CITIZENS NEWS ONLINE

CAREER PLANNING

2012-02-07T19:15:00.001-05:00

THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS ... BABA A A A AS THEY GO TO SLAUGHTER!

2012-02-07T17:26:00.001-05:00

DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATIVE KATHY DAHLKEMPER: I WOULDN'T HAVE VOTED FOR OBAMACARE IF I'D KNOW ABOUT HHS REGULATION (hint: you're suppose to read the bill before voting for it!!!)

12:46 PM, FEB 7, 2012 • BY JOHN MCCORMACK

Former Democratic congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, a Catholic from Erie, Pennsylvania, cast a crucial vote in favor of Obamacare in 2010. She lost her seat that November in part because of her controversial support of Obamacare. But Dahlkemper said recently that she would have never voted for the health care bill had she known that the Department of Health and Human Services would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, sterilization procedures, and the "week-after" pill "ella" that can induce early abortions.

"I would have never voted for the final version of the bill if I expected the Obama Administration to force Catholic hospitals and Catholic Colleges and Universities to pay for contraception,” Dahlkemper said in a press release sent out by Democrats for Life in November. "We worked hard to prevent abortion funding in health care and to include clear conscience protections for those with moral objections to abortion and contraceptive devices that cause abortion. I trust that the President will honor the commitment he made to those of us who supported final passage."

Of course, most abortion opponents disagree with Dahlkemper that the HHS regulation is Obamacare's only moral problem. Under Obamacare, each state's federally subsidized health care exchange is required to offer a health insurance plan that covers elective abortions unless the state passes a law opting out of the requirement.

WHAT WAS THAT FLASH OF LIGHT AND ROARING SOUND ... ISRAEL RESPONDING TO THE NEW HOLOCAUST

2012-02-06T12:19:00.000-05:00

AYATOLLAH: KILL ALL JEWS, ANNIHILATE ISRAEL

Iran lays out legal case for genocidal attack against 'cancerous tumor'

The Iranian government, through a website proxy, has laid out the legal and religious justification for the destruction of Israel and the slaughter of its people. PERHAPS A WORD WAS MISSING IN THE PRIOR SENTENCE ... MUTUAL ... AS IN ASURED DESTRUCTION OF TWO CULTURES!

The doctrine includes wiping out Israeli assets and Jewish people worldwide.

Calling Israel a danger to Islam, the conservative website Alef, with ties to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said the opportunity must not be lost to remove “this corrupting material. It is a “‘jurisprudential justification” to kill all the Jews and annihilate Israel, and in that, the Islamic government of Iran must take the helm.”

HOW CAN ANOTHER RELIGION BE A DANGER TO ISLAM? ESPECIALLY A VERY SMALL COUNTRY WITH AN EQUALLY SMALL POPULATION.

The article, written by Alireza Forghani, an analyst and a strategy specialist in Khamenei’s camp, now is being run on most state-owned conservative sites, including the Revolutionary Guards’ Fars News Agency, showing that the regime endorses this doctrine.

So the quest for identity proceeds generation after generation ...

How do we perceive our culture? How do we understand ourselves as beings in need of meaning? We are socialized into and live in complex cultures from which we extract the very essence of our identity, but at the same time we also construct these cultures. How is this process accomplished? What is the nature of those cultural processes that provide us with symbolic meaning and vitalize our perception of ourselves within our self-structured and regulated social orders?

All very good questions. Perhaps one of the more important missing questions is to what extend or extreme will a culture go to protect themselves from a perceived threat to that existence?

THE STRATEGY ...

The commander of the Revolutionary Guards, Brig. Gen. Seyyed Mehdi Farahi, stated in Augustthat the Safir missile, which is capable of transporting a satellite into space, can easily be launched parallel to the earth’s orbit, which will transform it into an intercontinental ballistic missile. Western analysts didn’t believe this would happen until 2015. Historically, orbiting a satellite is the criterion for crediting a nation with ICBM capability.

The Quran (Albaghara 2:191-193): “And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers] … and fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah.”

POPULATION TARGETS
The last census by the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics that shows Israel has a population of 7.5 million citizens of which a majority of 5.7 million are Jewish. Then it breaks down the districts with the highest concentration of Jewish people, indicating that three cities, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa, contain over 60 percent of the Jewish population that Iran could target with its Shahab 3 ballistic missiles, killing all its inhabitants.

NUCLEAR TARGETS
Israeli facilities as: the Rafael nuclear plant, which is the main nuclear engineering center of Israel; the Eilun nuclear plant; another Israeli reactor in Nebrin; and the Dimona reactor in the nuclear research center in Neqeb, the most critical nuclear reactor in Israel because it produces 90 percent enriched uranium for Israel’s nuclear weapons.

CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURES TARGETS
Other targets, according to the article, include airports and air force bases such as the Sedot Mikha Air Base, which contains Jericho ballistic missiles and is located southwest of the Tel Nof Air Base, where aircraft equipped with nuclear weapons are based. Secondary targets include power plants, sewage treatment facilities, energy resources, and transportation and communication infrastructures.

Israel could be destroyed in less than nine minutes and that Khamenei, as utmost authority, the Velayete Faghih (Islamic Jurist), also believes that Israel and America not only must be defeated but annihilated.

http://empactamerica.org/

THERE'S THE BABY BOOMERS, ME, XY AND NOW DEBT GENERATION

2012-02-03T08:33:00.000-05:00

CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS CRAP!

DREAMING

WTF

THERE'S A GAG ... AND THEN THE GAGGING REFLECT ... BOTH WORK

2012-02-02T08:09:00.001-05:00

Jewish World Review Feb 2, 2012/ 9 Shevat, 5772

How states are restricting political speech nationwide

By George Will

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | FOUNTAIN HILLS, Ariz. ---Dina Galassini does not seem to pose a threat to Arizona’s civic integrity. But the government of this desert community believes that you cannot be too careful. And state law empowers local governments to be vigilant against the lurking danger that political speech might occur before the speakers notify the government and comply with all the speech rules.

Last October, Galassini became annoyed — like many Ron Paul supporters, she is easily annoyed by government — about the city’s plan to augment its spending with a $29.6 million bond issue, to be voted on by mail by Nov. 8. On Oct. 6, she sent e-mails to 23 friends and acquaintances, urging them to write letters to newspapers and join her in two demonstrations against the bond measure. On Oct. 12, before she could organize the demonstrations, she received a stern letter from the town clerk: “I would strongly encourage you to cease any campaign-related activities until the requirements of the law have been met.”

State law — this is the state of John McCain, apostle of political purification through the regulation of political speech — says thatanytime two or more people work together to influence a vote on a ballot measure, they instantly become a “political committee.” This transformation triggers various requirements — registering with the government, filing forms, establishing a bank account for the “committee” even if it has raised no money and does not intend to. This must be done before members of this fictitious “committee” may speak.

Galassini wrote to ask the clerk if it would be permissible for her to e-mail the 23 persons telling them the demonstrations were canceled — she got no response — and told the clerk, “This is all so confusing to me.” Confusion and inconvenience — Galassini could have made an appointment for tutoring by the clerk’s office concerning permissible speech — are probably intended consequences of laws designed to burden political speech that is potentially inconvenient for government. Galassini gave up trying to influence the vote.

The Supreme Court, in its splendid 2010 Citizens Uniteddecision, said that laws requiring licenses or other official permission to speak “function as the equivalent of prior restraint by giving the (government) power analogous to licensing laws implemented in 16th- and 17th-century England, laws and governmental practices of the sort that the First Amendment was drawn to prohibit.” Paul Avelar of the Institute for Justice, the nation’s only libertarian public-interest law firm, which is helping Galassini contest the constitutionality of Arizona’s law, says that such niggling nuisances are proliferating nationwide.

A Florida law requires disclosure, including the name and address of the contributor, of any contribution, no matter how small — a penny for your thoughts? Report it — to a political committee. A Washington state law is notably protective of the political class: There must be litigation before a campaign to recall a public official can start, and lawyers are essentially forbidden from volunteering their help with that litigation. In Mississippi, anyone can put up his or her own Web page about a ballot issue, but the Web page designer must disclose the time he or she took to do it. And anyone who spends more than $200 on political speech — say, a small ad in a local newspaper — is required to give the government monthly reports about his or her political activity.

Such pettifogging laws reflect, aside from the joy governments derive from bossing people around, the current rage for regulating political speech lest . . . what? Campaign regulations usually focus on money, supposedly to prevent quid pro quo corruption or the appearance thereof pertaining to candidates. But many laws cover activities involving ballot measures, which suggests that, for reformers, limiting political speech is itself the goal. Hence their obsession with political money, most of which funds the dissemination of speech.

Nationally, political hygienists are regretting their inadvertent creations, this year’s super PACs, entities run by supporters of presidential candidates but forbidden to “coordinate” with the candidates. Super PACs are spending money that the reformers, by imposing low limits on contributions to candidates and parties, have diverted away from campaigns that otherwise could be held directly accountable for, and judged in terms of, the speech they finance. We hear, yet again, the reformers’ cry: “There is too much money in politics.” This year, the presidential campaigns combined may spend almost $2 billion, which is almost as much as Americans will, in a few weeks, spend on Easter candy.

EVER WONDER WHY A POLITICIAN IS NEVER WRONG ...

2012-01-31T22:09:00.000-05:00

Spell Checker

I halve a spelling checker,
It came with my pea see.
It plainly marks four my revue
Mistakes I dew knot sea.

Eye strike a key and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait aweigh.

As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the era rite
Its rarely ever wrong.

I've scent this massage threw it,
And I'm shore your pleased too no
Its letter prefect in every weigh;
My checker tolled me sew.

NEVADA'S USED FOOD SENATOR ... IS HE A CZAR?

2012-01-27T20:46:00.000-05:00

NOPE NOT A PIECE OF USED FOOD ... BUT A @#$%@#@#@#!!!

The Solar thing just got a little more interesting.......REALLY!

The Tonopah Solar company in Harry Reid's Nevada is getting a $737 million loan from Obama's Department Of Energy-DOE. The project will produce a 110 megawatt power system and employ 45 permanent workers. That's costing us just $16 million per job. One of the investment partners in this endeavor is Pacific Corporate Group (PCG).

The PCG executive director is Ron Pelosi, who is the brother to Nancy 's husband. He is the uncle of California 's Lt. Governor Calvin Newsome.

Don't ask any questions, just move along folks.....nuthin' crooked goin' on here.

You will find people on both sides arguing we need more solar power or arguing that this company will create 1,000 jobs not just 45 so that would still cost us $737,000 per employee. The fact remains we just came off the horrible Solyndra deal and our government is corrupt at every level. Think about this come November.

Click here to verify: http://energy.gov/articles/energy-department-finalizes-737-million-loan-guarantee-tonopah-solar-energy-nevada-project

Energy Department Finalizes $737 Million Loan Guarantee to Tonopah Solar Energy for Nevada Project

September 28, 2011 - 12:32pm

Washington D.C. --- U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu today announced the Department finalized a $737 million loan guarantee to Tonopah Solar Energy, LLC to develop the Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project. The solar project, sponsored by SolarReserve, LLC, is a 110 megawatt concentrating solar power tower generating facility with molten salt as the primary heat transfer and storage medium. It will be the first of its kind in the United States and the tallest molten salt tower in the world. Located 14 miles northwest of Tonopah, Nevada on land leased from the Bureau of Land Management, the company anticipates the facility will fund 600 construction jobs and 45 permanent jobs. The Crescent Dunes Solar Energy facility is expected to avoid nearly 290,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide annually and produce enough electricity to power over 43,000 homes.

“If we want to be a player in the global clean energy race, we must continue to invest in innovative technologies that enable commercial-scale deployment of clean, renewable power like solar,” said Secretary Chu. “Solar generation facilities, like the Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project, help supply energy to local utilities and create hundreds of good, American clean energy jobs.”

The project includes 17,500 heliostats (mirror assemblies) that collect and focus the sun's thermal energy to heat molten salt flowing through an approximately 640-foot tall solar power tower. The high temperature molten salt circulates from the tower to a storage tank, where it is then used to produce steam and generate electricity. Excess thermal energy is stored in the molten salt and can be called upon at any time to create additional steady, clean, renewable power for up to ten hours, even in the evening hours and when direct sunlight isn’t available. This increases grid stability and reduces the need for carbon pollution emitting generators, which currently supplement intermittent renewable generation technologies during periods of no or low solar resource. The molten salt technology was demonstrated at the Solar Two facility in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Power from the project will be sold to Nevada Power Company, a utility subsidiary of NV Energy, Inc.

The Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office (LPO) administers three separate programs: the Title XVII Section 1703 and Section 1705 loan guarantee programs, and the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing (ATVM) loan program. The Title XVII loan guarantee programs support the deployment of commercial technologies along with innovative technologies that avoid, reduce, or sequester greenhouse gas emissions, while the ATVM loan program supports the development of advanced vehicle technologies. To date, the Department has issued loans, loan guarantees or offered conditional commitments for loan guarantees totaling nearly $40 billion to support more than 40 clean energy projects across the United States, including several of the world’s largest solar generation facilities, three geothermal projects, the world’s largest wind farm, and the nation’s first new nuclear power plant in three decades. For more information, please visithttp://www.lpo.energy.gov.

News Media Contact: 202-586-4940

HOW I KILLED OSAMA ... MOVIE COMING OCT 2012 ... JUST IN TIME FOR GENERAL ELECTION

2012-01-27T20:43:00.003-05:00

Judicial Watch Sues Obama Administration for Records Detailing Possible Leak of bin Laden Classified Information to Hollywood Director

So let me get this straight. The Obama administration is fighting Judicial Watch tooth-and-nail to avoid releasing photographs of the capture and killing of Osama bin Laden, citing national security reasons. And at the same time, administration officials allegedly leaked information about the bin Laden raid to a Hollywood film director?

That's what press reports seem to indicate. And we're now trying to get to the bottom of this emerging scandal.

On January 13, 2012, JW filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to obtain documents regarding meetings and communications between government agencies and Hollywood director Kathryn Bigelow. (If the name sounds familiar, it is because Bigelow is the Academy Award-winning director of the military film "The Hurt Locker." She is also the ex-wife of Hollywood director James Cameron of "Avatar" fame.)

At issue in JW's lawsuit is the possibility that the Obama administration leaked classified information to Bigelow and Annapurna Pictures as source material for the making of Bigelow's not-yet-released film, tentatively titled "Killing bin Laden."

Here's what we're after, pursuant to JW FOIA requests filed with the DOD and the CIA on August 9, 2011:

All records of communications between any officer, official, or employee of the DoD and Ms. Bigelow, as well as with Mr. Mark Boal, Ms. Megan Ellison, or employees of Annapurna Pictures.(The same request was made of the CIA with regard to Bigelow, Boal, Ellison, and employees of Annapurna Pictures.)

The DOD admitted receiving the FOIA request on August 22, 2011, but advised Judicial Watch that "at this time, we are unable to make a release determination on your request within twenty (20) working days" of August 9, which would have been by September 6, 2011. The CIA acknowledged receiving the FOIA request on August 16, 2011, indicating that "the large number of FOIA requests CIA received has created unavoidable delays, making it unlikely that we can respond with the 20 working days the FOIA requires."

Well, this stonewalling has dragged on for months and we still have no documents. We haven't even been told by the Obama administration if documents would be produced - hence our lawsuit.

Bigelow's film, in production since 2008, originally intended to document the decade-long hunt for Osama bin Laden. The top secret Navy SEAL team mission that led to the capture and killing of bin Laden is reportedly the source for the film's new content and conclusion.

As reported by Reuter's, "It has been alleged that Bigelow…in preparation for the script to their Annapurna Pictures movie about the killing of Osama Bin Laden - received classified information regarding his death."

Now, why would the Obama administration do such a thing?

First off, this is an administration that has shown a proclivity to selectively releasing information that helps the "Obama brand" while withholding information that may be harmful or embarrassing. (See theselective release of classified documents disparaging the use of so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques.")

Second, this is also an administration that aggressively uses federal agencies to assist the Obama campaign. (See the recently dismissed lawsuit against Boeing in support of Big Labor and the flow ofObamacare waivers to unions.)

The conclusion seems obvious: The alleged leaking of this information was an effort to boost the Obama 2012 presidential election campaign.

Thank you to liberal New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd for alerting us to this abuse:
The White House is also counting on the Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal big-screen version of the killing of Bin Laden to counter Obama's growing reputation as ineffectual. The Sony film by the Oscar-winning pair who made "The Hurt Locker" will no doubt reflect the president's cool, gutsy decision against shaky odds. Just as Obamaland was hoping, the movie is scheduled to open on Oct. 12, 2012 - perfectly timed to give a home-stretch boost to a campaign that has grown tougher.

The moviemakers are getting top-level access to the most classified mission in history from an administration that has tried to throw more people in jail for leaking classified information than the Bush administration.

It was clear that the White House had outsourced the job of manning up the president's image to Hollywood when Boal got welcomed to the upper echelons of the White House and the Pentagon and showed up recently - to the surprise of some military officers - at a C.I.A. ceremony celebrating the hero Seals (sic). In short, if press reports from the liberal media are to be believed, the Obama administration released classified national security information to help Hollywood make a two-hour Obama campaign commercial to be released just weeks before the 2012 elections.

As I say, JW is in hot pursuit of these "Killing bin Laden" records in order to get to the truth in the matter. And at the same time, we continue to fight in court for the release of the post-mortem photographs and video recordings of bin Laden. At this point, given the alleged Bigelow leaks, it's hard to put any stock in the claim made by Obama administration officials that their stonewalling of the bin Laden death photos has anything to do with national security.

OBAMA BY THE NUMBERS ...

2012-01-25T23:05:00.000-05:00

Barack Obama’s State Of The Union Ratings Continue To Decline, Down 12% From 2011

By NELLIE ANDREEVA | Wednesday January 25, 2012 @ 3:05pm PSTTags: Barack Obama, Ratings, State Of the Union

NOW FOR A FISH STORY ... IT WASN'T REALLY THIS BIG!!!

About 37.75 million viewers watched President Obama’s 2012 State of the Union address, which featured a farewell appearance by Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and aired live across 14 broadcast and cable networks. That was down 12% from last year’s speech, which was watched by 42.79 million people and down 21% from Obama’s first State of the Union in 2010 (48 million). Like his approval ratings, Obama’s TV ratings have been sliding since the post-inauguration high of 52.37 million viewers who tuned in for his address to the joint session of Congress in February 2009. Among the cable news networks, Fox News dominated the field with 3.8 million viewers vs. 2.8 million for MSNBC and 2.7 million for CNN.

A RANDOM ECONOMIC WALK IN HISTORY ... WHERE IS THE "YOU ARE HERE" SIGN?

2012-01-24T09:40:00.000-05:00

Quarterly Update: The Economic Downturn in Historical Context

Authors: Paul Swartz, Analyst, Center for Geoeconomic Studies and Neil Bouhan, Analyst, Center for Geoeconomic Studies

PublisherCouncil on Foreign Relations

Release DateJanuary 18, 2012

How do the recent economic collapse and recovery match up with past cycles? This chart book provides a series of answers, plotting current indicators (in red) against the average of all post–World War II recessions (in blue). To facilitate comparisons, the data are centered on the beginning of the recession (marked by "0"). The dotted lines are composites representing the mildest and the most severe experiences in past cycles. Because the downturn has been compared to the Great Depression, the appendix plots the recent trend lines against the 1930s.

Appendix: The Current Recession Compared to the Prewar Average and the Great Depression

The economic cycle framework can be used to compare the current cycle to prewar (World War II) recessions and the Great Depression. The thick red line represents the current recession; the thin blue line, the postwar average; the thick green line, the Great Depression; and the thin gold line, the prewar average.

Explore our other Chart Books:

Foreign Ownership of U.S. Assets

Foreign Exchange Reserves in the BRICs

Trends in U.S. Military Spending

Economic Recovery

View/Print in Pdf Format (3.3 MB PDF)

ATLAS SHRUGGED OR MAYBE JUST FARTED IN THE ELEVATOR ON HIS WAY TO THE TOP

2012-01-22T13:44:00.001-05:00

IS THERE A LESSON WITH COSTA CONCORDIA AND ITS CAPTAIN CHICKEN OF THE SEA ...

2012-01-22T13:14:00.001-05:00

Mr. Moyers interview with David Stockman was spot on, well done in more ways than one! There’s is really very little difference between the two party political system. Our political “system” appears to be illusion wrapped in a delusion fed by the shadow of a starving chicken. The American public needs a pair of glasses without the rose colored lens of crony capitalism. The “Mother’s Milk” of American politics is drowning “freedom and liberty” of opportunity, innovation and individualism in which Stockman clearly shows during the interview. Our “future” and “wealth creation” has been hi-jacked by zero interest rates. Perhaps the events of huge cruise ship Costa Concordia and its Captain “Chicken of the Sea” is an analogy of Washington, D.C. leadership, policy and the financial shoals we are as a country heading for as our political future unfolds during this election season. These political candidates should require a hunting license for bagging the public.

Bill Moyers Interviews David Stockman On Crony Capitalism

By Jeff Harding, on January 21st, 2012

This is a great interview of our own David Stockman by Bill Moyers. The title is “Crony Capitalism,” and the interview is wide-ranging and informative. David spells out the causes of our current malaise and the history behind it. The good thing about shows like this is that Moyers actually let’s Stockman talk at length. Enjoy!

SOPA, PIPA, AND YOUR FREEDOM

2012-01-21T13:17:00.001-05:00

Somalia, pirates and the high seas of cyber-space ...

<p>&amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;gt;</p>

OBAMACARE, SMALL BUSINESS AND WAIVERS

2012-01-21T09:16:00.000-05:00

Open Letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid from American Small Business League President Lloyd Chapman

PETALUMA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The following is an open letter from American Small Business League President Lloyd Chapman:

“It is time to end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants.”

I am asking for your help in encouraging President Obama to issue a simple executive order that could create millions of jobs and permanently boost our economy. Here are a few economic facts.

1. Small businesses create virtually all the net new jobs in America:

- According to the U.S. Census Bureau, small businesses create more than 90 percent of all net new jobs.

- The Kauffman Foundation found that small businesses have created virtually 100 percent of all net new jobs since 1980, meaning Fortune 1000 companies have not created a single net new job in more than thirty years.

2. The Small Business Act of 1953 requires that a minimum of 23 percent of all federal contract dollars be awarded to small businesses. It defines a small business as being independently owned, which should exclude any publicly traded company.

3. Since 2003, a series of federal investigations have uncovered billions of dollars a month in federal small business contracts being diverted to some of the largest companies worldwide.

Does it make sense for the government to direct more than 80 percent of taxpayer dollars to a segment of the economy that has not created one net new job in more than thirty years?

In February 2008 President Obama stated, “It is time to end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants.” Not only has President Obama failed to honor this campaign promise, his administration recently announced plans to end one of the oldest and most successful minority job creation programs in U.S. history. Contracting expert Charles Tiefer wrote a legal opinion about the negative impacts of this latest proposal.

The president could change everything by issuing a one-line executive order stating, “The federal government will no longer report contracts awarded to publicly traded companies as small business contracts.” That one line would direct billions of dollars to the small businesses that employ more than half the private sector workforce, generate half of GDP and are responsible for 90 percent of U.S. exports. President Obama could also support H.R. 3184, “The Fairness and Transparency in Contracting Act,” a bill I wrote with the help of Congressman Hank Johnson that would have the same effect. Congressman Johnson introduced the bill to the House in October.

You or your staff will probably receive a speakerphone conference call from a government press office because I sent you this letter. They will try to impugn my credibility but nothing they say changes the facts. If and when they call, please contact me, tell me who called, what they said, and allow me to respond. Journalistic integrity demands as much. Also, here’s a link to some important questions you can ask them.www.asbl.com/documents/2011asblquestions.pdf

Some people in Washington may try to argue that the 23 percent small business contracting goal is not achievable. However, the vast majority of federal contract actions are below $100,000, and according to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, should automatically be set aside for small businesses. This is not happening.

Investigations by the General Accounting Office, the Small Business Administration Office of Inspector General (SBA OIG) and Department of the Interior support everything I say. In Report 5-15 the SBA OIG described the abuse as, “One of the most important challenges facing the Small Business Administration and the entire federal government today.” SBA Inspector General Peggy Gustafson recently testified before Congress, confirming that the diversion of federal small business contracts to large businesses remains a major challenge facing the federal government for the seventh consecutive year.

In conclusion, the simplest path to job creation and sustainable economic stimulus is to end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants. This is a permanent, deficit-neutral solution to a long-standing problem and requires no new taxes or new spending. Please join me and encourage President Obama to issue that one-line executive order and help our nation’s 28 million small businesses save the economy.

Contacts

American Small Business League
Brian Reeder, 707-789-9575
Communications Director
brianreeder@asbl.com

OBAMACARE WAIVERS: List is up to 1471!

Congratulations to the latest 39 companies (this week) added to the total list of 1,471 Waivers to Obamacare that have been released so far! The list of Obamacare Waivers is below:

WHO'S LYING TO WHOM ... USGS, OBAMA, DOE, WHOM?

2012-01-21T09:15:00.001-05:00

As you may know, Cruz Construction started a division in North Dakota just 6
months ago.

They sent every Kenworth (9 trucks) we had here in Alaska to North Dakota
and several drivers.

They just bought two new Kenworth's to add to that fleet; one being a Tri
Drive tractor and a new 65 ton lowboy to go with it.

They also bought two new cranes (one crawler & one rubber tired) for that
division.

Dave Cruz said they have moved more rigs in the last 6 months in ND than
Cruz Construction moved in Alaska in the last 6 years.

Williston is like a gold rush town; they moved one of our 40 man camps down
there since there are no rooms available.

Unemployment in ND is the lowest in the nation at 3.4 percent last I
checked.

See anything in the national news about how the oil industry is fueling
North Dakota 's economy?

Here's an astonishing read. Important and verifiable information:

About 6 months ago, the writer was watching a news program on oil and one of

the Forbes Bros. was the guest.

The host said to Forbes, "I am going to ask you a direct question and I
would like a direct answer;

how much oil does the U.S. have in the ground?" Forbes did not miss a beat,
he said, "more than all the Middle East put together."

The U. S.. Geological Service issued a report in April 2008 that only
scientists and oil men knew was coming, but man was it big.

It was a revised report (hadn't been updated since 1995) on how much oil was

in this area of the western 2/3 of North Dakota,

western South Dakota, and extreme eastern Montana.

Check THIS out:

The Bakken is the largest domestic oil discovery since Alaska 's Prudhoe Bay

, and has the potential to

eliminate all American dependence on foreign oil. The Energy Information
Administration (EIA) estimates

it at 503 billion barrels. Even if just 10% of the oil is recoverable( 5
billion barrels), at $107 a barrel,

we're looking at a resource base worth more than $5.3 trillion.

"When I first briefed legislators on this, you could practically see their
jaws hit the floor.

They had no idea.." says Terry Johnson, the Montana Legislature's financial
analyst.

"This sizable find is now the highest-producing onshore oil field found in
the past 56 years," reports The Pittsburgh Post Gazette.

It's a formation known as the Williston Basin , but is more commonly
referred to as the 'Bakken.'

It stretches from Northern Montana, through North Dakota and into Canada .

For years, U. S. oil exploration has been considered a dead end.

Even the 'Big Oil' companies gave up searching for major oil wells decades
ago.

However, a recent technological breakthrough has opened up the Bakken's
massive reserves,

and we now have access of up to 500 billion barrels. And because this is
light, sweet oil,

those billions of barrels will cost Americans just $16 PER BARREL !!!!!!

That's enough crude to fully fuel the American economy for 2041 years
straight.

And if THAT didn't throw you on the floor, then this next one should -
because it's from 2006 !!!!!!

U. S. Oil Discovery - Largest Reserve in the World

Stanberry Report Online - 4/20/2006

Hidden 1,000 feet beneath the surface of the Rocky Mountains lies the
largest untapped oil reserve in the world.

It is more than 2 TRILLION barrels. On August 8, 2005 President Bush
mandated its extraction.

In three and a half years of high oil prices none has been extracted.

With this mother lode of oil why are we still fighting over off-shore
drilling?

They reported this stunning news:

We have more oil inside our borders, than all the other proven reserves on
earth.

Here are the official estimates:

8 times as much oil as Saudi Arabia
18 times as much oil as Iraq
21 times as much oil as Kuwait
22 times as much oil as Iran
500 times as much oil as Yemen

and it's all right here in the Western United States !!!!!!

HOW can this BE? HOW can we NOT BE extracting this? Because the environmentalists and others have blocked all efforts to help America become independent of foreign oil! Again, we are letting a small group of people dictate our lives and our economy. WHY?

James Bartis, lead researcher with the study says we've got more oil in this very compact area than the entire Middle East, more than 2 TRILLION barrels untapped. That's more than all the proven oil reserves of crude oil in the world today, reports The Denver Post.

Don't think 'OPEC' will drop its price even with this find? Think again! It's all about the competitive marketplace, it has to.

Think OPEC just might be funding the environmentalists?

Got your attention yet? Now, while you're thinking about it, do this:

Pass this along. If you don't take a little time to do this, then you should stifle yourself the next time you complain about gas prices, by doing NOTHING, you forfeit your right to complain.

Now I just wonder what would happen in this country if every one of you sent

this to everyone in your address book.

By the way, this can be verified. Check it out at the link below !!!!!!

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911

3 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of Technically Recoverable Oil Assessed in North Dakota and Montana’s Bakken Formation—25 Times More Than 1995 Estimate—
Released: 4/10/2008 2:25:36 PM

Contact Information:
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey
Office of Communication
119 National Center
Reston, VA 20192

Main Contact
Phone: N/A

Read FAQs about the Bakken Formation.

Listen to a podcast with the lead scientist on this topic.

Reston, VA - North Dakota and Montana have an estimated 3.0 to 4.3 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil in an area known as the Bakken Formation.
A U.S. Geological Survey assessment, released April 10, shows a 25-fold increase in the amount of oil that can be recovered compared to the agency's 1995 estimate of 151 million barrels of oil.

Related Podcasts

3 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of Oil in North Dakota and Montana

Download directly | Details

or subscribe by e-mail.

Technically recoverable oil resources are those producible using currently available technology and industry practices. USGS is the only provider of publicly available estimates of undiscovered technically recoverable oil and gas resources.
New geologic models applied to the Bakken Formation, advances in drilling and production technologies, and recent oil discoveries have resulted in these substantially larger technically recoverable oil volumes. About 105 million barrels of oil were produced from the Bakken Formation by the end of 2007.
The USGS Bakken study was undertaken as part of a nationwide project assessing domestic petroleum basins using standardized methodology and protocol as required by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 2000.
The Bakken Formation estimate is larger than all other current USGS oil assessments of the lower 48 states and is the largest "continuous" oil accumulation ever assessed by the USGS. A "continuous" oil accumulation means that the oil resource is dispersed throughout a geologic formation rather than existing as discrete, localized occurrences. The next largest "continuous" oil accumulation in the U.S. is in the Austin Chalk of Texas and Louisiana, with an undiscovered estimate of 1.0 billions of barrels of technically recoverable oil.
"It is clear that the Bakken formation contains a significant amount of oil - the question is how much of that oil is recoverable using today's technology?" said Senator Byron Dorgan, of North Dakota. "To get an answer to this important question, I requested that the U.S. Geological Survey complete this study, which will provide an up-to-date estimate on the amount of technically recoverable oil resources in the Bakken Shale formation."
The USGS estimate of 3.0 to 4.3 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil has a mean value of 3.65 billion barrels. Scientists conducted detailed studies in stratigraphy and structural geology and the modeling of petroleum geochemistry. They also combined their findings with historical exploration and production analyses to determine the undiscovered, technically recoverable oil estimates.
USGS worked with the North Dakota Geological Survey, a number of petroleum industry companies and independents, universities and other experts to develop a geological understanding of the Bakken Formation. These groups provided critical information and feedback on geological and engineering concepts important to building the geologic and production models used in the assessment.
Five continuous assessment units (AU) were identified and assessed in the Bakken Formation of North Dakota and Montana - the Elm Coulee-Billings Nose AU, the Central Basin-Poplar Dome AU, the Nesson-Little Knife Structural AU, the Eastern Expulsion Threshold AU, and the Northwest Expulsion Threshold AU.
At the time of the assessment, a limited number of wells have produced oil from three of the assessments units in Central Basin-Poplar Dome, Eastern Expulsion Threshold, and Northwest Expulsion Threshold.
The Elm Coulee oil field in Montana, discovered in 2000, has produced about 65 million barrels of the 105 million barrels of oil recovered from the Bakken Formation.
Results of the assessment can be found at http://energy.usgs.gov.
For a podcast interview with scientists about the Bakken Formation, listen to episode 38 of CoreCast at http://www.usgs.gov/corecast/.

USGS provides science for a changing world. For more information, visit www.usgs.gov.
Subscribe to USGS News Releases via our electronic mailing list or RSS feed.
**** www.usgs.gov ****
Links and contacts within this release are valid at the time of publication.

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911 <http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911>;

A RAISIN IN THE SUN, EMPTY SUIT, THE PEOPLE'S CRIB

2012-01-21T09:15:00.000-05:00

AMEN! AND MAY THE OFF-SPRING OF 1,000 CAMELS SQUAT IN YOUR FRONT LAWN ... NOTHING LIKE A GREEN EXPERIENCE.

2012-01-21T08:39:00.000-05:00

A RAISIN IN THE SUN, EMPTY SUIT, AND THE PEOPLE'S CRIB ...

The Washington Post August 18, 2011

Obama: The Affirmative Action President by Matt Patterson (columnist - Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner)

Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?

Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer"; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present") ; and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator.

And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?

Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal:

To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.

Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass -- held to a lower standard -- because of the color of his skin. Podhoretz continues:

And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon --affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.

Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don't care if these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist.

Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin -- that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn't racism, then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama.

True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois ; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary. What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks?

In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people -- conservatives included -- ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of cliché's, and that's when he has his teleprompter in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth -- it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.

And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.

WHEN IS "NEWS" IS NO LONGER NEWS ... BAGGED AND TAGGED, INSTANT HISTORY

2012-01-20T21:15:00.000-05:00

OIL, OIL EVERYWHERE AND NOT A DROP FOR U.S.A. ~ REALLY

2012-01-20T21:05:00.000-05:00

President Barack Obama’s decision yesterday to reject a permit for TransCanada Corp.’s Keystone XL oil pipeline may prompt Canada to turn to China for oil exports.

Obama said today in a statement. “We will continue to look for new ways to partner with the oil and gas industry to increase our energy security.”

In a related story:

BUENOS AIRES — Off the coast of Rio de Janeiro — below a mile of water and two miles of shifting rock, sand and salt — is an ultradeep sea of oil that could turn Brazil into the world’s fourth-largest oil producer, behind Russia, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

The country’s state-controlled oil company, Petrobras, expects to pump 4.9 million barrels a day from the country’s oil fields by 2020, with 40 percent of that coming from the seabed. One and a half million barrels will be bound for export markets.

The United States wants it, but China is getting it.

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, in a telephone call told Obama “Canada will continue to work to diversify its energy exports,” according to details provided by Harper’s office. Canadian Natural Resource Minister Joe Oliver said relying less on the U.S. would help strengthen the country’s “financial security.”

The “decision by the Obama administration underlines the importance of diversifying and expanding our markets, including the growing Asian market,” Oliver told reporters in Ottawa.

The denial came before a Feb. 21 deadline set by Congress after Obama postponed a decision in November. TransCanada said the 1,661-mile (2,673-kilometer) project would carry 700,000 barrels of crude a day from Alberta’s oil sands to refineries on the U.S. Gulf coast, crossing six U.S. states and creating 20,000 jobs.

Approval of Keystone is a “no-brainer,” Harper said in a Sept. 21 interview with Bloomberg. Most of Canada’s crude is produced from oil-sands deposits in the landlocked province of Alberta, where output is expected to double over the next eight years, according to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

THE WINNER IN THE OIL SWEEPSTAKES IS CHINA ...

“I am sure that if the oil sands production is not used in the United States, they will be used in other countries,” Fatih Birol, chief economist at the International Energy Agency, said in an interview before a speech at Imperial College in London today.

Canada this month began hearings on a proposed pipeline by Enbridge Inc. to move crude from Alberta’s oil sands to British Columbia’s coast, where it could be shipped to Asian markets.

“We have to have processes in Canada that come to a decision in a reasonable amount of time, and processes that cannot be hijacked,” Harper said at a press conference Jan. 6 in Edmonton.

The Keystone decision is the latest of several U.S. moves that have irked Canadian policy makers. Canada objected to “Buy American” provisions in the Obama administration’s $447 billion jobs bill that was blocked by Republicans in Congress, as well as the restoration of a $5.50 fee on Canadian travelers arriving in the U.S. by plane or ship.

Yesterday’s rejection “certainly introduces new uncertainties into the economic relationship,” said David Pumphrey, deputy director of the energy and national security program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “This is a cornerstone of economic development for the country.”

************

Less than a month after President Obama visited Brazil in March to make a pitch for oil, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff was off to Beijing to sign oil contracts with two huge state-owned Chinese companies.

The deals are part of a growing oil relationship between the two countries that, thanks to a series of billion-dollar agreements, is giving China greater influence over Brazil’s oil frontier.

Chinese oil companies are pushing to meet mandatory expansion targets by inking deals across Africa and Latin America, but they are especially interested in Brazil.

“With the Lula and Carioca discoveries alone, Brazil added a possible 38 billion barrels of estimated recoverable oil,” said Luis Giusti, a former president of Venezuela’s state oil company, PDVSA, referring to the new Brazilian oil fields.

“That immediately changed the picture,” he said, adding that Brazil is on track to become “an oil giant.”

During Mrs. Rousseff’s visit to China, Brazil’s Petrobras signed a technology cooperation deal with the China Petroleum & Chemical Corp., or Sinopec.

Petrobras also signed a memorandum of understanding with Sinochem, a massive state-owned company with interests in energy, real estate and agrichemicals.

The Sinochem deal aims to identify and build “business opportunities in the fields of exploration and production, oil commercialization and mature oil-field recovery,” according to Petrobras.

The relationship with China goes back to at least two years before Mr. Obama came to Brazil to applaud the oil discovery and tell Mrs. Rouseff:

“We want to work with you. We want to help with technology and support to develop these oil reserves safely, and, when you’re ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers.”

China rescued Petrobras in 2009, when the oil company was looking at tight credit markets to finance a record-setting $224 billion investment plan. China’s national development bank offered a $10 billion loan on the condition that Petrobras ship oil to China for 10 years.

A chunk of Brazil’s oil real estate appeared on China’s portfolio in 2010, when Sinopec agreed to pay $7.1 billion for 40 percent of Repsol-YPF of Brazil, which has stakes in the now internationally famous Santos Basin, and the Sapinhoa field, which has an estimated recoverable volume of 2.1 billion barrels. Statoil of Norway also agreed that year to sell 40 percent of the offshore Peregrino field to Sinochem.

FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON ME, FOOL ME 2, 3, 4, 5, AND MANY MORE TIMES ... SHAME ON ME!

2012-01-20T21:04:00.001-05:00

Yesterday, the President rejected a permit to build the Keystone XL pipeline. The White House indicated they did not have enough time to thoroughly study the project — apparently, three years of study is not enough.

The White House’s cynical choice puts political gamesmanship above the national interest. This decision sends a clear message to all Americans: In an election year, jobs and U.S. energy security are not the White House’s priority.

Energy Citizens, energy workers, union members, and other concerned Americans have delivered hundreds of thousands of communications in support of the Keystone XL pipeline. Thank you for your efforts; we will continue to work with other supporters to make the Keystone XL Pipeline a reality.

The President promised to do what is right for the country, not what is electorally popular for a narrow margin of his base. That’s a promise he should keep.

Yesterday in Walt Disney World, the land “where dreams come true,” President Barack Obama appeared before Cinderella’s Castle to announce his latest plan to boost jobs in America–an effort to increase tourism to the United States. His announcement came one day after he flat out said “NO” to another plan that would have directly created at least 20,000 truly shovel-ready jobs–and 179,000 American jobs by 2035–while bringing more than 700,000 barrels of oil to the United States each day. That plan was the Keystone XL pipeline.

Had the President approved Keystone, a 1,700-mile pipeline would have been extended from Alberta, Canada, to Texas refineries — lifting up the U.S. economy with private-sector investment, putting people to work, and helping increase the supply of energy to lower prices when fuel costs are through the roof. Despite a finding by the State Department that the pipeline would pose minimal environmental risk, environmentalists were still up in arms and lobbied the President to say no to the plan.

The President’s decision is so out of line with fact and reason that The Washington Post strongly condemned it in an op-ed yesterday, saying the “pipeline rejection is hard to accept” and “We almost hope this was a political call because, on the substance, there should be no question.” As the Post explained, even without the pipeline, Canada will still export its oil–but across the ocean to China, instead. Meanwhile, the United States will continue importing crude oil from the Middle East. In other words, the environmental lobby might have stanched the flow of oil from Canada, but it’s being diverted onto the seas, and fossil fuel consumption will necessarily continue.

The environmental left’s “victory” is ultimately another loss for the American people — especially the 13.1 million unemployed workers. It’s a loss for small businesses, such as restaurants and hotels, in the towns along the proposed route. It’s a loss for state budgets that would have seen billions in tax revenue as a result. And it’s also a loss for those who are struggling with high energy costs.

Gas prices are at a record high for January and are 28.5 cents per gallon higher than a year ago. And that’s expected to go even higher–some analysts predict that the national average for a gallon of regular unleaded could hit $4 to $4.25 per gallon by the spring.

One might think that given the high cost of energy, the President would be seeking to increase domestic production, especially given Iran’s threats to block the Strait of Hormuz, thereby cutting off a quarter of the world’s energy supply. Think again. Under President Obama, oil and natural gas production on federal lands is down by more than 40 percent compared to 10 years ago, 2010 had the lowest number of leases issued for oil and gas production on federal lands since 1984, and the Administration held only one offshore lease sale in 2011.

A PICTURE IS WORTH A 1,000 WORDS ... OR IS IT?

2012-01-19T13:14:00.002-05:00

“As the price of oil goes down, it puts an economic squeeze on Iran,” Cain said. “That is why I believe we should have a serious energy-independent strategy, in order to be able to be a player on the world market.”

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE? SHORT ANSWER NOTHING! LONGER ANSWER STILL NOTHING! WELL O.K. ... NOT NOTHING. THE DECISION FROM WASHINGTON D.C. IS THAT "WE" (OBAMA ADMINISTRATION) ARE MORE INTERESTED IN SUPPLYING ENERGY TO CHINA THAN JOBS AND ENERGY TO AMERICA. CASE CLOSED!!!

BTW THIS IS A SHOVEL READY PROJECT ... THIS DIDN'T JUST HAPPEN OVER-NIGHT.

THE SECOND DATE THAT SHALL LIVE IN INFAMY

2012-01-19T12:17:00.000-05:00

REMEMBER JANUARY 3, 2007

Thought this was "right on" point...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REMEMBER JANUARY 3, 2007

The day the Democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009 when a democratic president was elected, it was actually January 3rd 2007, the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress. The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995 For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is “Bush’s Fault”, think about this:

January 3rd, 2007, the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress:

The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77

The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%

The Unemployment rate was 4.6%

George Bush’s Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION!

By the way GWB had Nothing to do with the GM bailout MR. Obama did all of that not GWB!!!!!!!!!

Remember that day…

January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee. The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES! THANK YOU DEMOCRATS (especially Barney ) for taking us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% Unemployment…to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES! (BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 times to stop Fannie & Freddie – starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy). Barney blocked it and called it a “Chicken Little Philosophy” (and the sky did fall!) And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA. And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie?

OBAMA and the Democrat Congress, especially BARNEY!!!!

So when someone tries to blame Bush…

REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007….THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!”

Bush may have been in the car but the Democrats were in charge of the gas pedal and steering wheel they were driving the economy into the ditch. Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democratic Party.

Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011.

In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases. For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budget.

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009. Let’s remember what the deficits looked like during that period:

If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.

If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself.

In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is “I inherited a deficit that I voted for, And then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.”

“The problems we face today exist because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.” That my friends constitutes socialism…a welfare state.

WTF ... AND ITS NOT HIS FAULT

2012-01-19T12:16:00.000-05:00

The central conflict of the Obama Presidency has been between the jobs and growth crisis he inherited and the President's hell-for-leather pursuit of his larger social-policy ambitions. The tragedy is that the economic recovery has been so lackluster because the second impulse keeps winning.

Yesterday came proof positive with the White House's repudiation of the Keystone XL pipeline, TransCanada's $7 billion shovel-ready project that would support tens of thousands of jobs if only it could get the requisite U.S. permits. Those jobs, apparently, can wait.

WHY NANCY PELOSI KEEPS GETTING RE-ELECTED!!!

2012-01-17T17:59:00.001-05:00

AND NOW CALIFORNIA RESIDENTS SHOW HOW SMART THEY ARE ... KEEP IN MIND THAT THEIR FROM NANCY PEOLSI STATE!!!

ONLY IN WONDERLAND ... "OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!"

2012-01-17T13:48:00.000-05:00

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) today released a new oversight report, “Wastebook 2011” that highlights over $6.5 billion in examples of some of the most egregious ways your taxpayer dollars were wasted. This report details 100 of the countless unnecessary, duplicative and low-priority projects spread throughout the federal government.

“Video games, robot dragons, Christmas trees, and magic museums. This is not a Christmas wish list, these are just some of the ways the federal government spent your tax dollars. Over the past 12 months, politicians argued, debated and lamented about how to reign in the federal government’s out of control spending. All the while, Washington was on a shopping binge, spending money we do not have on things we do not absolutely need. Instead of cutting wasteful spending, nearly $2.5 billion was added each day in 2011 to our national debt, which now exceeds $15 trillion,” Dr. Coburn said.

“Congress cannot even agree on a plan to pay for the costs of extending jobless benefits to the millions of Americans who are still out of work. Yet, thousands of millionaires are receiving unemployment benefits and billions of dollars of improper payments of unemployment insurance are being made to individuals with jobs and others who do not qualify. And remember those infamous bridges to nowhere in Alaska that became symbols of government waste years ago? The bridges were never built, yet the federal government still spent more than a million dollars just this year to pay for staff to promote one of the bridges.”

Examples of wasteful spending highlighted in “Wastebook 2011” include:

• $75,000 to promote awareness about the role Michigan plays in producing Christmas trees & poinsettias.

• $15.3 million for one of the infamous Bridges to Nowhere in Alaska.

• $113,227 for video game preservation center in New York.

• $550,000 for a documentary about how rock music contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

• $48,700 for 2nd annual Hawaii Chocolate Festival, to promote Hawaii’s chocolate industry.

• $350,000 to support an International Art Exhibition in Venice, Italy.

• $10 million for a remake of “Sesame Street” for Pakistan.

• $35 million allocated for political party conventions in 2012.

• $765,828 to subsidize “pancakes for yuppies” in the nation’s capital.

• $764,825 to study how college students use mobile devices for social networking.

Read the full report: here GOVERNMENT WASTE 2011