A Previous Subtle Effort By The Same Obama Propagandists

How symbolic, the red and blue spheres merge and the resultant color is a deeper shade of blue. Propaganda is considered effective if it is subtle and delivers a covert or subliminal message without the subject being aware of the intent. In this image, the profile of Obama was superimposed over the merging of Conservatism and Socialism with the profile of Obama and the result is a deeper shade of blue; picturesque and convenient, Obama brings the country together and we are united under a deeper shade of Marxism. It was created by the same team that made the Chrysler commercial; it hasn’t achieved fruition, but not for a lack of effort by Obama and his lackeys.

Our public school systems have been infiltrated with the Leftist Part Line for decades. At first the message was so vague, we thought it was merely coincidences, teachers and text writers surely couldn’t be so blatant and obvious with their political agenda; oh, but think back, while we refused to call liars and Socialists as such, they increased their efforts and relied on terrorists like Bill Ayers, confidant to our president, for the Leftist message now in our children’s text books.

Now, either Eastwood has allowed himself to be duped like a moron or he is a part of the deception; regardless of his intent, he has been used as a key element in the Leftist propaganda movement. Unfortunately, we have all been played for dupes by the creative schemers of the Left for while Eastwood tells America we are at the halftime of the recovery, during the halftime of the largest event in television history, the insidious message is implied that America needs to give Obama four more years to complete his anemic recovery, that seems to elude everyone but billionaires, bankers, and others on the dole.

The fact that Chrysler is staging a fart, stumble, fall type recovery based mainly on enriching Obama cronies and unions with our taxpayer money is pushed from our consciousness; since, we receive the subliminal message to equate the auto maker’s efforts with our fight against terrorism, the struggle of Obama to win reelection, and the struggle of the two athletic teams. In the excitement of the neo-gladitorial struggle portrayed on the boob tube, we are supposed to lose ourselves in the excitement and intellectual numbness of the game, much like the games in Rome that staged to entertain the masses or the mob in Rome to keep them content and less likely to riot. Thus in a similar way, we are played for fools by the people who stage our games; no they aren’t staged to prevent us from rioting, but what an excellent time to exploit our self-imposed stupor to insinuate a covert message to reelect our failed president by one of his corporate acquisitions, with a percentage of Obama’s funny stash money, more commonly known as tax payer money.

Oh, but you say the message is vague and imprecise, how can you make the connection: sorry people, the message is supposed to be vague and imprecise, it is supposed to leave a subliminal impression that will encourage the mobs of unthinking drones to vote for Obama once again; after all, hasn’t he struggled valiantly to repay his contributors and unions with taxpayer money, at least when he can find time between golf games and vacations. The fact that the connection is obvious to those who are alert and cognizant means the message is there. If you want to deny it, like Eastwood who so gallantly gave his check to charity, but also willingly gave his image and voice to the Marxism of Obama, means you either endorse the Socialist cause or you are to dense to notice the ever deepening pool of Obama Socialism.

Whether you hunt lions, Grizzlies, or men, there is a moment that defines the hunt; a mere split second can mean the difference between success or cataclysmic failure.

I was recently lion hunting in Colorado, it was a beautiful day in the mountains: the sun was bright, there was a few inches of fresh lightly packed snow, and the temperatures were in the twenties; of course, the temperature dropped with increases in elevation.

The snow was perfect for reading sign and there were plenty of Mountain Lions on the mountain, but the fresh tracks were from cats that were too small; still, it was a pleasure to see that the main predator of Colorado was thriving and that there would be excellent hunting in the future. The big cats were hanging out somewhere else, and more specifically the mature males with the brown patch on their rump were probably checking out the real cougars for liaisons of a more delicate nature; for it would soon be the season for lion humpy-rumpy if memory serves correctly. I think back to the time, many years ago, when an amorous cougar thought I looked pretty sexy in the moonlight, with a big boar beaver strapped to my back and walking on thin rotten ice over a wild river in flood; but that’s the kind of hunting story my fellow hunters like to hear at night around the fire after a couple shots of rye.

We were hunting in perfect conditions, and we were seeing many tracks, but none were worthy of a spirited chase by the hounds. Only the large tom lion is considered fair game, and they were either hiding or having a convention somewhere else in the mountains; this is why they call it hunting, and it is the mark of an amateur to become frustrated and not enjoy the beauty of the day and the mountains.

During the same period in Idaho, a similar scene was taking place, but on this trip the hounds man had a hunter who wanted to kill a cat with a bow. The bow is a primitive weapon and a legitimate weapon; it has been used effectively by hunters for several thousand years. I have nothing against bow hunting; I have enjoyed bow hunting and may yet hunt, once again, with a bow in the future, but hunting with a bow requires familiarity and practice to be competent. Primitive man depended on the bow to avoid starvation. We are no longer faced with such a demanding lifestyle, but hunters have a responsibility to provide a clean death and not to endanger himself or others with unwarranted danger because of his unfamiliarity with the bow.

On this particular hunt, as related to me by a rancher friend from Idaho, who has a friend with a pack of hounds, who makes a business of guiding lion hunters. His hunter waited until the hounds had a large lion treed before stringing his bow and notching an arrow to take aim. Normally, a cat will stay in the tree and not challenge a pack of five hounds, but depending on predictable behavior from wild animals is like trying to predict human behavior.

This cat jumped into the pack of hounds, while our hunter was still preparing his bow for the climax of the hunt, the cat killed four of the five hounds in the length of time an arrow would have needed to reach the cat. The huntsman’s best hound quit the melee and opted for the old parable of discretion being the better part of valor, before having his carotid ripped open. Then the cat quit the scene of carnage, and our hunter was still struggling to string his bow.

When people have asked me about the dangers of Grizzly hunting, I tell them it’s not as dangerous as you might think, but you just need to realize, some days you kill the bear and on other days, the bear kills you.

It would be funny, except it is closer to the truth than you may realize. We Conservatives are now engaged in a presidential primary; a primary that is as interesting and as dangerous as lion or bear hunting. We have the media and our Republican Elites trying to select our candidate without us and if we take too long to string our bows and notch our arrows or opinions, they may select our candidate without our input and we will have essentially been killed, for all practical purposes.

Whenever Barack Obama makes a key decision, it always seems to benefit special supporters. 80% of the money Obama threw away on “green energy” programs went to his big donors. It’s become painfully evident that crony capitalism has its fingerprints all over other Barack Obama decisions.

Last year Barack Obama softened up Warren Buffett by awarding Buffett the Medal of Freedom, which Obama felt was appropriate for Buffett having accumulated more than $40 billion in personal wealth. In return, Buffett has become a cheerleader for Obama, voicing his support of Obama’s Buffett rule.

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Monday will call for a new minimum tax rate for individuals making more than $1 million a year to ensure that they pay at least the same percentage of their earnings as middle-income taxpayers, according to administration officials.

The devil, as they say, is always in the details:

Mr. Obama will not specify a rate or other details, and it is unclear how much revenue his plan would raise. But his idea of a millionaires’ minimum tax will be prominent in the broad plan for long-term deficit reduction that he will outline at the White House on Monday.

Recently Barack Obama said no to the Keystone Pipeline. An article from Bloomberg (which curiously went down the memory hole already) scrapes the ice off the windshield so we can see why:

Warren Buffett’s Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC is among U.S. and Canadian railroads that stand to benefit from the Obama administration’s decision to reject TransCanada Corp. (TRP)’s Keystone XL oil pipeline permit.

With modest expansion, railroads can handle all new oil produced in western Canada through 2030, according to an analysis of the Keystone proposal by the U.S. State Department.

“Whatever people bring to us, we’re ready to haul,” Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffett’s Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A), said in an interview. If Keystone XL “doesn’t happen, we’re here to haul.”

The State Department denied TransCanada a permit on Jan. 18, saying there was not enough time to study the proposal by Feb. 21, a deadline Congress imposed on President Barack Obama. Calgary-based TransCanada has said it intends to re-apply with a route that avoids an environmentally sensitive region of Nebraska, something the Obama administration encouraged.

The rail option, though costlier, would lessen the environmental impact, such as a loss of wetlands and agricultural productivity, compared to the pipeline, according to the State Department analysis. Greenhouse gas emmissions, however, would be worse.

If completed, Keystone XL would deliver 700,000 barrels a day of crude from Alberta’s oil sands to refineries along the Gulf of Mexico, crossing 1,661 miles (2,673-kilometers) over Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas.

Obama gives Buffett award. Buffett voices support for Obama. Obama makes decision to help put money in Buffett’s pocket.

Tidy.

Obama has what is realistically a complete moratorium on domestic oil exploration and production while at the same time helping to fund Brazil’s Petrobas search for oil. In addition, Obama granted Petrobas permission to operate a deep water vessel in the Gulf of Mexico:

Petrobras has received final approval to operate the Gulf of Mexico’s first floating production, storage and offloading vessel, clearing the way for the Brazilian oil giant to start pumping oil from two deep-water fields, federal regulators said Thursday.

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement took the “final regulatory step” in green-lighting the project, with the approval of a production safety system permit and a supplemental deep-water operating plan, the bureau said in a statement.

The floating production, storage and offloading vessel, or FPSO, has a daily production capacity of 80,000 barrels of oil and 16 million cubic feet of natural gas. The ocean energy bureau said with the latest approvals, production at the Cascade and Chinook deep-water fields is expected to begin soon.

The fields are in more than 8,000 feet of water about 165 miles off Louisiana, in an area called Walker Ridge.

The reason?

Soros.

In August of 2010 George Soros sold off his stake in Petrobas.

Billionaire George Soros’s fund management firm sold all of its Petroleo Brasileiro SA stock, dumping its biggest company holding ahead of a planned $25 billion offering by Brazil’s state-controlled oil producer.

Soros Fund Management LLC, which oversees $25 billion, sold 9.1 million American depositary receipts representing Petrobras common stock and 5.88 million ADRs corresponding to preferred shares in the second quarter, according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission yesterday.

But then he bought back into Petrobas:

Billionaire investment manager George Soros built on his position in Brazilian oil and gas company Petrobras in the first quarter of 2011 for his Soros Fund Management firm, according to the guru watchers over at Guru Focus.com on May 17. He now owns 1.1 million shares of Brazil’s state owned oil company.

Soros sold out of Petrobras in mid-2010 only to return to the market in the fourth quarter of 2010 with the purchase of roughly 588,000 shares. The stock has been a money loser for Soros since getting back into the market, according to his average share price calculated by Guru Focus. Petrobras closed May 17 at $34.27 per share, so Soros’s big purchases in one of Brazil’s top two most actively traded stocks was unaffected by his large purchase orders.

May I draw your attention to the timing. Soros began “building” on his position from the fall of 2010 into the “first quarter” of 2011.

The decision to allow operation of the deep water vessel is announced in the middle of March 2011, and it coincidentally just happens to follow Soros’ Petrobas holdings expansion. Now Brazil has signed an agreement with China for China to purchase Petrobas’ oil.

The administration had already been found in contempt for its determined effort to keep US interests at bay in the Gulf while aiding Soros’ Petrobas.

Curious.

On a Mission from God

If one searches for Obama’s position on the separation of church and state, one is repeatedly directed to a speech given by Obama at the Call to Renewal’s Building a Covenant for a New America. A video of a portion of the speech is posted several times on youtube and it is described by one poster this way:

Barack Obama discusses the importance of The Separation of Church and State in a pluralistic society.

Another poster says this:

Obama explains the importance of church-state separation in a variety of ways. What it comes down to is; In a diverse democratic society, any proposed policy must justify itself via the benefits we ALL see, rather than via arguments that only hold true to people who have one certain religious worldview.

Neither is correct and Obama’s speech was not about separation of church and state- but rather how government can take advantage of religion. He pays lip service to the separation of church and state but not so much about keeping religion out of politics as it was keeping politics out of religion:

For one, they need to understand the critical role that the separation of church and state has played in preserving not only our democracy, but the robustness of our religious practice. Folks tend to forget that during our founding, it wasn’t the atheists or the civil libertarians who were the most effective champions of the First Amendment. It was the persecuted minorities, it was Baptists like John Leland who didn’t want the established churches to impose their views on folks who were getting happy out in the fields and teaching the scripture to slaves. It was the forbearers of the evangelicals who were the most adamant about not mingling government with religious, because they did not want state-sponsored religion hindering their ability to practice their faith as they understood it.

But then makes the argument that religion must bow to government:

This brings me to my second point. Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God’s will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

Thus it ought to surprise no one that Barack Obama’s policy has been to intermingle church and state when it to his advantage to do so. He’s on a Mission from God.

During his run for the Presidency Barack Obama gave a campaign speech in the United Church of Christ’s General Synod in Hartford Ct in June of 2007.

The speech caught the interest of the IRS:

NEW YORK — The IRS is investigating the United Church of Christ over a speech Sen. Barack Obama gave at its national meeting last year after he became a candidate for president, the denomination said Tuesday.

Obama, an Illinois Democrat, belongs to the 1.2 million-member Protestant group through his Chicago congregation.

In a letter the denomination received Monday, the IRS said “reasonable belief exists” that the circumstances surrounding the speech violated restrictions on political activity for tax-exempt organizations. The denomination has denied any wrongdoing.

The week before the Hartford speech Obama told an Iowa audience:

‘‘My faith teaches me that I can sit in church and pray all I want, but I won’t be fulfilling God’s will unless I go out and do the Lord’s work,’’

And again in Kentucky the following year:

On the rear of the flyer is a little homily about how Obama visited a local church one Sunday. That day Obama felt a beckoning of the Spirit and accepted Jesus Christ into his life.

On Father’s Day of 2008 Obama again campaigned in a church:

Obama headed to church this Father’s Day Sunday in his hometown of Chicago — the first time he’s been to church since he severed relations with his former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright. The Obama family attended services at Chicago’s Apostolic Church of God, one of the city’s largest African American congregations and just six and a half miles from Obama’s former place of worship, Trinity Church of Christ.

Longtime church leader Bishop Arthur Brazier greeted his “good friend” warmly and touchingly noted, “[Obama] has done something [in] this country that I never thought I would live to see.” He continued, “I am filled with emotion because I have lived through some very tough times in America. But the America today is not the America of yesteryear. And I don’t think, I don’t think it behooves us well to keep talking about the past. The Apostle Paul said forgetting the things that are behind and reaching out to the things that are before.”

At the end of his speech, Obama thanked Apostolic for their hospitality and urged them to pray for him and for Michelle. The senator left the sanctuary before the actual sermon to be delivered by Bishop Brazier’s son Byron Brazier and didn’t get a chance to hear Apostolic’s prayer for him.

And thus it ought to come as no surprise that Valerie Jarrett recently took to the pulpit to campaign for Obama.

On the Sunday before the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett visited Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta to give a political speech, in support of her boss (Barack Obama) and congressional Democrats

“We all sleep a little better at night knowing Osama Bin Laden and his lieutenants are not plotting a terrorist attack against the United States,” she said, eliciting applause from the crowd.

There was also a brief jab at Republicans.

“Teachers, and firefighters, and policemen, whose jobs are now in jeopardy because congress, well let me be specific, because the Republicans in congress …”
Before she could finish her sentence, people in the congregation were laughing, and applauding.

And to top it off, the church held a voter registration following her political speech.

It was suggested that Jarrett’s speech might be in violation of IRS law:

Valerie Jarrett’s partisan speech at Atlanta’s Ebenezer Baptist Church may have violated the IRS tax rules for churches’ political activities, said a prominent free speech attorney.

“It is problematic under current regulations,” said Erik Stanley, a senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, which is campaigning to roll back IRS curbs on believers’ speech.

And that’s before the so-called separation of church and state. Obama is abusing religion in the name of politics, not that that matters.

After all, Obama is doing the Lord’s work.

The last moderate leaves the Obama administration.

Barack Obama has burned through his second chief of staff, Bill Daley. It was thought that Daley would remain on board until after the next election but that is not to be and Daley’s departure is the opening salvo in what promises to be a war.

Charlie Gasparino tells us why Daley left and what it means: a hard left turn.

The announcement that Bill Daley will step down as President Obama’s chief of staff is further proof that as the 2012 election approaches, Obama is embracing his inner leftist on anything touching the economy. The administration has moved so far left that even one of the country’s most prominent Democrats can’t fit in.

And he believes that the Republican nominee will face a “scorched Earth” campaign assault.

Daley was about the last moderate in the Obama administration. He no doubt riled his colleagues and boss with the occasional flash of truth:

Daley said he couldn’t get into detail about the individual case which he said sounded like the “typical sort of bureaucratic stuff that’s hard to defend. Sometimes you can’t defend the indefensible.” The chief of staff said he would look into the case to “see if there is any way to bring some reason into it.”

Daley eventually became a pariah because of his tendency to be a moderate:

Daley thought he had the president’s blessing to move the Obama economic agenda to the center, but that support quickly evaporated as the ideologues and the spin masters like Valerie Jarrett and David Plouffe assumed bigger roles in the administration’s daily affairs.

As I reported on the Fox Business Network back in September, Daley grew increasingly agitated about his role. He openly complained that he was being isolated by Jarrett, Obama’s friend and personal adviser, who’s been at the forefront of Obama’s most recent leftward tilt, and let it be known that he wanted to do something else — maybe serve as treasury secretary, given his banking background at JP Morgan.

Daley was reportedly undercut routinely by the Chicago mafia:

Daley was often overruled by Obama Chicago insiders like Valerie Jarrett, leaving him ineffectual. If nothing else it’s surprising Bill Daley put up with the level of disrespect he faced from the “chosen few,” in the administration.

But it seems his greatest fault was trying to work with Republicans

Daley’s downward spiral was accelerated when he tried to work with Congressional Republicans, something he learned from serving in the Clinton administration. Daley suggested Obama work with Speaker Boehner to “go big” on a deal during the summer debt ceiling negotiations while Obama’s close friends wanted Obama to take a tougher “take it or leave it,” approach.

Obama Senior Adviser David Plouffe and incoming Chief of Staff Lew were in favor of a big deal with Boehner while National Economic Council Chairman Gene Sperling was opposed. Sperling won and Daley lost.

Daley’s moderate views and his willingness to work with Republicans made him widely unpopular with White House staff leading to deterioration in his role in administration efforts. Daley’s businessman’s approach to the nation’s fiscal issues ran in direct opposition to key White House advisors that wanted more liberal policies.

Tavis Smiley says the coming election will be the “ugliest.”

You can bet on it.

People forget that this is the same Barack Obama whose people somehow managed to come into possession of Jack Ryan’s sealed divorce records and then had his operatives email supporters about it. The Chicago Tribune then piled on, suing to have Ryan’s sealed records made public. Then, inexplicably, Berkeley-educated and Grey Davis-appointed judge Robert Schnider decided that Ryan’s divorce records should be made public and Ryan’s campaign was doomed.

Obama made a pious reversal on his position about injecting Ryan’s records into the race- but only after they were ordered released. Yet he did not call on others to do the same.

Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Barack Obama reversed his position on Republican rival Jack Ryan’s divorce file Friday, calling on fellow Democrats to refrain from trying to inject it into the campaign.

“I don’t think it’s an appropriate topic for debate,” Obama said.

Obama has consistently said that his campaign would not focus on Ryan’s 1999 divorce from TV actress Jeri Ryan.

But when he first made that pledge, Obama refused to call on other Democrats to follow his lead.

“It’s going to be up to other people to determine what’s appropriate and what’s not,” Obama said the day after his March primary victory.

Given’s Obama’s past and with Axelrod, Plouffe and Jarrett behind the scenes, you absolutely can expect to see the nastiest, filthiest election campaign you have ever seen.

It’s the Chicago way.

“I will see nutting!”

Or, why Eric Holder will remain in office until 2013 at least.

A pair of articles from the Washington Times make clear that the White House has a plan for the 2012 election, and that is to guarantee victory for Obama regardless of the outcome of the vote. A large part of it depends on Eric Holder and his continual bastardization of the law.

The first comes from Robert Knight and his account of why democrats despise voter id laws:

Assistant AG Thomas Perez, the same official who terminated the Black Panther voter intimidation case, ordered South Carolina to stop enforcing its voter photo ID law. South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson explained precisely why the law is necessary:

The state Department of Motor Vehicles audited a state Election Commission report that said 239,333 people were registered to vote but had no photo ID. The DMV found that 37,000 were deceased, more than 90,000 had moved to other states, and others had names not matched to IDs. That left only 27,000 people registered without a photo ID but who could vote by signing an affidavit as to their identity.

Contrary to left wing claims, requiring photo ID has not been shown to suppress voter ID:

A bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform in 2005 chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former U.S. Secretary of State James A. Baker III found no evidence that requiring photo IDs would suppress the minority vote. The panel recommended a national photo ID system and a campaign to register voters.

The second article comes from Jeffrey Kuhner. Against the backdrop of the Carter/Baker report (of which Holder appears to be completely ignorant) Eric Holder plays the race card for South Carolina:

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. claims Jim Crow is returning. In a recent speech, Mr. Holder said that attempts by states to pass voter identification laws will disenfranchise minorities, rolling back the clock to the evil days of segregation. He said that a growing number of minorities fear that “the same disparities, divisions and problems” now afflict America as they did in 1965 prior to the Voting Rights Act. According to the Obama administration, our democracy is being threatened by racist Republicans. Hence, the Justice Department must prevent laws requiring a photo ID to vote from being enacted.

Holder’s argument has no foothold in reality.

Kuhner points out that Holder’s real problem is that photo ID laws will impair ACORN’s ability to conduct fraud:

Mr. Holder evidently wants to scuttle ID laws because he knows which organization will be hurt most: ACORN. For years, community activist groups, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, have engaged in massive electoral fraud – registering illegal aliens, offering bribes to numerous politically disinterested people in the inner cities as inducements to vote and pushing underage and multiple voting. Election reform, therefore, is a stake aimed at the heart of Democratic corruption and ACORN’s power. Clean up the voter rolls and Mr. Obama’s re-election is in serious jeopardy.

Free photo ID cards are made available to anyone who needs one in South Carolina as are absentee votes for those who would trouble getting to the polls. Additionally, in blocking the South Carolina law Holder runs afoul of stare decisis:

Moreover, the Supreme Court already has ruled on the issue – upholding state voter ID laws. In the 2008 Crawford v. Marion County Election Board decision, the high court held that an Indiana law mandating photo identification at the voting booth was indeed constitutional. If it is good enough for the Supreme Court and the overwhelming majority of the states, then it should be for Mr. Holder as well.

Holder claims that requiring a photo ID is tatamount to a poll tax but that is laughable:

“He has a particularly hard time explaining how the South Carolina requirement of government-issued photo identification amounts to a ‘poll tax’ when the state has also made provisions to provide that identification, free of charge. Hear that, Mr. Attorney General? The only thing the voter has to do is show up and get his or her photo taken. And if that’s too much darn trouble well, then, that person can do something else on election day.”

Why is too burdensome to show up and obtain a photo ID but not too burdensome to show up to vote?

The ducks are aligning in a row. Blocking the South Carolina law will allow ACORN and other left wing operations to run amuck with voter fraud. The problem is that election fraud is a Federal offense, and that’s where Holder becomes critical. I fully expect no end to election chicanery on the part of the ACORN and the left, whether it involves “finding” lost votes as in Minnesota, printing out enough democrat ballots to guarantee a victory, forging signatures, or forging more signatures. I also expect that Holder would dismiss out of hand all claims beneficial to Obama and democrats and pursue only those in which the outcomes favored Republicans.

Ultimately the job of the Attorney General of the United States is protect the law from abuse but it is painfully clear that Eric Holder was appointed to protect abuse from the law.

Justice John Paul Stevens wrote:

”There is no question about legitimacy or importance of a state ‘s interest in counting only eligible voters.”

The integrity of the vote means nothing to Holder. Eric Holder would not know integrity if it bit him in the ass.

And that’s exactly why he was appointed.

In his latest signing statement Obama said:

“My administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens,” Obama said in the signing statement. “Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation.”

Now why would he even need to say that were it not possible?

Does his signing statement make you feel safer? It ought not. After all, it was Obama who said unequivocally that he would not use signing statements to “get his way.”

Click here to view the embedded video.

Obviously it is now possible for Obama to hold any American he deems a potential terrorist indefinitely without trial.

And who can be declared a terrorist? Among the possibilities are these:

People or groups who:

* Provide identification that is inconsistent or suspect or demand identity “privacy”
* Insist on paying with cash or uses credit card(s) in different names
* Make suspicious comments regarding anti-US, radical theology, vague or cryptic warnings that suggests or appear to endorse the use of violence in support of a cause
* Demonstrate interest in uses that do not seem consistent with the intended use of the item being purchased
* Possess little knowledge of intended purchase items
* Make bulk purchases of items to include:
-Weatherproofed ammunition or match containers
-Meals Ready to Eat
-Night Vision Devices; night flashlights; gas masks
-High capacity magazines
-Bi-pods or tri-pods for rifles

I am not comforted by Obama’s assurance that he would not detain an American indefinitely. Not one bit, especially given the bona fide idiots who are in charge of the Department of Injustice and Homeland Insecurity. And considering this- my brother-in-law and I formed a partnership to buy and rent a condo at a ski resort. We were notified that we had subsequently been placed on a terrorist watch list.

Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.

From Investors

The EPA thinks it’s worth spending billions of dollars each year to reduce already minuscule amounts of mercury in the outside air. So why is it trying to shove mercury-laced fluorescent bulbs into everyone’s homes?

When the EPA announced its new air pollution rules this week — designed to reduce power plant emissions of mercury and other to gases — Administrator Lisa Jackson blogged that:

“Mercury is a neurotoxin that is particularly harmful to children, and emissions of mercury and other air toxics have been linked to damage to developing nervous systems, respiratory illnesses and other diseases.”

At $10 billion a year, complying with the new rules won’t come cheap, and that assumes the EPA’s low-ball estimate comes true. According to the coal industry, this is the most expensive rule the EPA’s ever imposed.

Fear not, since Jackson claims the “health and economic benefits” will be many times greater than the costs.

But here’s the curious thing: While whipping up fear about mercury in the outdoors, the EPA is actively downplaying mercury’s health risks when it comes out of fluorescent bulbs inside people’s homes.

In a pamphlet extolling the virtues of the looming federal ban on traditional incandescent light bulbs, the EPA says it’s a “myth” that the mercury used in compact fluorescent lights is “dangerous in your home.”

But if you break a mercury-containing CFL? What then?

Before Cleanup

Have people and pets leave the room.
Air out the room for 5-10 minutes by opening a window or door to the outdoor environment.
Shut off the central forced air heating/air-conditioning system, if you have one.
Collect materials needed to clean up broken bulb:
stiff paper or cardboard;
sticky tape;
damp paper towels or disposable wet wipes (for hard surfaces); and
a glass jar with a metal lid or a sealable plastic bag.

During Cleanup

DO NOT VACUUM. Vacuuming is not recommended unless broken glass remains after all other cleanup steps have been taken. Vacuuming could spread mercury-containing powder or mercury vapor.
Be thorough in collecting broken glass and visible powder.
Place cleanup materials in a sealable container.

After Cleanup

Promptly place all bulb debris and cleanup materials outdoors in a trash container or protected area until materials can be disposed of properly. Avoid leaving any bulb fragments or cleanup materials indoors.
If practical, continue to air out the room where the bulb was broken and leave the heating/air conditioning system shut off for several hours.

Here’s what happened when one concerned citizen took action following a CFL breakage:

According to an April 12 article in The Ellsworth American, Bridges had the misfortune of breaking a CFL during installation in her daughter’s bedroom: It dropped and shattered on the carpeted floor.

Aware that CFLs contain potentially hazardous substances, Bridges called her local Home Depot for advice. The store told her that the CFL contained mercury and that she should call the Poison Control hotline, which in turn directed her to the Maine Department of Environmental Protection.

The DEP sent a specialist to Bridges’ house to test for mercury contamination. The specialist found mercury levels in the bedroom in excess of six times the state’s “safe” level for mercury contamination of 300 billionths of a gram per cubic meter. The DEP specialist recommended that Bridges call an environmental cleanup firm, which reportedly gave her a “low-ball” estimate of US$2,000 to clean up the room. The room then was sealed off with plastic and Bridges began “gathering finances” to pay for the US$2,000 cleaning. Reportedly, her insurance company wouldn’t cover the cleanup costs because mercury is a pollutant.

Given that the replacement of incandescent bulbs with CFLs in the average U.S. household is touted as saving as much as US$180 annually in energy costs — and assuming that Bridges doesn’t break any more CFLs — it will take her more than 11 years to recoup the cleanup costs in the form of energy savings.

And when they burn out?

► Contact your local waste collection agency

Visit Earth911.com Exit EPA Disclaimer to find collection schedules in your area or drop-off locations if curbside collections are not available. Note that waste collection agencies:

– provide services that are usually free, though some may charge a small fee.
– sometimes collect household hazardous wastes only once or twice a year, so residents will have to hold on to their light bulbs until the collection takes place. Other collection agencies provide collection services throughout the year.
– may also collect paints, pesticides, cleaning supplies or batteries.
– usually accept waste only from residents, although some collection programs include small businesses as well.

So it’s going to cost you additional money to recycle your spent CFLs and/or you’re going to have to burn gas to deliver them to a recycler. Worse, you’re going to have burn the one thing you cannot ever get back- the time required to do this.

And if your local trash hauler doesn’t offer CFL recycling, p*ss them off!

1) Your local garbage service
Probably the best place to start is with whoever currently picks up your household trash or recyclables. If you pay for this service, you’ll almost certainly find a customer service number on your bill. Give them a call and ask if they offer CFL or mercury recycling. If not, politely suggest they do so. Here’s an opportunity to write a letter, attend a meeting or take some other activist role in highlighting the importance of proper CFL disposal. The appropriate follow-up will depend on whether your trash service is privately or publicly held.

Left out of this suggestion is that should the hauler be forced into such a program, the cost would be passed on in the form of increased fees. And the truth is that few are going to be bothered with this. Millions and millions of CFLs are going to be discarded into landfills, which will eventually contaminate the ground with significant amounts of mercury. And CFLs have far greater mass than incandescent bulbs.

What about the energy required for manufacture of CFLs?

The total energy input for the production of a CFL light bulb comes to 1.7kWh compared to 0.3kWh for a single incandescent light bulb.

That’s six times as much energy required to create a CFL over an incandescent bulb!

Most CFL’s are manufctured in China, and in their manufacture workers are poisoned:

Large numbers of Chinese workers have been poisoned by mercury, which forms part of the compact fluorescent light bulbs.

A surge in foreign demand, set off by an EU directive making these bulbs compulsory within three years, has also led to the reopening of mercury mines that have ruined the environment of a remote part of China.

Doctors, regulators, lawyers and courts in China are increasingly alert to the potential damage to public health of an industry that promotes itself as a friend of the Earth but depends on highly toxic mercury for its core product.

Making the bulbs requires workers to handle mercury in either solid or liquid form because a small amount of the metal is put into each bulb to start the chemical reaction that creates light.

Mercury pollution in China is already a significant problem.

Reducing Hg pollution has been a high priority in China’s environmental management and improvement program. During the past few years, China’s State Environmental Protection Administration has also strengthened its management of the production, use, import, export, and disposal of Hg. Hg mining has been restricted in many areas, such as Wanshan. In 1996, artisanal Au-mining activities were officially banned.

This “green” stuff ain’t all it’s cracked up to be. Six times as much energy is used in the manufacture of CFLs over incandescent bulbs, workers and landfills are poisoned and CFLs are toxic if broken.

But you can be comforted knowing that while mercury may be poisonous in the air, Lisa Jackson says it is safe once it is your home.

Merry Christmas!

And Obama again proves that only gullible, stupid people vote for him.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Posted on the pomposity that is the site of the “Office of the President Elect” it says this:

Protect Whistleblowers: Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled. We need to empower federal employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance. Barack Obama will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government. Obama will ensure that federal agencies expedite the process for reviewing whistleblower claims and whistleblowers have full access to courts and due process.

That, as is just about everything else about Barack Obama, is chock full of manure. It is as phony as he is.

Baack Obama promised to protect whistleblowers and instead has done absolutely the opposite. This must have come as quite a shock to the liberal media. Tears likely washed on the fingers of Jane Mayer as she wrote:

When President Barack Obama took office, in 2009, he championed the cause of government transparency, and spoke admiringly of whistle-blowers, whom he described as “often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government.” But the Obama Administration has pursued leak prosecutions with a surprising relentlessness. Including the Drake case, it has been using the Espionage Act to press criminal charges in five alleged instances of national-security leaks—more such prosecutions than have occurred in all previous Administrations combined. The Drake case is one of two that Obama’s Justice Department has carried over from the Bush years.

Gabriel Schoenfeld, a conservative political scientist at the Hudson Institute, who, in his book “Necessary Secrets” (2010), argues for more stringent protection of classified information, says, “Ironically, Obama has presided over the most draconian crackdown on leaks in our history—even more so than Nixon.”

“More than Nixon”

In the Atlantic Wire John Hudson writes:

The Justice Department’s subpoena of New York Times reporter James Risen Monday was the latest sign of how aggressive the Obama administration is being in its campaign against government whistle-blowers. The purpose of Risen’s subpoena is to force him to testify that Jeffrey Sterling, a former CIA agent, gave him confidential information about the CIA’s efforts to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program. The extent to which the administration is prosecuting leakers has troubled those who see leakers as speakers of truth to power. “In President Obama’s 26 months in office, civilian and military prosecutors have charged five people in cases involving leaking information, more than all previous presidents combined,” reports the Times. Here’s a list of prominent leakers with various agendas currently under pressure from the government.

Obama’s war on whistleblowers also includes those who would tell us the truth about Fast and Furious:

Senator Grassley pointed out that the documents DOJ released to smear Dodson were actually supposed to be so sensitive that the DOJ wouldn’t provide them to congressional investigators. But then, to harm a whistleblower, someone from the DOJ provided these specifically selected documents to the press. In fact, the name of the criminal suspect in the documents was redacted, but Agent Dodson’s name was left for all to see. “This looks like a clear and intentional violation of the Privacy Act as well as an attempt at whistleblower retaliation,” said Grassley.

Now Obama trains his sights on those who would uncover the biggest fraud of our times- climate change. Obama is joining the British government in trying to identify the leaker of the climtategate emails. Christopher Horner in the Washington Examiner:

I have seen apparent proof that the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), Criminal Division, is working with United Kingdom police to pursue the leaker of the 2009 and 2011 “Climategate” emails.

I have learned that last week DOJ sent a search-and-seizure letter to the host of three climate-change “skeptic” blogs. Last night, UK police raided a blogger’s home and removed computers and equipment.

The leaked records derailed “cap-and-trade” legislation in the U.S. and, internationally, as well as talks for a successor to the Kyoto Protocol. The emails and computer code were produced with taxpayer funds and held on taxpayer-owned computers both in the US and the UK, and all were subject to the UK Freedom of Information Act, the U.S. Freedom of Information Act and state FOIA laws.

They also were being unlawfully withheld in both the UK (by the University of East Anglia) and the U.S. (Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), including stonewalling me for two years, and three other requesters for longer).

The hunt involving U.S. and UK law enforcement agencies is now escalating. On Wednesday night UK time, six detectives with the UK police (Norfolk Police Department) raided the home of at least one blogger, removing his equipment to look for clues to the identity of leaker “FOIA 2011.”

……..

To review: The UK police and the US DOJ, Criminal Division, are pursuing a leaker of public records subject to one or more FOIA, records that were unlawfully withheld under those laws, which leaks indicate apparent civil violations (tortious interference by seeking dismissal of certain “skeptics”), and raising reasonable questions of fraud against taxpayers.

And they are pursuing the leaker.

This is the President who promised to protect whistleblowers but now pursues them with a vengeance. This is the President who refuses to prosecute those who break the laws and promises to prosecute those who enforce the laws. This is the Preisdent who demanded all Americans be subject to indefinite detention without trial.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Obama has proven that not only is he was awful as many of us thought him to be, not only has he brought the slime of Chicago to Washington, not only has he stripped all the dignity from the office of the Presidency, he has become a monster. If he is re-elected, he will likely remain in office for the rest of his life.

Hasta La Vista Kim Baby!

Kim Jung Il’s life: a soliloquy in lunacy and madness.

Often the sages admonish
Oh Death, be not so proud
A tender soul’s last wish
The welfare of others be allowed

Death unkind, strikes indiscriminate
History records with only a wretched few
Death comes not soon enough to elate
The drop of his miserable carcass in its tomb

This could well be a scripted scene from a remake of Orwell’s 1984:

This is a more realistic response.

The world awaits the apparent madness of the heir apparent and the ubiquitous and fawning attention by our State Department to insure adequate supplies for the country and an effortless transition of power from one totalitarian despot to another, like when we aided Kim and his transition of ultimate Nepotism.

From the pen of Hitchens, 2005:

One tries to avoid cliché, and I did my best on a visit to this terrifying country in the year 2000, but George Orwell’s 1984was published at about the time that Kim Il Sung set up his system, and it really is as if he got hold of an early copy of the novel and used it as a blueprint. (“Hmmm … good book. Let’s see if we can make it work.”)

Actually, North Korea is rather worse than Orwell’s dystopia. There would be no way, in the capital city of Pyongyang, to wander off and get lost in the slums, let alone to rent an off-the-record love nest in a room over a shop. Everybody in the city has to be at home and in bed by curfew time, when all the lights go off (if they haven’t already failed). A recent nighttime photograph of the Korean peninsula from outer space shows something that no “free-world” propaganda could invent: a blaze of electric light all over the southern half, stopping exactly at the demilitarized zone and becoming an area of darkness in the north.

Kim, Rest In Hell, you evil bastard!