denying women basic human rights

Written on December 21, 2011 by The Godfather

Biden Says the Taliban are Our Friends

If you’re old enough to remember or you studied it in a history class, Gerald Ford, in his debate with Jimmy Carter, made what many believe was a classic blunder. The media never let him or us forget it:

Ford incorrectly stated that Poland was “independent and autonomous” from the Soviet Union, though at the time the Soviet Union dominated Poland and much of Eastern Europe. When pressed, instead of reconsidering, Ford responded more firmly that “There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe, and there never will be under a Ford administration.” Ford’s misstatements were considered a major factor in his loss to Carter, and are cited again every four years as among the worst gaffes made in any televised political debate.

Now we have daily-gaff-prone Joseph Biden saying that that the Taliban isn’t an enemy of the United States. If they’re not an enemy of the US, then they must be four friends. And the media hardly bat an eye. Here’s what the Vice President said:
“Look, the Taliban per se is not our enemy. That’s critical. There is not a single statement that the president has ever made in any of our policy assertions that the Taliban is our enemy, because it threatens U.S. interests. If, in fact, the Taliban is able to collapse the existing government, which is cooperating with us in keeping the bad guys from being able to do damage to us, then that becomes a problem for us.”So who’s trying to kill us? Who’s imposing Sharia law, denying women basic human rights, driving out Christians, burning churches, and beheading those who oppose them? “The Taliban engage in attacks against the civilian population. According to a report by the United Nations, the Taliban were responsible for 2,477 civilian casualties [in Afghanistan] (76 percent of all casualties) in the first six months of 2010.” Al Qaeda also supported the Taliban with regiments of imported fighters from Arab countries and Central Asia.
But they’re our friends?
Biden believes that if we place nice with the Taliban that in the future they will not continue to force their agenda and kill us if we get in their way.
You may recall that we supported Osama Bin Laden when he and his band of merry men were fighting the former Soviet Union. How well did that work out?

Read more: Biden Says the Taliban are Our Friends | Godfather Politics http://godfatherpolitics.com/2744/biden-says-the-taliban-are-our-friends/#ixzz1hCaxF853

Muhammad abused a little six-year-old girl sexually

Objective: Undermine recruitment into Islam

Russ Jones - OneNewsNow - 12/20/2011 4:15:00 AM

A California-based Christian ministry is trying to educate students about Islam. Last week the organization reached some 6,000 students throughout the United States.

Dr. Gary Cass, president of DefendChristians.org, says his organization was active in both California and Florida last week, educating students on the teachings of Muhammad. Their objective? "What we're trying to do is just destroy Islam's ability to recruit by telling the truth about Muhammad," says Cass.

Entitled the "9-11 Defend Our Students" campaign, volunteers distribute leaflets to children who live in the neighborhood near a mosque.

"What do those mosques do? They recruit our kids and try to turn them into terrorists," states the ministry spokesman. "The reason why our kids are vulnerable to Islamic conversion is because the schools -- and even the churches, unfortunately -- will not tell the truth about Muhammad."

And the truth, Cass says, is a shocking reflection of a religion that is taking root in the U.S.

"You can see on the flyer we point out that Muhammad abused a little six-year-old girl sexually. Her name was Aisha," he explains. "A lot of black Americans are not aware that Muhammad owned black slaves and had a lot of derogatory things to say about black people."

Cass notes a handful of people, including senior citizens, can reach thousands of young people with the gospel and the truth about Muhammad in less than 30 minutes.

Mickey and Hitler could determine the next president of the United States

Dear Fellow American, Democrats, union members and their cronies in Wisconsin have launched an effort to remove Governor Scott Walker from office because of the responsible budget bill he signed earlier this year requiring union members to pay a small percentage towards their health care and retirement like everyone else. As the January 17 deadline to submit the 540,206 signatures needed to force a recall election nears, officials in Wisconsin delivered a major victory to the anti-Walker factions. Signatures from Mickey Mouse and Adolph Hitler will count! Wisconsin is a key battleground state with 10 electoral votes up for grabs, and the outcome of the Walker recall will predict whether it goes red or blue in 2012. This means Mickey and Hitler could determine the next president of the United States! It may seem funny at first, but this decision will impact all of us. Unions have created a special working class in this country and for too long we've allowed them to hold us hostage. The Obama administration has exacerbated the problem by doing their bidding for the past 3 years. Now we're stuck footing the bill for union members' health care, pensions and other benefits. And that means higher taxes. Defending Governor Walker's fiscally conservative agenda is our single opportunity to halt the Obama/unions big-government agenda before it gains momentum. If we're able to demonstrate that we can match the unions' deep pockets and defeat them at the ballot box, we'll head into 2012 elections poised for victory in all 50 states. This is an all hands on deck situation and time is running out. Please act today to defend Governor Walker and deliver a victory for limited government. Thank you in advance for your support. Sincerely, Peter M. Horkan Founder, Alliance for a Stronger Wisconsin

North Koreans are following the old Soviet script

Hell is Growing More Crowded While we hope that Christopher Hitchens was pleasantly surprised after his passing last week, there is little doubt among believers as to where North Korean Dictator Kim Jong-Il will be spending eternity after his passing. The Associated Press describes Kim as having, "a taste for cigars, cognac and gourmet cuisine". They left out his fondness for starving millions of his citizens, forced labor camps, and brutal public executions. As Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch puts it: “North Korea under Kim Jong-Il has been a human rights hell on earth,” said Roth. “Kim Jong-Il ruled through fear generated by systematic and pervasive human rights abuses including arbitrary executions, torture, forced labor and strict limits on freedom of speech and association.” Though perhaps not always the most reliable source of information, Wikipedia has an exhaustive article about human rights abuses in North Korea. Here's an academic paper that presents the case for criminal prosecution for Kim, though such prosecution would have paled in comparison to his eternal sentence. The obvious question is regarding the next steps for this isolated and backwards worker's paradise (which just happens to have nuclear missiles). As the American Enterprise Institute's Michael Auslin puts it in National Review: For now, however, the North Koreans are following the old Soviet script for succession. Kim Jong-un has been named head of the official state funeral committee, thereby confirming his ascendancy for the moment. His work will begin after the funeral on December 28, when he will have to start consolidating his power; alternatively, we may begin to see hints that he is merely a figurehead, such as increased prominence of other leaders. Only if the regime itself is in danger of fissioning or being attacked by the oppressed people of North Korea will the situation on the peninsula change to any appreciable degree. What Asian and Western governments need to prepare for is some kind of military demonstration, such as a new nuclear test, a ballistic-missile test, or even a limited attack on South Korean territory or property, all of which have been the stock in trade of the Kim regime. As a means to prove that the new leadership is fully in control, as a warning to South Korea and the United States not to take advantage of the death of Kim Jong-il to push for regime change, or because of factional in-fighting among the North Korean leadership to jockey for position, an act of aggression is very likely after Kim Jong-Il’s funeral. The Obama administration, along with its South Korean ally, needs to make clear now that any such destabilizing actions will be met with a response. Sadly, there is little chance that Kim Jong-il’s death means the dawn of a new spring in North Korea. Its terrorized and brutalized populace will have to endure more horrors at the hands of the third Kim to rule since the end of World War II, and Asia and the rest of the world will continue to wait nervously for another threat to their safety and security. Now may not be the time to try and weaken the new government, but neither is it time to relax our guard. Our wait-and-see attitude is justified only if we are prepared to strike back against unprovoked aggression and retain the moral compass to condemn the regime for the barbarity that it is. For the time being, we must resign ourselves to perusing Kim Jong-Il's autobiography, which is so full of socialist tripe you'd be forgiven for thinking that it was ghostwritten by Ted Kennedy.

National Defense Authorization Act

Written on December 19, 2011 by da Tagliare

Storing 7 Days of Food Could Send You to Gitmo Indefinitely

If President Obama signs the National Defense Authorization Act that is sitting on his desk, it will give him the power to arrest any American citizen and send them to Guantanamo Bay without any charges, without a trial and the imprisonment can be indefinite.
Contained in the over 1800 pages of the massive bill is a provision that gives the military the power to indefinitely detain any suspected terrorists without filing charges.  Since the President is Commander in Chief of the armed forces, that provision also gives him the same powers.
The real danger lies in the government’s definition of what a suspected terrorist is.
According to Sen Rand Paul (R-KY),

“We’re talking about American citizens who can be taken from the United States and sent to a camp at Guantanamo Bay and held indefinitely.  There are laws on the books right now that characterize who might be a terrorist: someone missing fingers on their hands is a suspect, according to the Department of Justice. Someone who has guns, someone who has ammunition that is weatherproofed, someone who has more than seven days of food in their house can be considered a potential terrorist. If you are suspected because of these activities, do you want the government to have the ability to send you to Guantanamo Bay for indefinite detention?”

Paul says this is why he and twelve other senators voted against the bill, because they saw the dangerous implications of this provision which was designed to give the military certain powers during the current conflict with al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations.
A number of Democrats deny that the bill contains any provision that would allow for the indefinite detainment of American citizens without due process of law.  However, if you look at the list of the Dems making the denials, you will quickly discover that they are the loyal minions of the president and have already proven that they will lie and pervert the law so as to support Obama.
The truly frightening aspect of this is that Obama has placed a number of provisions in place to set the stage for his dictatorial takeover of the country.  Once he touches the ink to this piece of legislation, he will have the power to accuse anyone who opposes him of being a suspected terrorist and have them sent to Gitmo or some other military facility where they can be held without any formal charges for as long as the government determines that we are still at hostility with terrorism.
This provision is another nail in the coffin of free America, mark my word.

Read more: Storing 7 Days of Food Could Send You to Gitmo Indefinitely | Godfather Politics http://godfatherpolitics.com/2686/storing-7-days-of-food-could-send-you-to-gitmo-indefinitely/#ixzz1h0QwqzPL

Written on December 19, 2011 by Giacomo

Mr. President – Put Up or Shut Up!

The controversy over Barack Obama’s legal eligibility has been going on for three years and it is still not resolved.  Obama says that there are no grounds for a controversy and he wishes it would go away.
The White House has produced three separate pieces of documentation, each of which has only added more doubt to the issue rather helping to resolve it.  That latest documentation, a photocopy of a Hawaiian birth certificate that has two different type sets used on it along with wording that was not used until years later.
A number of people have been challenging Obama to give them access to the original documentation in Hawaii that would prove one way or another if he is truly eligible to hold the office of President or not.  With his claiming that he wants this to go away, you would expect him to release access to the real documentation to settle the matter, but for reasons that only cause the public to doubt his eligibility, he continues to refuse access and only attacks those demanding access and proof.
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is one of those demanding to see the real records before he will authorize Obama’s name to be placed on the 2012 ballot in his county.  Maricopa County is Arizona’s largest county with nearly 4 million people.  Instead of providing Sheriff Joe with access to the documentation in Hawaii, Obama has instructed the Department of Justice to go after Sheriff Joe and do their best to discredit him and force him out of office.The DOJ has now filed charges of civil rights violations involving racial profiling for the way Sheriff Joe actively leads his department in the fight against illegal trafficking of drugs and people across the Mexican border and into his county.  But how does one carry out his legal duties to stop the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs when over 95% of it involves Hispanics without using some form of racial profiling?
When Sheriff Joe initiated his investigation into Obama’s eligibility, a number of other county sheriffs across the nation were watching to see what happened and if they should join in the investigation.  Now that the DOJ has launched their attack on Arpaio and his department, a number of those watching are having second thoughts about following Sheriff Joe’s footsteps.
It’s time the general public demands that Obama provide access to the real documentation (if it exists).   We all need to be telling him to either put up or shut up and get the heck out of the White House.

Read more: Mr. President – Put Up or Shut Up! | Godfather Politics http://godfatherpolitics.com/2683/mr-president-put-up-or-shut-up/#ixzz1h0Q1MOBk

risk of increased tension in the region

Kim Jong-II was 'the worst sort of dictator': Dutch minister

Monday 19 December 2011
North Korean leader Kim Jong-II was 'one of the worst types of dictator,' Dutch foreign minister Uri Rosenthal said on Monday, in reaction to the news of the Korean leader's death.
'He did not allow the North Korean people any freedom whatsoever and was responsible for heightened tension in the region,' Rosenthal said in a statement.
Rosenthal said that like the rest of the international community, he is concerned about the possibility of a power struggle in North Korea. 'We have to take into account there is a risk of increased tension in the region,' he said. 'The Netherlands and European Union are keeping a close eye on developments.'
In particular, Rosenthal said he hoped discussions on removing the nuclear threat between North Korea, the US, China, Russia, South Korea and Japan could now continue.
For more on the situation in North Korea, see our international news section

© DutchNews.nl

00,000 New Jobs

Show Details

How to Create 600,000 New Jobs Simple. According to House Minority Leader, Former Speaker of the House (and certified one-percenter) Nancy Pelosi, extending unemployment benefits would “make a difference of 600,000 jobs to our economy.” Oh where to start. Nobel Prize winner and alleged economist Paul Krugman wrote in his textbook "Macroeconomics" (in 2009): Public policy designed to help workers who lose their jobs can lead to structural unemployment as an unintended side effect. . . . In other countries, particularly in Europe, benefits are more generous and last longer. The drawback to this generosity is that it reduces a worker’s incentive to quickly find a new job. Generous unemployment benefits in some European countries are widely believed to be one of the main causes of “Eurosclerosis,” the persistent high unemployment that affects a number of European countries. In fairness, Ms. Pelosi has never been portrayed as an economics guru (unlike the far-left Krugman), but she does have quite a history of making grand pronouncements which simply defy logic. For example, Pelosi claimed that passing ObamaCare would result in the creation of four MILLION new jobs (including 400,000 immediately upon passage). We didn't know there were that many lobbyists on Earth, but we could be mistaken. According to CNSnews: Pelosi said President Barack Obama will not sign the Republican bill to extend the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance benefits, which passed on Tuesday. That legislation is paid for by extending the standing pay freeze for federal workers for one more year, mandating that federal workers make larger contributions to their pensions, and raising the insurance rates for mortgages held by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Millionaires would also be banned from collecting unemployment benefits and food stamps under the bill. Furthermore, Medicare Part B and D premiums would go up for those in the high-income bracket. On the other hand, Democrats who rejected the House legislation want the bill to be paid for by raising taxes on the rich, which they define as people making more than $1 million a year. The president will not sign the bill that the Republicans passed –"having issues that have nothing to do with the payroll tax, like the Keystone Pipeline and again [a] diminished, diminished proposal for the payroll tax cut and in the unemployment insurance,” Pelosi told reporters. “Under the Republican bill, 1 million Americans will lose there unemployment insurance in January; 2 million by February; and the difference between the president's bill and the Republican bill is 3 million people losing their unemployment insurance.” “After avoiding the issue and opposing a payroll tax cut, Republicans reluctantly passed through the House a bill that was doomed from the start,” said Pelosi. “It had the seeds of its own destruction there.” But back to Pelosi's laughable claim. Here's a terrific analysis on the actual numbers from Ed Morrissey: This is a fairly testable hypothesis. The last time Congress extended the jobless benefits was a year ago, in another crunch-time compromise between Republicans and Democrats on Pennsylvania Avenue. Since then, the economy has added about 1.5 million jobs — an average of 125,000 a month, which is only enough to keep up with population growth. Assuming that Pelosi’s correct and we subtract 600,000 from the 2011 numbers, the Obama adminstration’s economic policies would account for growth that falls well below that of population maintenance — at only 75,000 per month. The number and the claim is absurd. Whatever short-term economic benefit arises from giving benefits to the unemployed is not enough to generate enough marketplace demand to create 600,000 jobs, nor would its absence be enough to eliminate 600,000 jobs, either. Its absence would probably force the long-term unemployed into part-time and low-paying jobs to maintain themselves, which would not only service much of that same demand, it would also not take capital from the future — where its absence will cost jobs. There are social and humanitarian reasons for providing unemployment benefits, but job creation and economic growth are not among them. We wonder if anyone has asked Ms. Pelosi what the impact would be if we passed a bill allowing unemployment benefits for life? According to her logic, that should create 400 kabillion gazillion jobs, or just about the number required for the Obama economy to fully recover.

No More Lip-Service: Impeach Obama Now!
     Our elected officials sit in their elite salons and parlors in Washington and plot and scheme. If you were a fly on the wall, it would come as no great shock to hear one of them actually chortle and proclaim, cigar and drink in hand: "Of course Obama SHOULD be impeached, but let's not upset the apple cart. Life is good for us here in Washington. Let's just keep talking tough, do nothing, and those idiotic rubes in flyover country will vote us back into office anyway."

     It's time to send our leaders in Congress a message... that's NOT going to happen!

     And while they plot and scheme, Barack Obama continues to usurp the authority of the legislature and the judiciary, he continues to compromise our national sovereignty. He demagogues and tries to divide us by race and class. He undermines our Judeo-Christian heritage whenever the opportunity presents itself and he repeatedly violates Article II, Section 4 of the United States Constitution, which requires that he “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

     As columnist Ben Johnson wrote: "Barack Obama has been flirting with impeachment like Bill Clinton at a sorority on open bar night." It's high time we give Obama what he's been asking for, and yet, our Republican leaders refuse to do what must be done for the good of the country... they refuse to hold this 21st century dictator to account... they refuse to stop the rampant lawlessness of the Obama Regime.  They refuse to IMPEACH BARACK OBAMA.

     We say, enough is enough. There's only one solution. It's time to let our so-called Republican leaders know that upsetting the apple cart is REQUIRED and failure to heed that demand will have career destroying consequences.

     The time to speak in one resounding voice is upon us. It is now. It's time to send our elected officials a clear message: If you love the the halls and corridors of power in Washington D.C. and you want to stay... then you must remove Barack Obama from office. Remove Barack Obama or we will remove you in 2012.

FEMA is preparing for a national emergency

Home / Congress / FEMA’s Emergency Camps: Hiring Has Begun

 

Be very afraid, We the People should not be the enemy.

FEMA’s Emergency Camps: Hiring Has Begun

0

Alex Jones has posted a “Help Wanted” advertisement issued by a private firm that is working for the U.S. government, namely, FEMA. The document reads as follows:

KBR is establishing a National Quick Response Team for our current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) work, and for anticipated future contracts. Upon completion of evaluation, certain subcontractors may be invited to establish a Master Services Agreement (MSA) with pre-established lease rates and terms and conditions. The Continental US will be broken up into five regions as indicated in the map below Services will be required in each State within each region.
Anticipated Project Requirements:
Establish services listed below within 72 hours for initial set-up and respond within 24 hours for incremental services. This is a CONTINGENCY PROJECT and it should be stressed that lead times will be short with critical requirements due to the nature of emergency responses.
Subcontractors must be flexible and able to handle multiple, shifting priorities in an emergency environment. Supply lines needed must be short but not necessarily pre-positioned.

But wait! There’s more!

Temporary Fencing and Barricades
Subcontractor will mobilize, transport, erect, install and demobilize temporary fencing, barricades, and associated equipment according to federal, state and local laws, codes and manufacturer installation instructions. The Subcontractor shall be able to mobilize and deploy key personnel(s) within four (4) hours of NTP to meet with KBR Site Manager at the Responder Support Camp (RSC) site in order to finalize the site design plan and acquire site specific design requirements and layout.
Number of linear footage:
Approximately 2,300LF for a 301 person camp after 36 hours of NTP
Approximately 3,600LF for 1,000 person camp after 72 hours of NTP

Step by step, FEMA is preparing for a national emergency.
What do you suppose this emergency will be? Why will camps be necessary? Who will be assigned to these camps? Why? For how long?
Why will the camps require fencing?
All this from the wonderful folks who gave New Orleans protection from Katrina.
Your friends and relatives will scoff at all this. You are a conspiracy nut, they will think. You are inventing impossible stories.
FEMA should be open about this. The outfit should explain to Congress why it is doing all this. But no one in Congress knows about this. That is my point. If this has an acceptable explanation, let’s hear it. But FEMA says nothing.
FEMA has even provided a map of the United States, which is divided into five regions. To see which region you will be located in, click the link.

EPA's War on Coal

GET INVOLVED...STAY INVOLVED...

Ann, Coordinator
Carbon County Chamber of Commerce
81 North 200 East, #3
Price, Utah  84501
(435) 637-2788 / 10:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m.
NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS:  cccc@carboncountychamber.net
Website:  www.carboncountychamber.net

It is the mission of the Carbon County Chamber of Commerce to enhance
retail, commercial, industrial and civic interests in Carbon County


Subject: FW: EPA's War on Coal
*
On Monday, EPA will  finalize the "Utility MACT" rule, by far the largest
job-destroying Economic Train Wreck regulation that will raise energy prices
nationwide and cost communities across the country high-paying jobs. 

Visit our Action Center at
http://actformining.org/national-actions/stopMACT/ and urge Congress to stop
EPA's Utility MACT Rule

EPA needs to reconsider its approach to the Utility MACT rule as well as the
various EPA Train Wreck regulations threatening America's mining industry.
Our nation's electric reliability and our ability to create jobs & grow our
economy during the economic downturn is at risk. 

According to the North American Reliability Corporation, EPA is "triggering
'an unprecedented resource-mix change,' with utilities switching to natural
gas from coal..." NERC predicts another 36 to 59 gigawatts of power will go
offline by 2018. That could mean the loss of a quarter of all coal-fired
capacity.

Furthermore, "the nation's power grid will be stressed in ways never before
experienced" and reliability depends on building new power plants to cover
the losses. But the electric industry has only three years to comply under
one EPA regulation known as the utility MACT rule, which is meant to target
mercury and is due to be finalized soon, "while many other destructive rules
are in the works."

To justify these disastrous economic consequences, EPA is arguing these
rules are necessary to protect public health, but studies have shown the
Utility MACT rule will provide very little in terms of health benefits while
imposing substantial costs on American consumers.

We need you to contact Congress at
http://actformining.org/national-actions/stopMACT/ and urge them to stop
EPA's new rule. During this current economic downturn, Congress needs to
ensure any new regulations protect consumers, help create high-paying
American jobs and make sure America has access to reliable and affordable
electricity. 

Visit http://actformining.org/national-actions/stopMACT/ to contact Congress
and make mining's voice heard!

Thank you for your support

KUHNER: Obama’s Watergate

Officials cover up culpability for gun smuggling and murder

By Jeffrey T. Kuhner

-

The Washington Times

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Illustration: Rangel by Alexander Hunter for The Washington Times

A year ago this week, U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered. He died protecting his country from brutal Mexican gangsters. Two AK-47 assault rifles were found at his death site. We now know the horrifying truth: Agent Terry was killed by weapons that were part of an illegal Obama administration operation to smuggle arms to the dangerous drug cartels. He was a victim of his own government. This is not only a major scandal; it is a high crime that potentially reaches all the way to the White House, implicating senior officials. It is President Obama’s Watergate.
Operation Fast and Furious was run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and overseen by the Justice Department. It started under the leadership of Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. Fast and Furious enabled straw gun purchases from licensed dealers in Arizona, in which more than 2,000 weapons were smuggled to Mexican drug kingpins. ATF claims it was seeking to track the weapons as part of a larger crackdown on the growing violence in the Southwest. Instead, ATF effectively has armed murderous gangs. About 300 Mexicans have been killed by Fast and Furious weapons. More than 1,400 guns remain lost. Agent Terry likely will not be the last U.S. casualty.
Mr. Holder insists he was unaware of what took place until after media reports of the scandal appeared in early 2011. This is false. Such a vast operation only could have occurred with the full knowledge and consent of senior administration officials. Massive gun-running and smuggling is not carried out by low-level ATF bureaucrats unless there is authorization from the top. There is a systematic cover-up.
Congressional Republicans, however, are beginning to shed light on the scandal. Led by Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Rep. Darrell Issa of California, a congressional probe is exposing the Justice Department’s rampant criminality and deliberate stonewalling. Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer, who heads the department’s criminal division, helped craft a February letter to Congress that denied ATF had ever walked guns into Mexico. Yet, under pressure from congressional investigators, the department later admitted that Mr. Breuer knew about ATF gun-smuggling as far back as April 2010. In other words, Mr. Breuer has been misleading Congress. He should resign - or be fired.
Instead, Mr. Holder tenaciously insists that Mr. Breuer will keep his job. He needs to keep his friends close and potential witnesses even closer. Another example is former acting ATF Director Kenneth Melson. Internal documents show Mr. Melson directly oversaw Fast and Furious, including monitoring numerous straw purchases of AK-47s. He has admitted to congressional investigators that he, along with high-ranking ATF leaders, reassigned every “manager involved in Fast and Furious” after the scandal surfaced on Capitol Hill and in the press. Mr. Melson said he was ordered by senior Justice officials to be silent regarding the reassignments. Hence, ATF managers who possess intimate and damaging information - especially on the role of the Justice Department - essentially have been promoted to cushy bureaucratic jobs. Their silence has been bought, their complicity swept under the rug. Mr. Melson has been transferred to Justice’s main office, where he serves as a “senior adviser” on forensic science in the department’s Office of Legal Policy. Rather than being punished, Mr. Melson has been rewarded for his incompetence and criminal negligence.
Mr. Holder and his aides have given misleading, false and contradictory testimony on Capitol Hill. Perjury, obstruction of justice and abuse of power - these are high crimes and misdemeanors. Mr. Holder should be impeached. Like most liberals, he is playing the victim card, claiming Mr. Issa is a modern-day Joseph McCarthy conducting a judicial witch hunt. Regardless of this petty smear, Mr. Holder must be held responsible and accountable - not only for the botched operation, but for his flagrant attempts to deflect blame from the administration.
Mr. Holder is a shameless careerist and a ruthless Beltway operative. For years, his out-of-control Justice Department has violated the fundamental principle of our democracy, the rule of law. He has refused to prosecute members of the New Black Panthers for blatant voter intimidation that took place in the 2008 election. Career Justice lawyers have confessed publicly that Mr. Holder will not pursue cases in which the perpetrators are black and the victims white. States such as Arizona and Alabama are being sued for simply attempting to enforce federal immigration laws. Mr. Holder also opposes voter identification cards, thereby enabling fraud and vote-stealing at the ballot box. What else can we expect from one who, during the Clinton administration, helped pardon notorious tax cheat Marc Rich and Puerto Rican terrorists?
Mr. Holder clearly knew about Fast and Furious and did nothing to stop it. This is because the administration wanted to use the excuse of increased violence on the border and weapons-smuggling into Mexico to justify tighter gun-control legislation. Mr. Holder is fighting ferociously to prevent important internal Justice documents from falling into the hands of congressional investigators. If the full nature of his involvement is discovered, the Obama presidency will be in peril.
Fast and Furious is even worse than Watergate for one simple reason: No one died because of President Nixon’s political dirty tricks and abuse of government power. But Brian Terry is dead; and there are still 1,500 missing guns threatening still more lives.
What did Mr. Obama know? Massive gun-smuggling by the U.S. government into a foreign country does not happen without the explicit knowledge and approval of leading administration officials. It’s too big, too risky and too costly. Mr. Holder may not be protecting just himself and his cronies. Is he protecting the president?
Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.

one in two Americans are now poor or low income?

Half of Obamaville Lives in "Poverty" -- Which is Exactly What Democrats Want

December 15, 2011

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: We had this story yesterday, didn't have a chance to get to it. "Squeezed by rising living costs a record number of Americans -- nearly one in two -- have fallen into poverty, or they are scraping by on earnings that classify them as low income. One in five American children live in poverty." Now, stop and think of this, folks. One in two Americans are now poor or low income. Now, this is the kind of story that usually comes out when a Republican is in the White House. Seriously. You don't get these kinds of stories when a Democrat's in the White House. We had a story yesterday about homeless children. I said to myself, "We don't get these kinds of stories when a Democrat's in the White House. What's going on?"
And then, and then I remembered. The New York Times, in an op-ed two weeks ago on a Monday, Thomas B. Edsall (now at the Huffing and Puffington Post) wrote a piece in which he said that the Obama campaign was writing off white working class families. They were going to focus on the poor. The focus is on the votes of the poor and the votes of minorities. They are forgetting white working-class voters, meaning they know they can't get those votes. The white working class is hurt; the white working class wants to work. Obama has policies that are destroying the creation of jobs. They know it. So Obama's not even gonna make a pretense in the campaign.
Therefore what's Obama need? More poor people! More people who are told they're poor. More people who are told they're poor because Wall Street stole from 'em. More people who are told they're poor because the 1% have taken everything from 'em. So when you see a story -- it's at US News World Report, it's at MSNBC, it's everywhere -- one in two Americans are now poor or low income. Well, Obama's not failed. It's like I said on Greta last night. I reminded everybody: January 16, 2009, Wall Street Journal calls, "Can you give us 400 words on what you hope for the new president?" I said, "It won't take 400, I can do it in four: 'I hope he fails,'" and an excrement storm erupted.
I, for six months, was the only guy carrying that message and that water.
So I said last night to Greta, "He has not failed." From his perspective, he has had resounding success: Bankrupting the country, joblessness, increased debt, a transfer of money from the private sector to the public sector to government that's never been done before on this level. The cutting down to size of the private sector, the class warfare, he's succeeded -- and when you see one in two Americans are now poor or low income, and you understand Obama's gonna spend a billion dollars in his reelection targeting those people? The more poor the better. (New Castrati impression) "That's a very cynical view to have, Mr. Limbaugh!"
It's not cynical, Mr. New Castrati. It's political. It's how I analyze it. I defy anybody to tell me that this is something Obama doesn't want. Remember, one of his own lackeys writes in the New York Times that white working class votes they're not interested in. (summarized) "We don't think we can get 'em. We're gonna go after the disadvantaged, the poor, the hungry, the thirsty, and the minorities." Well, the more of them the better, and to the extent that you might not be able to really expand substantively the number of poor you can still convince a lot of people that they're poor. It doesn't take much for Obama to make a speech and depress everybody. Blame it on Wall Street, blame it on the 1%, blame it on the rich -- as though he was gist inaugurated yesterday and the last two to three years happened with somebody else in the Oval Office.
So I look at this: Dismal prospects, one in two Americans are now poor or low income? Success! Bammo! Bull's-eye! Home run.! This is where Obama is heading. "The latest census data depict a middle class that's shrinking." Remember, now, Obama was gonna "focus like a laser" on them -- and who was the middle class liaison? Joe Bite Me! Obama appointed Joe Bite Me to supervise the stimulus, all other kinds of things to make sure the middle class had a spokesman, had somebody standing up for 'em -- and now "census data depict a middle class that's shrinking as unemployment stays high and the government safety net frays. The new numbers follow years of stagnating wages for the middle class that have hurt millions of workers and families." Yep, that's what Obama said in Osawatomie, Kansas!
It's all the rich people's fault!
It's all the Republicans' fault!
It's worse than he knew when he was inaugurated. He inherited all this from George W. Bush.
But it's exactly what he wants.
It's how he intends to win reelection.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Pittsfield, Maine. We're gonna take a phone call here in the first hour, and it's from Tim. Tim, thank you, sir. Great to have you with us.
CALLER: Rush, it's a pleasure to talk to you! Rush, I'm getting a little bit tired of Barack Obama and the liberals in this country hijacking the language of what "poverty" is, okay? I grew up in the 1970s. When I was 21 years old I got left with two kids under the age of three, okay? I had $112.52 a week is what I was taking home.
RUSH: What, did your wife run out on you or something?
CALLER: We got divorced, yes.
RUSH: Yeah?
CALLER: I got left with two small children. I hitchhiked back --
RUSH: Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Your wife did not want the children?
CALLER: No. I hitchhiked back and forth to work for nine years before I had enough money to put a vehicle on the road all the time. My father always told me and I worked my way out of it, and what they're doing is they're poisoning these kids' minds, and they're doing that -- how they're doing that is they're teaching them that hijacking the language about middle class and poverty.
RUSH: Right.
CALLER: In other words, I work all day long. I work 60, 65 hours a week. I still work a lot of hours, and I'm 53 years old today, okay? I own my own home. I work my way out of this because I knew how to work my way out of it -- and the thing of it is if you've got a roof over your head and clothes on your back and you're paying your bills and you got a little bit of money left over? Man, you're middle class! You're not poor. You're not poverty stricken. You're middle class. And part of the reason the education system is failing is because they're doing these kids a bad disservice by teaching them that they're poverty stricken, that somehow or another they're never going to be able to get up over this.
RUSH: Yeah, you're right. You are right. You are nailing this. You're exactly right and the story that I just had where now the Bureau of Labor Statistics says one out of two Americans live in poverty? That is flat-out BS.
CALLER: It is.
RUSH: It's flat-out BS. But you're nailing it. The language is being totally corrupted. The reason why this is being done -- it is sickening and it's pathetic but the reason it's being done -- is they want people to think they're poor. They want people to think that they are victims of Wall Street, of the rich, or whatever. They want people to think that if it weren't for ears who have more than they do, that they'd be happy. It's pure, 100% class envy. This is why I maintain to you that Obama and the Democrats (and they're one and the same) relish a story with the headline: "One Out of Two Americans in Poverty." It's made to order for "See what the Republicans did to you? See what Wall Street did to you? I'm here to help you! I'm here to help you. I'm here to give you health care. I'm here to put your kid into college. I'm here..." This is exactly it. You have nailed it. That's precisely the whole point of this.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: You know, the truth is, ladies and gentlemen -- and this is something the left, the Democrats have to rewrite out of history books; they have to take it out of the economics books -- wealth does trickle down. What is called poor today would have been considered upper middle class just a generation, two generations ago. What is today called poor. I'm not exaggerating, look at Robert Rector at Heritage and his stats.

Cuts begin to bite, thousands of teaching, mental health jobs to go

Thursday 15 December 2011
At least 14,000 people currently employed in special needs teaching and mental health services will lose their jobs because of government cuts, it emerged on Thursday.
The cabinet's decision to cut spending on mental health services by €600m will lead to 9,000 people losing their jobs, Marleen Barth, chairman of the local authority health boards is quoted as saying.
'Over 10% of the budget for mental health services is being cut in one go,' Barth said. Most of those affected will be freelancers or people on flexible contracts, she said.
Teaching
Meanwhile, education minister Marja van Bijsterveldt has confirmed that the €300m cut in spending on special education programmes will lead to the loss of 5,000 teaching and classroom assistant jobs.
The cash is being chopped from budgets to help special needs children attend ordinary schools.
Those plans have led to widespread protests from parents and teachers. Bijsterveldt told MPs on Thursday she had reached agreement with parents' organisations and teaching unions on the changes.

© DutchNews.nl

gradually curb public criticism of Islam

Islamic governments angle for speech curbs in the US

Published: 12:27 AM 12/13/2011 | Updated: 6:13 PM 12/13/2011

By Neil Munro

A young Afghan girl covers her face as she is pictured next to burqa clad woman in Kabul on October 10, 2011. AFP PHOTO / ADEK BERRY (Photo credit should read ADEK BERRY/AFP/Getty Images)  Welcome to Freedom Islamic style.

The State Department began a three-day, closed-door meeting Monday to talk about U.S. free speech rules with representatives from numerous Islamic governments that have lobbied for 12 years to end U.S. citizens’ ability to speak freely about Islam’s history and obligations.

Free speech advocates slammed the event as an effort to gradually curb public criticism of Islam, but it was defended by Hannah Rosenthal, who heads the agency’s office to curb anti-Semitism.

The meeting is a great success, she said, because governments in the multinational Organisation for Islamic Cooperation have dropped their demand that criticism of Islamic ideas be treated as illegal defamation. Member countries include Pakistan, Iran, Saudia Arabia and Qatar.

In exchange for dropping the demand, she said, they’re getting “technical assistance [to] build institutions to ensure there will be religious freedom” in their countries, she told The Daily Caller.

“That’s a joke,” said Andrea Lafferty, a conservative activist who was repeatedly denied information about the meeting.

Rosenthal’s claim that the OIC is accepting freedom of speech and religion implies revolutionary changes in Islamic countries, she said. That’s because Islamic texts set myriad laws for behavior, and sharply restrict non-Muslim religions, free speech and women’s rights, said Lafferty, who is president of the Traditional Values Coalition, a conservative advocacy group.

If the OIC countries are giving up on their religious obligation to ban criticism of Islam, she said, “does this mean that Pakistan is no longer going to kill Christians and kill religious minorities? … Are women in Saudi Arabia going to vote, to drive, to live free lives?”

“We hope so,” said Rosenthal, who added that such progress will not occur rapidly.

The more realistic explanation for the three-day event, Lafferty said, is that administration officials, progressives and OIC officials are tacitly cooperating to gradually stigmatize speech that is critical of Islam.

Lafferty pointed to a July statement by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in which she said that free speech will be protected, but the U.S. government will “use some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming, so that people don’t feel that they have the support to do what we abhor.”

Clinton’s statement was issued at Istanbul, where the United States and the OIC launched the joint project to combat “religious intolerance.”

Prior to the launch, OIC officials spent 12 years lobbying for a U.N. resolution that would declared criticism of religion to be defamation. U.S. officials strongly opposed this measure as a restriction on free speech and a barrier to Internet services.

In March, the OIC dropped the defamation resolution in exchange for passage of a resolution in the Human Rights Committee, dubbed 16/18.

The new resolution was titled “Combating Intolerance, Negative Stereotyping and Stigmatization of, and Discrimination, Incitement to Violence and Violence Against, Persons Based on Religion or Belief.” It urges all governments to counter “Islamophobia,” and declares opposition to “derogatory stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of persons based on their religion or belief.”

However, it also urges states to promote tolerance of all believers, and to promote “a wider knowledge of different religions and beliefs.”

This week’s State Department meeting is intended to begin implementing the 16/18 decision. The meeting is titled “The Istanbul Process for Combating Intolerance and Discrimination based on Religion or Belief.”

Another meeting is slated for February or March, said Rosenthal.

When was the last time anyone was impeached?

Why D.C. RINOs Won’t Impeach Eric Holder

December 13, 2011 By Ben Johnson Comments (7)

inShare

One of the activists in the Clinton impeachment trial says not to believe some Republicans threatening to impeach Attorney General Eric Holder over Operation Fast and Furious. It’s just a smokescreen used by Washington pols, he writes.
Larry Klayman, the founder of Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch USA, writes the fact “that House Republicans threatened only to impeach Holder if he does not come totally clean on Operation Fast and Furious” is an “empty threat” and “meaningless in the world of Washington, D.C., politics.”
“When was the last time anyone was impeached?” he asked.
Klayman knows the territory. He doggedly pursued Bill Clinton’s serial crimes in the 1990s on everything from Filegate to Chinese campaign fundraising to misuse of the Commerce Department. Then-Congressman Bob Barr brought Klayman in to brief congressmen who were pursuing impeachment, and Klayman introduced the panel to Dolly Kyle Browning, a former victim of Clinton’s sleazy ways. (When she planned to expose their affair, Clinton’s staffers responded, “We will destroy you.”)

Klayman writes in WND.com that he has seen RINOs promise impeachment before as a slick political tactic:

You see, lying in the nation’s capital may make for good theatre, but it’s really no “big deal,” whether it’s Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton during her scandalous reign of terror in the White House, or anyone else, including Obama and his predecessor George W. Bush, who lied about various issues involving the lead up to the Iraq war. Threats of impeachment of Holder are just part of the overall dog-and-pony show to position Republicans for the next election – just as the impeachment of Bill Clinton was intended only to weaken Democrats for the 2000 presidential election. There never was any Republican intention to convict and remove the criminal from office, lest Al Gore assume the presidency and run as an incumbent in 2000.

Congressman James Sensenbrenner, a conservative patriot, publicly raised the specter of impeachment during Eric Holder’s testimony last week. However, RINOs quickly backed away. Former Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff said he does not even want to see Holder’s subordinate, Lanny Breuer, fired — insisting it “would be a loss if Lanny were to leave.”
Former Bush-43 speechwriter David Frum advised Republicans to cave on the debt ceiling to avoid impeaching Obama. He’s currently warning the GOP not to nominate Newt Gingrich, because it means “volunteering to spend 2012 re-arguing the Clinton impeachment.”
If anyone knows impeachment’s inside baseball, it is Klayman. As this author has noted, the two parties simply agree to disagree over major issues, swap seats every so often, and coalesce to hurt the average American. At the leadership level, Washington is a one-party town with two names, both dedicated to big government.
The good news is, Klayman has a solution:

It again falls to “We the People” to take action. If Holder is not indicted for perjury, should we not empanel a citizens’ grand jury and charge him ourselves – a legal right under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution? And, let’s not single out Sir Eric! The mainstay of the Washington, D.C., political establishment, with few exceptions, should also be indicted for destroying our country and lying to us in the process!

In fact, citizen grand juries have indicted Barack Obama. This may be the most effective way to go.

There are no easy times ahead of us

No easy times ahead, says finance minister as Holland is in recession

Tuesday 13 December 2011
The government will have to take extra steps to keep its finances under control as the budget deficit rises above agreed limits, finance minister Jan Kees de Jager told reporters on Tuesday.
‘We felt this coming. It is certainly not positive,’ the minister said. ‘There are no easy times ahead of us.’
De Jager refused to say what sort of measures the government is likely to take. ‘But I can rule out nothing. There are no taboos,’ the Volkskrant quoted the minister as saying.
Recession
The government’s macro-economic forecasting agency CPB says the budget deficit is set to hit 4.1% next year and that the economy is already in recession.
The coalition - the Christian Democrats and right-wing Liberals - together with the anti-Islam PVV have already agreed an €18bn package of cuts. The PVV has said several times it will not support any more spending cuts unless €4bn is shaved of spending on development aid.
Deputy prime minister and acting leader of the CDA Maxime Verhagen said the government would have to take steps which would not only generate money, but would improve the country’s longer term prospects. ‘We will all notice the worsening economy in 2012,’ he said.
Reforms
CPB director Coen Teulings urged the government not to make major cuts at a time of recession. Instead, the government should take the time to make structural reforms to deliver money and growth.
This could include moderation, a faster introduction of a higher pension age and a reduction in mortgage tax relief.
The government will outline what measures it plans to take in the early spring.

© DutchNews.nl

the rest of the world is NOT the United States

Written on December 12, 2011 by Giacomo

Obama Draws Ire from Birth-land and Other African Nations

President Obama’s recent foreign policy decision to make gay rights an international issue has drawn the ire from Kenya, his place of birth and most of the other African nations.
Obama told world leaders that US foreign aid would be tied to gay rights.  He also vowed to send financial aid to gay individuals and groups that are being persecuted in other nations and that the US will try to help those fleeing anti-gay persecution.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton added that gay rights are the one remaining human rights issue that needs to be dealt with on an international basis when she said,

“It is violation of human rights when people are beaten or killed because of their sexual orientation, or because they do not conform to cultural norms about how men and women should look or behave.  It is a violation of human rights when governments declare it illegal to be gay, or allow those who harm gay people to go unpunished.”

What Obama and Clinton fail to realize is that the rest of the world is NOT the United States and that it is extremely insensitive, inconsiderate and outright offensive for them to try to force their personal views on the rest of the world.
In Africa today, there are 4 countries that have the death penalty for anyone convicted of being a homosexual.  Over 25 other African countries make homosexuality punishable by imprisonment.  Depending upon which country, the sentence can range from a few months to life.  All but one of the remaining African countries ban homosexuality, with the one exception being South Africa who recognizes same-sex marriages.
Kenya, Obama self-confessed birthplace, views homosexuality as a serious offense and will imprison those convicted of being gay to a minimum of 11 years up to life.  Oliver Kisaka, the deputy general secretary of the National Council of Churches of Kenya responded by saying,

“We don’t believe in advancing the rights of gays.  God did not make a mistake; [being gay] is that person’s own perception. Those who live as gays need help to live right and we should not be supporting them to live in a wrong reality.
“Society should reach out to gays and transgender people to help them out of their situation. They have not ceased to be God’s children and no one is a gone case.”

Other leaders from African nations have taken Obama’s and Clinton’s statements as being extremely upsetting and offensive.
John Nagenda, senior advisor to Uganda’s president said,

“I don’t like her tone, at all.
“I’m amazed she’s not looking to her own country and lecturing them first, before she comes to say these things which she knows are very sensitive issues in so many parts of the world, not least Africa.
“Homosexuality here is taboo, it’s something anathema to Africans, and I can say that this idea of Clinton’s, of Obama’s, is something that will be seen as abhorrent in every country on the continent that I can think of.”

Obama’s statement was made almost in conjunction with Nigeria’s Senate approval of a bill to ban same-sex marriages.  The Nigerian law would impose a 14 year jail sentence on anyone found guilty of violating the new law and a 10 year jail term for anyone assisting a homosexual wedding.
Noted Nigerian columnist Leon Usigbe claims this will create a diplomatic confrontation between the US and Africa’s most populace nation.  He also wrote,

“Diplomatic sources hinted on Wednesday that the timing of the Obama presidential order was too closely tied to the recent passing of a bill by the Senate banning same-sex marriage and relationships.”

Homosexuality is also not tolerated in Muslim nations which makes one ask what his motive for such an abhorrent statement and policy?  Why would he knowingly antagonize such a large segment of the world’s population?
It appears that Obama’s attempt to force the world to accept homosexuality is part of his effort to not only seize control of the United States, but his formation of a one-world government with him holding the central authority and power.  I’m not one to get too involved with end times, but it would not surprise me to see Obama emerge as the anti-Christ as warned about in Scripture.

Read more: Obama Draws Ire from Birth-land and Other African Nations | Godfather Politics http://godfatherpolitics.com/2561/obama-draws-ire-from-birth-land-and-other-african-nations/#ixzz1gRs8CPGe

end congressional pensions

Time to Kill Congressional Pensions and Cut Pay

by Rep. Mike Coffman

12/12/2011

74
Comments

To demonstrate to the American people that we in Congress have skin in the game when it comes to reducing deficit spending and that we intend to lead by example on this matter, we must put an end to pensions for members of Congress. I served my country in both the U.S. Army and in the Marine Corps and I was taught from the beginning of my military career that a fundamental tenet of leadership is to lead by example. I learned that leaders should never ask others to do anything that they themselves would be unwilling to do.

Today, our nation is mired in debt and we in Congress have to make tough decisions to find a way out of this crisis. This will involve asking the American people to make sacrifices related to their reliance on a government that has grown much larger than our economy will ever be able to support. In these extremely difficult economic times, Congress needs to set an example for the country and I think that ending our pension plan would be a good start.

If members of Congress are to be servants of the people, they must not receive a benefit that is now generally unavailable to the average American citizen. It is my belief that our founding fathers envisioned Congress as a citizen legislature comprised of members who were successful on a career path outside their elected federal office and who would not be dependent upon their service in Congress to provide them with a retirement income for the rest of their lives once they leave office.

In September I introduced legislation (House Resolution 2913) that will put an end to the pension plan now available to members of Congress. I am steadily gathering co-sponsors for my bill and I am confident that I will eventually assemble enough support from my colleagues in Congress, given the demands by their constituents for change, to enact this important reform.

We in Congress must vote to end the pension plan and demonstrate to the American people that their elected representatives in Washington understand they are servants of the people and not a political elite exempt from the challenges felt by most Americans today.

The current congressional pension program is a defined-benefit pension plan that pays U.S. representatives and senators 1.7% of their current $174,000 annual salary for every year they serve in Congress for up to 20 years, and an additional 1% for each year served after passing the 20-year mark. Members of Congress are required to pay 1.3% of their annual salary into the pension plan.

Members of Congress can’t participate in the pension plan until they have served at least five years. They are eligible for a pension at age 50 if they have completed 20 years of service, or at any age after completing 25 years of service. For example, if a member of Congress retired after serving for 20 years, he would receive 34% of his salary, or $59,160 per year and, if the had served for 30 years he would receive 44% of his annual salary, or $76,560.

Under my bill, members of Congress will still be required to pay into Social Security and may participate in the defined contribution Thrift Savings Plan (401K), available to all federal employees. My legislation would also honor any retirement benefits already accrued by members of Congress prior to its enactment. In addition, it would reimburse members who will have served for less than five years when my legislation becomes law, for the 1.3% of salary contributions already paid into the pension plan from which they will never collect.

My legislation to end congressional pensions is only one part of my efforts to reform Congress and the federal government. In January, I introduced House Resolution 270 that would cut congressional pay by 10%, reduce congressional office budgets and require federal civilian employees to take a non-consecutive, two-week furlough in 2012. An exception is provided in the legislation for federal employees involved in national security or for reasons related to public safety including law enforcement. The reduction in congressional office budgets was adopted in the debt ceiling agreement in August, but I’m not confident that either of the other two provisions will ever be enacted.

Unlike the prospects for H. R. 270, I am very optimistic about the chances that my proposal to end the congressional retirement system will pass because it clearly addresses part of the overall need to reform the culture of Congress. I believe that the issue of the congressional pension system will be easily understood by the voting public and will rise to a level where members of Congress will be questioned about their position on this legislation in town hall meetings across the country and by challengers during their upcoming re-election campaigns.

My bill also enjoys the support of three prominent taxpayer advocacy groups: Americans for Tax Reform, Citizens Against Government Waste and the National Taxpayers Union have come out to publicly support my legislation. I welcome their efforts to raise awareness about this important issue.

Ending the congressional retirement plan may be little more than a symbolic move toward fiscal responsibility from a leadership perspective, but it will be viewed as important by the American people as a step forward changing the culture of Washington, D.C.

This story was printed as the cover story in December 12, 2011 issue of HUMAN EVENTS newspaper.

He keeps the environmentalists happy

Written on December 12, 2011 by The Godfather

Is Obama Purposely Wrecking America’s Economy?

What is the Obama administration afraid of when it comes to oil production in the United States? Nixing the Keystone pipeline project was a short-term political decision. Yes, it upset the unions, but they’re not going anywhere on election-day. He keeps the environmentalists happy and their money pouring in. The oil companies will continue to donate to his campaign trying to persuade Obama to change his mind. The same is true of other groups who don’t want oil production of any kind, even when it comes from Canada.
Is Obama trying to cripple the United States? He’s said that free market capitalism does not advance prosperity even though every statistic says it does. The empirical evidence is out there that controlled economies do not work. Cuba and North Korea are current examples. It wasn’t too long ago that the former Soviet Union and the walled-fantasies of East Germany were extolled as worker paradises.
Even so, Obama pushes for more government control and free spending, sucking the lifeblood out of our economy. Is he so resentful of America that he is willing to destroy it? I believe he is. He is harboring some long-held animosity toward the United States. In The Roots of Obama’s Rage, Dinesh D’Souza may have hit on what drives Obama to make seemingly irrational political decisions:

The real Obama is a man shaped by experiences far different from those of most Americans; he is a much stranger, more determined, and exponentially more dangerous man than you’d ever imagined. He is not motivated by the civil rights struggles of African Americans in the 1960s — those battles leave him wholly untouched. He is not motivated by the socialist or Marxist propaganda that hypnotized a whole generation of wooly-minded academics and condescending liberals — those concepts also leave him cold.

What really motivates Barack Obama is an inherited rage — an often masked, but profound rage that comes from his African father; an anticolonialist rage against Western dominance, and most especially against the wealth and power of the very nation Barack Obama now leads.

This rage might explain why he is ignoring the wealth that is right beneath our feet. Victor David Hanson, in an article published in National Review Online, makes a startling claim that if true makes the Obama Administration complicit in jeopardizing America’s national security: There were always known to be additional untapped reserves of oil and gas in the petroleum-rich Gulf of Mexico, off America’s shores, and in the American West and Alaska. But even the top energy experts never imagined just how vast the energy there was — or that it was also beneath far more unlikely places such as South Dakota, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and New York. Some studies suggest the United States has now expanded its known potential gas and oil reserves tenfold.

Presently, we are dependent on foreign oil sources, sources that are held by some of our sworn enemies. According to Hanson, the United States could “supply all of its own domestic natural-gas needs — perhaps for the next 90 years at present rates of consumption. . . . With expanded exploration and conservation, the United States could also eventually supply half of its own petroleum needs. If we were to eliminate 5 million barrels of our current daily 9 million barrels of imported petroleum, the annual savings could reach nearly $200 billion per year. Eventually, the new gas and oil could add 1.6 million new jobs and up to nearly $1 trillion in federal revenue.”

Such an investment takes time. If we don’t take advantage of this window of opportunity, the day may come when radical Islamists control most of the major foreign oil fields. America’s economy runs on oil. There isn’t enough corn grown in the United States to make a dent in our daily fuel needs. In fact, ethanol is a money loser like all government subsidized industries. You can’t run cars on wind power or solar panels.

In the current presidential campaign, three issues dominate: national security, fiscal solvency, and high unemployment. Development of America’s vast new gas and oil finds would address all three at once.

The idea of vastly expanding American gas and oil production in the 21st century is almost as unbelievable as the present administration’s apparent reluctance to capitalize on its windfall.

Is it possible that President Obama has some deep-seeded reasons as to why he does not want to capitalize on America’s windfall? Does he believe it’s  payback time for all of America’s crimes against humanity? Nero fiddled why Rome burned. Obama vacations. The results are the same.

Read more: Is Obama Purposely Wrecking America’s Economy? | Godfather Politics http://godfatherpolitics.com/2568/is-obama-purposely-wrecking-americas-economy/#ixzz1gLUZaDnp