven.

Here’s the net result of the project so far in Youngstown, keeping in mind that we don’t know how much the administration spent on the project or what, if any, their initial goal was.

The Youngstown hub is still in its very early stages but so far, at least, there are no obvious signs of a wider impact. About 29,600 people held factory jobs in the Youngstown metro area in January, the latest month for which data are available. That’s actually slightly lower than the number of manufacturing jobs there when the administration awarded the hub to Youngstown in August 2012 and when it opened its doors that October. Total employment in the area was flat in 2013, while it grew nationwide.

Of six organizations in Youngstown and Cleveland – the nearest major city in the state – working on America Makes projects, none has made new hires for the work.

So, money spent, no return. It’s a government project.

How about we look at something that is adding jobs, lots and lots of really good paying jobs, to the economy.

Signs of pride and prosperity were evident all over Williamsport and the gorgeous northern Pennsylvania countryside around it. Friendly, happy people greeted us. New cars, trucks, hotels and restaurants sparkled in a clean, bustling downtown. New roofs topped barns and houses, while late model tractors worked the fields. Former dirt roads are now paved.

Men and women again have high-paying jobs, young people are coming back instead of moving away, their salaries are supporting other businesses and jobs, and many are taking college programs in oilfield technical and business specialties…

What could be causing that to happen? Could it be an administration jobs initiative that we missed?

Hydraulic fracturing has created 1.7 million new direct and indirect jobs in the United States, with the total likely to rise to 3 million jobs over the next seven years, IHS Global Insight reports. It has injected billions into North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Texas and other state economies. It’s added $62 billion to federal and state treasuries, with that total expected to rise to $111 billion by 2020.

Hydraulic fracturing, also known as “fracking” is the bearer of this good news. Fracking is an initiative of private industry and they’ve been fought tooth and nail by the Obama administration’s EPA and every blue state governor in the nation.

The boom that we’re seeing from fracking is happening almost exclusively in red states and only on privately developed lands. Federal lands, which hold huge reservoirs of gas and oil that could be safely recovered by fracking are off limits thanks to the Obama administration. They’re building solar and wind powered turkeys instead and keeping people unemployed and the US economy on a code blue.

TPNN EXCLUSIVE: Dinesh D’Souza Calls Out Obama Administration for Mafia-Style Tactics


http://www.tpnn.com/2014/03/19/tpnn-exclusive-dinesh-dsouza-calls-out-obama-administration-for-mafia-style-tactics/

March 19, 2014 By Greg Campbell

 

Dinesh
Conservative author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza, who earned much praise from conservatives for his documentary “2016: Obama’s America” spoke with The Tea Party News Network regarding his current battle with Obama’s Justice Department and the nature of the Obama Administration’s willingness to deal with political dissent through brute force.
 
In January, D’Souza was indicted for alleged campaign finance law violations. Prosecutors charge that D’Souza used straw donors to provide money to a U.S. Senate candidate in 2012.
 
TPNN met up with D’Souza and asked about the legal battle and questioned if the indictment was politically-motivated given his outspoken views on President Obama.
 
D’Souza responded that he is trying to avoid saying anything directly about the pending legal actions, but noted that the Obama Administration has a history of dealing with political dissent with force.
 
“I do think that Obama was unnerved by ‘2016,’” D’Souza began. “We know that because he had a diatribe about it on his website, BarackObama.com. I can also see from just looking around that the government has been using its power to target its opponents.
 

This is kind of an Alinsky-ite strategy. [Saul] Alinsky came up in Chicago and Alinsky says that he learned a lot of his tactics from the mafia and he points out that the way to win in politics is not to treat your opponent as a well-meaning good guy, but to make him a bad guy; treat him not as a critic, but an enemy. And that seems to be the modus operandi of this administration.”

 
D’Souza’s criticism comes as Obama’s IRS remains under fire after it was revealed that for years, the tax-collecting agency targeted Tea Party and conservative groups for harassment prior to and after the 2012 re-election bid.
 

D’Souza and many other conservatives have long pointed to Saul Alinsky as a model for Obama’s political strategy. Alinsky advocated a radical brand of politics that focuses on seizing and maintaining political power as a means of creating radical change in society and government.

 
 

New Executive Order: “Obama Has Just Given Himself the Authority to Seize Your Assets”


http://www.infowars.com/new-executive-order-obama-has-just-given-himself-the-authority-to-seize-your-assets/

SHTFplan.com
March 20, 2014

On Monday the U.S. government took steps to seize the US-based assets of Russian lawmakers and anyone else that the US government deemed complicit in supporting the Crimean secession movement.

Image: Barack Obama (Wiki Commons).

We’ve seen the U.S. government do this in countless cases surrounding drug and financial crimes, and sometimes even against foreign leaders like Saddam Hussein and Manuel Noriega.

What makes this particular instance so unprecedented and terrifying is that President Obama went so far as to issue a new Executive Order to give himself the authorization to do so, because the laws of the United States are such that our government is not allowed to simply take someone’s bank assets, home or business without due process.

Here’s the kicker.

The new Executive Order doesn’t just apply to just Russians or foreigners. It gets blanket coverage, so even American citizens could now face asset forfeiture if their actions are deemed to be “contributing to the situation in the Ukraine.”

Be careful what you say. Be careful what you write. President Obama has just given himself the authority to seize your assets.

According to the president’s recent Executive Order, “Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine” (first reported by WND’s Aaron Klein), the provisions for seizure of property extend to “any United States person.” That means “any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.”

Via: The Ron Paul Institute

Like most Executive Orders and government legalese, the definitions for why an individual would have their assets seized under this directive are extremely broad and they could, for all intents and purposes, be used against anyone who supports Russian interests, or simply argues against those of the United States.

You can read the full Executive Order at the White House web site. The key points are noted below:

All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person (including any foreign branch) of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State:

(i) to be responsible for or complicit in, or to have engaged in, directly or indirectly, any of the following:

(A) actions or policies that undermine democratic processes or institutions in Ukraine;

(B) actions or policies that threaten the peace, security, stability, sovereignty, or territorial integrity of Ukraine; or

(C) misappropriation of state assets of Ukraine or of an economically significant entity in Ukraine

This new Executive Order has crossed a very dangerous line. It’s one that turns the notions of property rights and due process upside down by effectively bypassing the U.S. Constitution.

While we’re sure the President and his staff would argue that such a law would never be used against Americans who are protected by free speech, the fact is that the Executive Branch now believes it has the self-manifested authority to target any individual who engages in activities that undermine US interests abroad or at home.

If a President of the United States believes he has the authority to make it illegal for you to provide support to Russia by way of political commentary, charitable donations or other methods, could he also use similar directives to push forward other agendas?

President Obama has already re-authorized an E.O. giving him the ability to seize farms, food, processing plants, energy resources, transportation, and skilled laborers during national emergency.

The next Executive Order could come in the form of restrictions on firearms advocacy or target those who speak out against policies like government mandated health care. All it would take is the declaration of a national emergency and they can essentially do as they please.

Is it prudent to give a single person the ability to force such actions down the throats of the American people without Congressional oversight or Judicial review?

This article was posted: Thursday, March 20, 2014 at 6:32 am

MAX HASTINGS: Putin thinks the West is as weak as jelly. And the tragedy is he’s right


You want to know how we are perceived in the world? Read the following report from England. Not good

Jerry Broussard

Three Star Line

By Max Hastings

PUBLISHED: 21:05 EST, 18 March 2014 | UPDATED: 21:05 EST, 18 March 2014

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2583970/Putin-thinks-West-weak-jelly-And-tragedy-hes-right.html#ixzz2wRDkVaxz

The West’s outrage at Russia’s illegal annexation of the Crimea found full expression at Monday’s meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels.

It was announced that 21 Russian and Crimean politicians and officials face a travel ban and asset freeze, a sanction matched by America. Thus, a tiny number of Moscow’s elite and their puppets find their Harrods cards suspended.

And in case you are wondering, it is as likely that President Vladimir Putin’s £25billion personal fortune will be discovered sitting in a current account at the Kensington branch of NatWest as that Sevastapol will win the 2014 Holiday Destination of the Year prize.

Armed aggression: Putin's actions in Ukraine rely on exactly the same arguments that Hitler once deployed

Armed aggression: Putin’s actions in Ukraine rely on exactly the same arguments that Hitler once deployed

 

Former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind yesterday dismissed this pea-shoot gesture as ‘pathetic’, and he is right.

Whatever the historic arguments for Crimean secession from Ukraine – and some exist – Putin’s act of armed aggression, with threats of more to come, relies on exactly  the same arguments that Hitler deployed to justify his 1938-39 lunges into Czechoslovakia and Poland.

Russia’s brutish president plays golf abroad with only one club in his bag — force, or the threat of it.

Nothing that has been said or done by the West since the Ukrainian crisis began will have caused him a moment’s discomfort.

Russia cannot impress the world by social or industrial achievements, because it boasts none. It can gain our attention only by inspiring fear or sponsoring mayhem, whether in Crimea, Iran or Syria, and Putin is content that this should be so.

The United States yesterday warned of further sanctions against Russia, including expulsion from the G8.

But it remains unlikely that the leading Continental nations will support convincing economic action.

Half of Europe cooks on Russian gas, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel opposes a display of real defiance against Putin, or indeed any foreign enemy.

Rally: Putin speaks at an event in front of a background reading 'Crimea, we are together'

Rally: Putin speaks at an event in front of a background reading ‘Crimea, we are together’

 

Unafraid: Kremlin supporters flood Red Square in celebration of the incorporation of Crimea into Russia

Unafraid: Kremlin supporters flood Red Square in celebration of the incorporation of Crimea into Russia

 

Thus the master of the Kremlin has concluded that the West is weak, jelly weak. The evidence of almost three decades since the Cold War’s ending suggests he is right.

Depressed

Europe’s major powers have largely dismantled their armed forces. NATO is more dependent on the Americans than ever in its history for any display of military power.

U.S. radar surveillance aircraft and U.S. fighters yesterday patrolled the skies over Eastern Europe, and mighty sick the American people are becoming of paying the bill for our defences.

And where in all this is Britain? The Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary have talked bravely since the crisis began.

Yesterday in the Commons, William Hague deplored Russia’s ‘land grab’, the manner in which Moscow has rejected ‘respect for the law of that country, or for international law’.

He asserts that Putin has made ‘a big miscalculation’; that Russia will face ‘costs and consequences’ for its military intervention in Ukraine.

Brave talk: Foreign Secretary William Hague has condemned Putin, but Britain now commands little respect internationally

Brave talk: Foreign Secretary William Hague has condemned Putin, but Britain now commands little respect internationally.

But why should Moscow be impressed? This British Government, for all its pretensions since 2010 to play a heroic lead, has conducted its affairs in a fashion that leaves us singing falsetto on the international stage.

A friend who recently accompanied a national delegation to the Middle East told me how depressed he was to discover how respect for Britain has slumped.

We have lost two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, albeit as junior partners to the Americans; then made an almighty mess of policy towards Syria.

There, David Cameron and William Hague marched to the top of the hill, then had to come scuttling down again when they found nobody else following. Libya is now a shambles.

Defence cuts have made a sorry impression. We can no longer posture in Washington as a credible partner in military operations, and the Government lies through its teeth about the state of our Armed Forces.

Stuck with two absurd giant aircraft-carriers under construction, it refuses to admit a truth well known in Whitehall – that it can afford only a handful of American-built F-35 jets to fly off them.

Ministers pretend they can make good their drastic reduction in Army strength by recruiting more reservists. Yet every man, woman and sniffer dog in the services knows the reserves scheme is dead in the water.

Thuggery

Moreover, in the secrecy of the Ministry of Defence, discussions have already started about prospective Army cuts below the planned 82,000 establishment, on the assumption that even this will soon be unaffordable.

David Cameron has placed Britain’s security in the hands of an accountant, Defence Secretary Philip Hammond, who displays as much understanding of strategy as Davina McCall.

It is welcome that a British Government should recognise our diminished place in the world. It is sad, however, that respect for this country should be so drastically reduced.

Accountant: Defence Secretary Philip Hammond has overseen plans to slash the Armed Forces

Accountant: Defence Secretary Philip Hammond has overseen plans to slash the Armed Forces

Britain commands enthusiasm among the rich and mighty as a great destination for shopping, country week-ending and Michelin-starred dinners.

But William Hague’s stern remarks about Ukraine impress foes and friends alike no more than the same lines delivered by Winnie the Pooh.

The lessons of the Ukraine crisis are written in neon lights. First, after decades in which the Left has denounced American ‘meddling’ in the affairs of other nations, here we see what happens when the greatest democracy on earth renounces its historic leadership role.

Barack Obama’s presidency is a failure for many reasons, rooted in the weird detachment of the man himself.

But it is scary indeed to see what happens when a big, ugly state such as Russia, ruled by a gangster elite, decides that the United States and its leader are no longer capable of resisting its thuggery.

Beyond this, it has been plain for decades that the U.S. is unwilling much longer to bankroll and spearhead our defence – and why should it, when Europe is a rich continent? Now, we see Germany refusing even to use its vast economic muscle to deter Moscow.

We must keep a sense of historical perspective. The Ukrainian crisis is grave, but it is not 1914 nor 1939. Nonetheless, it should provide a giant wake-up call to Europeans.

History did not end with the conclusion of the Cold War. There are still very bad people out there, willing to do very bad things unless they are deterred or stopped.

It is indispensable for NATO to warn Moscow, and mean it, that any act of aggression towards the Baltic states would provoke a major showdown.

Instead of imposing personal sanctions on a mere 21 Russians and Crimeans, every member of the Russian parliament who voted for invasion and annexation should be denied entry to the U.S. and EU.

Germany must recognise that its place as the richest and most powerful nation in Europe demands that it should start to do its share towards protecting our common security, as it has not done since 1990.

Crumbling

The British Government must find the money to rebuild our crumbling Armed Forces. We need a credible strategy for the 21st century, instead of a mere defence balance sheet.

Crumbling forces: Reductions in Armed Forces spending has left us less able to act

Crumbling forces: Reductions in Armed Forces spending has left us less able to act

It is a misfortune for the world that Russia, a great nation, should have fallen into the hands of brutes. Putin reveres Stalin, one of the most successful mass murderers of the 20th century.

Freedom and dissent are, in the Russian president’s eyes, unacceptable in his new czardom.

Yesterday, a Ukrainian servicemen was shot and killed at a base that came under attack in Crimea’s main town of Simferopol.

The acting Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk called it a war crime and said the Crimean conflict has now entered a ‘military phase’. These are chilling words indeed.

We neither need nor wish to fight Russia, but the West must abandon its dismally failed attempt to appease its leader.

The bear will continue to claw victims unless we display the will to drive him back into his lair – before he comes hunting closer to our own door.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


CONSERVATIVE-BYTE-BANNER

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 274 other followers

%d bloggers like this: