Previous month:
July 2012
Next month:
September 2012

Obama inserts himself into Neil Armstrong tribute message

What better tribute to an amazing American Hero and the first man to set foot on the surface of the moon than to post a silhouette picture of yourself looking at the sky with not even a full moon? A striking contrast the between the competency, bravery and leadership of Neil Armstrong and an ineffectual narcissist who needs a TelePrompTer to express himself. I almost expected Barack Obama to remind us that Neil Armstrong didn’t achieve greatness without government assistance.

Capture8-27-2012-1.55.59 PM

Neil’s spirit of discovery lives on in all the men and women who have devoted their lives to exploring the unknown—including those who are ensuring that we reach higher and go further in space. That legacy will endure—sparked by a man who taught us the enormous power of one small step.
—President Obama on the passing of Neil Armstrong

Neil’s spirit of discovery lives on in all the men and women who have devoted their lives to exploring the unknown—including those who are ensuring that we reach higher and go further in space. That legacy will endure—sparked by a man who taught us the enormous power of one small step.

—President Obama on the passing of Neil Armstrong

<Source: Official Campaign Page at TUMBLR>

Bottom line …

Neil Armstrong represents the very worst of humanity according to socialists and communists. An individual who prepares himself to the best of his ability and then risks everything to achieve greatness. Not an unexceptional member of the collective who needs to be ordered to perform; with the ruling elite taking credit for their actions and portraying it as a “collective achievement.”

We need more people like Neil Armstrong and less people like Barack Obama. Remember this in the voting booth. Your choice: exceptional people performing exceptional tasks in an exceptional nation or unexceptional people working on unexceptional tasks in an unexceptional socialist nation.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



DID LANCE ARMSTRONG GET SCREWED?

UPDATE: 10/12/2012 -- SOMETHING STILL STINKS ...

USADA's report against Lance Armstrong reveals more issues. The 202-page report released Wednesday included affidavits from 11 of Armstrong's former teammates detailing elements of Armstrong's — and in some cases their — use of performance-enhancing drugs.

USADA announced Thursday that cyclists Tom Danielson, George Hincapie, Levi Leipheimer, Christian Vande Velde and David Zabriskie each have accepted six-month suspensions, effective Sept. 1, 2012, as a result of their testimony in the Armstrong investigation.

If they were there, participated or knowingly covered up the doping, shouldn't they too be banned for life -- or are they being rewarded for making the agency's case? Like I said, something stinks here!

UPDATE: 10/10/2012 – I WAS WRONG ABOUT LANCE ARMSTRONG!

While it is always prudent to give another person the benefit of doubt and a chance to clear up all allegations, I have just finished reading the massive report on the case against Lance Armstrong. Should you wish to review this document for yourself, you can find it here.

It appears that there is overwhelming, documented evidence that suggests Armstrong and many others were guilty of participating in what can only be characterized as a “sophisticated doping ring.”

Whether or not there were any deal cut with other doping participants in return for reduced charges or other considerations remains unknown. But it is very, very clear that many of those who provided affidavits did so under penalty of perjury and potential prosecution for various other crimes such as libel, slander, possessing controlled substances, violation of various foreign drug laws, etc..

This is a very disappointing day. Even with the use of performance-enhancing drugs, riding against others who used the very same performance-enhancing drugs still means that it was a monumental achievement for a human being. However, knowing the game was rigged takes the edge off the performance.

As to what should happen to Lance Armstrong and the others – I suggest that the appropriate penalty would be to strip all concerns of their awards – place asterisks next to their names and do not re-jigger the results because it is not known whether the next in line for the award used the same performance-enhancing drugs. The U.S. Postal Service should be reimbursed for their sponsorship funding.

Perhaps, Lance Armstrong can make up for his alleged personal failure by helping others to achieve their goals. As for those testifying, they should suffer the same fate as Lance Armstrong as there is no honor in spilling your guts when confronted with overwhelming evidence.

A part of me still wants to believe that there is a change – a very, very small chance – that the agency bringing the charges is corrupt and Lance Armstrong has been the victim of a massive conspiracy fed by the self-interests of the prosecutors. We have all seen innocent men sentenced to life in prison, it is too bad their isn’t an “Innocence Project” for athletes. – steve

Capture8-26-2012-4.26.11 PM

While I do not profess to know whether or not Lance Armstrong is guilty of the doping allegations made by a quasi-governmental agency, I do know that our legal process has been subverted by investigators and prosecutors with a great self-interest in promoting their own careers and positions. And that informants are often coerced into testifying (possibly falsely) by the promise to ignore their transgressions or lighten their sentences.

I think that this arbitration system stinks. Either charge Lance Armstrong with a crime or go away. Let him respond in a court of competent jurisdiction for all to see. Present the evidence and see if it holds up under the judicial standards for evidence. No more innuendo and secret findings. Let those who performed the tests be placed on the stand, under oath. Let a jury of his fellow citizens decide. 

I think justice demands that Lance Armstrong be treated fairly as should every other citizen of the United States.

To strip a man of his medals, the symbols of a unique achievement, without such an open trial is WRONG.

Bottom line …

Let Lance Armstrong keep his medals unless there is concrete and irrefutable proof of his wrongdoing. And that those who may have been coerced to testify against him be examined under oath. We have too few heroes and too many non-achiever critics to let kangaroo courts impugn a man’s honor. So let the judicial process decide.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



THE FCC'S WEALTH RE-DISTRIBUTION SCHEME: TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION?

Once again the Federal Communications Commission is attempting to plunder the pockets of American taxpayers to engage in socialistic wealth redistribution scheme. Similar to that implemented by the Universal Service Fund to insure that everyone in remote areas of the United States has access to telephone service. Or the tax that provides for specialized telephone equipment supplied to people with impaired hearing, sight or other disabilities. We are speaking of BILLIONS of dollars which are flowing through the government to government-regulated special interests.

How many people were aware that $4.5 BILLION of the Universal Service Fund was simply paper-designated to an Internet subsidy called the “Connect America Fund?”  

Broadband has gone from being a luxury to a necessity for full participation in our economy and society – for all Americans. For that reason, the FCC has adopted comprehensive reforms of its Universal Service Fund (USF) and Intercarrier Compensation (ICC) systems to accelerate broadband build-out to the 18 million Americans living in rural areas who currently have no access to robust broadband infrastructure. This reform will expand the benefits of high-speed Internet to millions of consumers in every part of the country by transforming the existing USF into a new Connect America Fund (CAF) focused on broadband. <Source: FCC>

How many people know that there is a non-governmental organization (with its own well-paid bureaucratic structure) involved?

The Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) is an independent, not-for-profit corporation created in 1997 to collect universal service contributions from telecommunications carriers and administer universal support mechanisms (programs) designed to help communities across the country secure access to affordable telecommunications services. USAC carries out its functions as the administrator of the federal universal service programs and universal service fund (USF) under the oversight of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). USAC administers universal service programs for high cost companies in rural areas, low-income consumers, rural health care providers, and schools and libraries. <Source: USAC>

And that the Board of Directors governance appears to be stacked in favor of the special interests?

USAC's Board of Directors represents the universal service stakeholder community.

Three (3) directors represent incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) made up from the following:

  • one for Bell Operating Companies (BOCs),
  • one for ILECs other than BOCs with annual operating revenues over $40 million, and
  • one for ILECs other than BOCs with annual operating revenues less than $40 million.

Two (2) directors represent interexchange carriers (IXCs) (i.e., long distance companies) made up from the following:

  • one for IXCs with over $3 billion in annual operating revenues, and
  • one for IXCs with less than $3 billion in annual operating revenues.

Three (3) directors represent schools that are eligible to receive discounts.

One (1) director represents libraries that are eligible to receive discounts.

Two (2) directors represent rural health care providers that are eligible to receive discounts.

Seven (7) directors, each representing one the following:

  • wireless providers,
  • competitive local exchange carriers,
  • cable operators,
  • information service providers,
  • low-income consumers,
  • state telecommunications regulators, and
  • state consumer advocates.

USAC's chief executive officer is also a Board member. <Source>

And that the head honcho is a Washington-type liberal lawyer?

Scott Barash is the Acting CEO of USAC. He joined USAC as its first in-house attorney in 1999. Previously, he was a partner in the Washington, DC office of a national law firm where he concentrated on complex civil litigation, particularly in the telecommunications field and on behalf of trade associations, charitable organizations, and other not-for-profit organizations.

Before that, he was a trial attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch. During his tenure at the Justice Department, he handled a wide variety of litigation on behalf of numerous federal agencies. He earned a B.A. from Yale University and a J.D. from the University of Chicago Law School. He served as a law clerk to Judge R. Lanier Anderson, III, of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. <Source>

The next FCC move, detailed in a “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.” is to increase the amount of incoming revenue by imposing additional taxes on the consumer. Those wishing to read the FCC’s Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking can find it here.

Double-dipping?

Why did $4.5 BILLION dollars come from telephone users to fund the Connect America Fund? I can understand that older telephone service required the use of physical connections over copper wire. But, cellular service is a “wireless” system. So why are phone users now being milked to provide Internet service?

Why should the taxpayer be required to fund cellular sites that allow the special interests, the communications carriers, to defray build-out costs and still collect money from users. Money which flows to their bottom line and rewards executives (bonuses) and investors (increases in share price). Why shouldn’t these services be provided free to all users if they are regarded as a necessity of life and the infrastructure is paid for by taxes?

Why should the taxpayer be required to fund satellite access systems just because a person chooses to live in a rural area?

Is the fundamental principle correct?

Is access to the Internet a fundamental right? Is healthcare a fundamental right? These are questions that must be answered by Congress, not a hyper-political government agency.

The FCC’s has redefined its mission …

The Federal Communications Commission should be restricted to its fundamental mission. One, to allocate the communications spectrum through licensing and oversight. Two, to insure that devices that operate within this spectrum meet stringent technical qualifications so that their signals do not impact the signals of others. Three, to license individuals to possess and operate telecommunications equipment. Four, to conduct limited research and analysis on equipment to insure their suitability for use within the broadcast spectrum. They should not involve themselves in moral issues such as policing the airwaves for nudity or swearing. They should not be involved in administering programs which have not been sanctioned by Congress. They should not create non-governmental or quasi-governmental agencies that are not directly overseen by Congress. And most of all, the directors of the FCC should not be political hacks or their politically-connected special interest friends.

For years the Internet has been controlled by organizations without government interference. The IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) which sets inter-operability standards. ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) which provides for the issuance and control over top-level domains. Let us not allow any bureaucratic agency, foreign or domestic,  assume control over these institutions which have worked so well in the past and will continue to work well in the future.

Bottom line …

There are BILLIONS of dollars that are washing through the system with little or no public disclosure. Ostensibly used for the betterment of citizens, these taxation systems actually represent agency administrative rulings WHICH IS TANTAMOUNT TO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION.

I am not saying that these programs are bad, just that they should be created, debated and approved by Congress as is every other tax. Otherwise, the President and his fellow travelers can skirt Congress at will and tax American citizens who have no legitimate method for redressing this particular grievance. How likely are those that govern this hidden system to demand the efficient and effective use of those funds? How much oversight is a hyper-politicized agency likely to provide knowing that all of the big players have significant lobbying activities which can be milked for campaign funds?

I pay for my own equipment and my access to the Internet. If there is no satisfactory coverage in my area, I can move or make other arrangements. The idea that one needs “high-speed” broadband access as a condition of life is ludicrous. Especially if it is paid by an inefficient tax administered by unscrupulous people for their own self-benefit.

If we are serious about providing this service, it can be done by simply using the low-frequency portion of the broadcast spectrum to provide near universal signal coverage at minimal costs. Especially, by limiting the profits sucked out of the system by those who would be gatekeepers. If the for-profit people want to reap the revenue rewards, let them fund the build-out and profit accordingly.

I cannot help but think of the difference between that charlatan Thomas Edison, who had others do his work and ran to the patent office at the drop of a hat, and Nicola Tesla whose work gave us most of our modern electrical device. A man who died alone and broke in a hotel room because his backers found out that there was no way to monetize Tesla’s invention of providing free energy out of the atmosphere with little more than a suitably-tuned antenna. Had the government intervened over the special interests, this might have been a different world.

But here the government is controlled by the special interests. And mostly in unaccountable ways. It is time to return government back to “We the People” and make our representatives vote on each and every tax in an open, transparent and accountable manner such as that envisioned by our forefathers.  

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



Republican's fundraising survey trick makes me angry ...

Once again, the Republican National Committee believes that I am one of the sheeple that can be conned into thinking that their “2012 PRESIDENTIAL ISSUES SURVEY” really wants my opinion and is something more than a disguised propagandized fundraising pitch.

First, I am no longer a registered Republican, so they are using outdated lists.

Second, the questions they ask are one-sided and idiotic for any non-liberal independent thinker.

Are you more enthusiastic or less enthusiastic about voting in the upcoming November election than you were four years ago?

Considering what Barack Obama and his fellow travelers have done to our nation, voting is not a matter of enthusiasm, it is a matter of critical action to prevent the nation from further decline into a socialist democracy like France or Greece.

Thinking ahead to the November election, do you plan on voting at the polls on Election Day, or will you be voting early, either through absentee voting by mail or through "early voting in-person" allowed in many states?

It really doesn’t matter how you vote, just that you vote and fulfill your duty as a legal citizen of the United States and your state of residence.

How important are each of the following issues when deciding how to vote this November?

  • Economic issues like jobs.
  • Government issues like the deficit, spending, and taxes.
  • Pocketbook issues like rising prices, and the cost of gas and housing.
  • Social issues like. abortion and gay marriage.
  • Foreign policy issues like national security, the war in Afghanistan, and Iran's nuclear weapons program. 
  • Personal freedom issues like gun control and defending the Constitution, and limiting government.

Amazingly, you should be concerned about all of the issues. With concern for the social issues being less important than:

  1. The protection and preservation of our Constitution and “Rule of Law” (Something Obama tramples with impunity)
  2. National security and safety issues.
  3. Outrageous government spending directed at cronies and special interests which only serves to purchase influence, votes and campaign funding.
  4. Rising taxes and the cost of commodities.

As for social issues, such as abortion and gay marriage, these are a matter of conscience and should not be used to divide the vote. There will always be time to deal with these matters on a state level AFTER concerns about the preservation of our constitutional values, national security and control over the government’s outrageous spending and unwarranted meddling in economic affairs,.

As for issues involving education; again, these are state issues and truth-be-told, controlled by toxic and socialist public employee unions which have produced little or no progress in spite of ever-increasing budgets. Not competency testing teachers in both teaching ability and subject-matter specialties is crazy. Eighty percent of all costs are administration, personnel and building projects which pump funds to special interest projects at the expense of the children. Two decades of indoctrinating and producing political activists and not students who can compete in a global economy.

If you want a short-cut to deciding how you want to look at issues and vote, ask yourself:

If making national defense and economic prosperity a priority is selfish and unfair, does weakening America and increasing middle-class poverty seem fair and make you feel more benevolent?

The goal of socialists and communists like Barack Obama and his fellow travelers is to decrease everyone's standard of living to the point of needing the government's assistance to live your life. Government which they and their special interest cronies control for their own self-benefit. With the goal of their ascension to perpetual power being tantamount to all other goals. And by making America into just another nation in the United Nations, they help fulfill the goals of international communism: government central planning by an “enlightened” ruling elite. Another polite euphemism by a dictator and their czars.

With the "end" well-defined, the means -- fair or foul -- become acceptable as the cost of doing business. Perhaps why the democrat party accepts corruption as a fact of life.

Bottom line …

There is a clear choice.  America or  France/Greece!

I chose America!

-- steve

  

 

 

 

 


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



POLITICS OF PERSONAL DESTRUCTION

Recently I was involved in a situation where a blogger noticed that someone apparently “plagiarized” a portion of one of my blog items. After reviewing the facts, the matter did not arise to the level of plagiarism, but more like the failure to attribute a quote. What makes it a non-issue for me is that the paragraph appears to be re-written, so it is not an exact reproduction of my words.

So why jump up and down? To quote an unknown author, “Big people discuss ideas, ordinary people discuss things, and small people discuss other people.” As long as the author made the point he was trying to make – and it agreed with my original intent – good on him. The author did not simply reprint one of my blog items under his own name – although that has happened before.

Could it be that the blogger and the publication have an axe to grind with a former politician and radio talk show host? Engaging in the politics of personal destruction because the blogger disagrees with the author’s viewpoint, conservatism or color?

Notice that I am not naming the individuals or the publications involved because I do not believe it is a big deal. In fact, I believe it is one of those non-issues that are rarely worth discussing.

Bottom line …

It is probably wise to consider who is speaking as well as what is being said. I know that much of what I write about Barack Obama and his fellow travelers appears to be snarky and in the same vein. But there is a difference. Here is a President who has promoted policies which have decimated my finances, the finances of the United States and more importantly, trashed our Constitution. Think about it, someone characterized as a constitutional law professor implementing clearly unconstitutional rules and regulations.

This is not some former politician and/or radio talk show host who made a mistake … this is the alleged leader of the free world and the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces. Someone clearly deserving of scorn. 

I would have a diametrically different viewpoint if my work was commercial and it was abused for the profit of another individual. But it’s not and I don’t really think it is worth jumping up and down, waving one’s arms and saying  anything more than “bad puppy.”

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



WHY DON'T I GIVE PRESIDENT OBAMA A FAIR CHANCE?

One of my readers asked why I was so overwhelmingly negative in what I write about Barack Obama and in the spirit of “fair play” suggesting that I should cut him some slack. Since the person did not sign his name, I will reply here in the hope that he reads this.

Where was Obama’s spirit of fair play when he instructed Congress to craft that abomination known as Obamacare? The Congressional democrats did not allow republicans to assist in crafting the legislation and did not allow for republican amendments to the legislation. As Obama and his fellow travelers put it, Obamacare is good for the country and good for its citizens. So I ask you, if it was so recognizably good, why were legislative bribes and backroom deals needed to coerce some democrats to vote for the bill? Why was it a 2000+ page bill, virtually nobody read nor understood? Why was is dropped on desks in the dead of night? Nothing particularly fair about that.

Where was Obama’s spirit of fair play when his party controlled the House, the Senate and the Presidency for two years? He often said the country was hurting after the “Bush Recession,” so why didn’t he set about fixing it – instead of doling out money to municipalities and the states who were keeping union employees on the job while letting others go? What was so fair about that?

Where was Obama’s sense of fair play when he was asked for his birth certificate, travel documents, social security card and school records? He didn’t think much of the American public to provide them with his credentials for the office he now holds. Spending millions to avoid producing the documents in a court of competent jurisdiction. Is it fair when he demands Romney’s tax returns and hides his own documents? I think not.

And speaking of fair play, how does he manage to get a pass from the mainstream media when he openly lies to the American public?

And how about the fairness to award Obama the Nobel Peace Prize when he did absolutely nothing to earn it? What about the fairness to the other contenders with real accomplishments? Or was this simply an advance reward for screwing over America?

You want fairness ? I will extend him fairness. I won’t call for his prosecution for treason should it turn out that he misled the public. I will call for his prosecution and conviction. I think that is fair for the American people.

And should he turn out to become the Secretary General of the United Nations, I will demand that the United States quit the U.N. and throw the corrupt delegates out of the country.

Fair is fair!!


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



The SECRET OBAMA 2012 ELECTION STRATEGY

What is the strategy used by Barack Obama’s top-level advisors? It is all contained here – the talking points for Obama’s most ethical administration that  highlights transparency and accountability …

Capture8-24-2012-10.04.22 AM Cartoon <Source>

Bottom line …

It’s not about the dismal economic outlook.

It’s not about the disastrous jobs market.

It’s not about bungled foreign policy which brought the Muslim Brotherhood to power.

It’s about blaming someone else: former President Bush, ATM machines, fires, earthquakes – and anybody close by.

OBAMA AND HIS FELLOW TRAVELERS HAVE NO ANSWERS … OR THEY WOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING MEASURABLE BY NOW.

LOOK FOR THE DEMOCRATS TO TURN TO ILLEGAL VOTES AND QUESTIONABLE ELECTION PROCEDURES – IT’S THE ONLY THING THEY HAVE LEFT! AND I DO MEAN HARD LEFT!

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



OBAMA’S DISHONEST “WAR ON WOMEN” CAMPAIGN AGAINST MITT ROMNEY

Obama is trying to sell women that Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and the entire GOP is bad for women and have an abominable stance on women’s rights …

Hypocritical, because one of the top democrat leaders is, himself, an accused rapist, a womanizer and someone who has disgraced the Presidency with his sexual shenanigans in the Oval Office.

A man whose campaign employed a cadre of private investigators, smear merchants and media nay-sayers to publicly discredit honest and honorable women who were allegedly attacked by this man. Colloquially known as the “BIMBO SQUAD,” their sole duty was to manage “bimbo eruptions” from women coming forth to complain about Clinton’s sexual proclivities.

For all her endless protestations that Bill Clinton was the victim of a Right-wing conspiracy rather than a serial philanderer, his wife is no fool. When Hillary caught wind of the fact that the sexy Hollywood actress Sharon Stone was going to be a star guest at a Clinton fundraising dinner, she knew she had to intervene. But she also needed to keep her hands clean. So she asked a friend to tell Bill's senior staff not to sit Sharon Stone next to the President at dinner. Dutifully, the staff designated the seat for another woman. They need not have bothered: on the night, Bill arranged to have Stone take her place.

That year, 1995, Hillary certainly had reason to be worried about her husband's proclivities. A biography of Bill was published which contained irrefutable evidence from one of their most trusted friends, Betsey Wright, who had been chief of staff when he was the governor of Arkansas. She was quoted as confirming that Arkansas state troopers had helped solicit women for Bill. Moreover, she revealed that in 1987 she had personally tried to dissuade him from running for President by presenting him with a list of his purported lovers. For once, because Betsey was a close friend, Hillary could not dismiss a "bimbo eruption" as the work of their enemies.

Bill Clinton reacted to the revelations with fury. One of his most trusted advisers, Dick Morris, said later that the President "never spoke of his chagrin that he had done things to bring pain to Hillary - he just railed against his misfortune at them coming out. Nowhere was there any contrition for the adultery - just a furious rage that the world was making trouble for him in his marriage".

Hillary, for her part, was angry enough to kick him out of their White House bedroom and stop speaking to him for a few weeks. She had reacted that way before in Arkansas: during periods of estrangement, she and Bill ended up sleeping in separate bedrooms in the governor's mansion. He always managed to win her back. But unless evidence of his affairs proved incontrovertible, she simply preferred to turn a blind eye. To keep her marriage going, she had years ago devised a "don't ask, don't tell" approach. "Tolerating Bill's weakness," said her close friend Susan Thomases, "has always been part of her relationship with him." <Source>

Bottom line …

How can any party or any politician point their finger at Mitt Romney, a man faithful to his vows, and complain that he is anti-women? But a better question: where is Obama when it comes to denouncing Muslins and their routine and ritual abuse of women? Treating women as chattel? Routinely beating or raping women? Making women wear total covering in hot weather? Demanding that rape victims have 4 male witnesses? Stoning women to death for adultery? Absolute silence while he says Romney and Ryan are bad for women. Disingenuous, dishonest and disgusting. But that’s Obama for you!

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



THE LEFT’S SMOKE AND MIRRORS CAMPAIGN ON MITT ROMNEY’S PERSONAL FINANCES

What we know is that Mitt Romney is successful and worth a ton of money which he appeared to earn as a venture capitalist/turn-around consultant. We also know that wealthy and sophisticated people pay accountants, lawyers and other consultants a lot of money to help them arrange their affairs in such a manner as to legally pay the lowest possible tax rate.

Unlike, Obama whose financial dealings involve dodgy people doing dodgy deals, Mitt Romney has complied with the law and made the appropriate disclosures. But that has not satisfied the left who are playing the communist class warfare game – the rich versus the poor, the haves versus the have nots – by suggesting that Romney has a hidden secret.

The headlines blare …

Capture8-23-2012-2.32.18 PM Inside Mitt Romney’s Bain Files

In a massive document dump, Gawker has published 950 pages of confidential files related to Mitt Romney’s finances. Alex Klein on what’s notable in the cache—and what to ignore.

Capture8-23-2012-2.36.08 PM

The Bain Files: Inside Mitt Romney’s Tax-Dodging Cayman Schemes

 

What’s really there?

48 documents totaling more than 950 pages. They consist predominantly of confidential internal audited financial statements from 2008, 2009, and 2010, as well as investor letters from the same period, for Bain entities that Romney has previously disclosed owning an interest it.

Can they even understand what they say?

The documents are exceedingly complicated. We don't pretend to be qualified to decode them in full, which is why we are posting them here for readers to help evaluate—please leave your thoughts in the discussion below.

Do they indicate wrongdoing?

If there was any wrongdoing, one would assume that it would be the entity that was culpable and chargeable and not the investors. As for tax evasion, the left is very, very careful not to claim that Mitt Romney committed a crime – by only suggesting that he evaded paying what they falsely characterize as a “person’s fair share.”

But what of Gawker itself?   

Nick Denton’s blog empire.

For years after starting Gawker Media, the online publishing network, in 2002, Nick Denton ran the company out of his apartment, in SoHo. “He said, ‘If you run it out of your house, then no one expects anything,’ ” Denton’s friend Fredrik Carlström, the film producer and adman, told me. “ ‘If you have an office, people want stuff. They want cell phones, lunch breaks, beer on Fridays.’ ” Gawker Media was a deliberately fly-by-night operation: incorporated in Budapest, where a small team of programmers still works, and relying on elegantly jaded bloggers who considered themselves outsiders with nothing to lose. Early contributors tell stories about bounced checks, and receiving payment straight from the A.T.M. The arrangement, many assumed, was a convenient hedge against potential libel claims. (Scarcely a week passes without one or more of Denton’s nine sites receiving a cease-and-desist letter.) It also helped bolster Denton’s image as a kind of digital-sweatshop operator—he initially paid his bloggers twenty-four thousand dollars a year—and cultivated a helpful sense among contributors that they were the crew of a rogue “pirate ship,” as Gawker people sometimes say, initiating stealth attacks on the ocean liners in midtown.

Nonetheless, two years ago Denton, who is forty-four, set up a permanent base for the operation in a large loft in Nolita, which he increasingly shows off, as if to demonstrate that his bloggers do not wear pajamas all day long. They now make good money, sometimes in excess of eighty thousand dollars, with 401(k)s, and, soon to come, maternity leave (not that many of them yet need it). Roughly sixty of the company’s hundred and twenty staffers work on-site, sitting at three long rows of desks alongside Denton himself—who, in the fashionable mode of modern media executives, declines a corner office. There is also a roof made for hosting parties with bands and Ping-Pong tables.

Denton used to tell people who asked what he did for a living that he was a pornographer. This was true, in a limited way: he publishes Fleshbot, a blog that boasts of its devotion to “Pure Filth,” and features a great many explicit anatomical images. But Fleshbot, which receives about a million unique domestic visitors each month, is now the worst-performing of the nine titles that Denton puts out, and you won’t find any mention of it on the mastheads of the other eight; it’s a drag on the reputable kind of advertising that Denton now covets.

Denton is good but unnerving company. He often prefers to communicate via instant message, where the self, as expressed through a keyboard, is easier to regard, and therefore to keep in check. (His employees have internalized a kind of Morse code for deciphering his moods and intentions: “Hey hey” prefigures good news, for instance, whereas a lone “Hey” means business.) In live conversation, his intelligence is evident, as is his penchant for rational contrarianism. He once announced to his dinner companions that he was in favor of gay marriage (Denton is himself gay) but against abortion, on the ground that, if you’ve got to draw a line somewhere, it might as well be at conception. He speaks quickly, in a soft, clipped baritone that one former colleague of his likens to “whale sonar.” He also bores easily, having been proved right often enough to dismiss most attempts at debate with an insensitivity that is commonly mistaken for meanness. His smiles fade a little too quickly, and can leave you with the nagging suspicion that he views it all as a lark—the high-school-cafeteria metaphor taken too literally.

After graduation, Denton set off to observe the transition from Communism in Eastern Europe, stringing for the Daily Telegraph in Romania, and later catching on with the Financial Times in Hungary, thereby pleasing his parents. (“I think my dad was a little bit embarrassed by me working for the Telegraph.”) Budapest, though a step up from Bucharest, was no Moscow or Prague—“It wasn’t an exuberant situation,” as Matt Welch, another Budapest journalist, recalls, citing rampant xenophobia and anti-Semitism—and Denton found the experience doubly dispiriting. The politics “gave one a very cynical view of world events,” he said. “You have these beautiful revolutions, and very quickly the old political, pre-Communist dividing lines reasserted themselves: ethnic.” <Source>

About those Cayman Islands …

As John Cassidy relates in The New Yorker, Gawker’s finances are “organized like an international money-laundering operation.” For example:

Much of its international revenues are directed through Hungary, where [bossman Nick] Denton’s mother hails from, and where some of the firm’s techies are located. But that is only part of it. Recently, [Felix] Salmon reports, the various Gawker operations—Gawker Media LLC, Gawker Entertainment LLC, Gawker Technology LLC, Gawker Sales LLC—have been restructured to bring them under control of a shell company based in the Cayman Islands, Gawker Media Group Inc.

Why would a relatively small media outfit based in Soho choose to incorporate itself in a Caribbean locale long favored by insider dealers, drug cartels, hedge funds, and other entities with lots of cash they don’t want to advertise? The question virtually answers itself, but for those unversed in the intricacies of international tax avoidance Salmon spells it out: “The result is a company where 130 U.S. employees eat up the lion’s share of the the U.S. revenues, resulting in little if any taxable income, while the international income, the franchise value of the brands, and the value of the technology all stays permanently overseas, untouched by the I.R.S.” <Source>

Bottom line …

More democrat douchebaggery from a douchebag on behalf of the Obama team.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



COULD OBAMA BE A CLOSET MUSLIM AND JEW-HATER?

One, we know Barry Soetoro spent a number of years as a Muslim.

What we don’t know is:

  • When he changed his name to Barack Obama and if that is his legal name?
  • If the Illinois State Bar revoked his law license or allowed him to forfeit his license for perjury associated with swearing that Barack Obama was the only name he has ever used or some other violation of their rules and regulations?
  • How he managed to travel to Muslim Pakistan – and on what passport – since Americans using American passports were prohibited from such travel?
  • Was he enrolled in school as a foreign student and did he get preferential admissions treatment and financial aid as a foreign student?

Two, we know that Barack Obama regarded the anti-Semitic, anti-America, anti-white Reverend Jeremiah Wright as his spiritual mentor for over 20 years. And that Wright visited Libya with another notorious anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan.

Three, we know that Muslims are permitted to lie when it comes to advancing the cause of Islam. And if there is anything that Obama does well, it is lie to the American people.

The principle of Al-Takeyya <Source>

The Arabic word, "Takeyya", means "to prevent," or guard against. The principle of Al Takeyya conveys the understanding that Muslims are permitted to lie as a preventive measure against anticipated harm to one's self or fellow Muslims. This principle gives Muslims the liberty to lie under circumstances that they perceive as life threatening. They can even deny the faith, if they do not mean it in their hearts. Al-Takeyya is based on the following Quranic verse:

"Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution (prevention), that ye may Guard yourselves from them (prevent them from harming you.) But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah." Surah 3: 28

According to this verse a Muslim can pretend to befriend infidels (in violation of the teachings of Islam) and display adherence with their unbelief to prevent them from harming him.

Under the concept of Takeyya and short of killing another human being, if under the threat of force, it is legitimate for Muslims to act contrary to their faith. The following actions are acceptable:

  • Drink wine, abandon prayers, and skip fasting during Ramadan.
  • Renounce belief in Allah.
  • Kneel in homage to a deity other than Allah.
  • Utter insincere oaths.

Four, we know that he tried to subvert the role of NASA into a Muslim outreach program – a position which was later walked back by the Administration. He has openly courted Muslims and Muslim nations while disregarding our allies.

Five, we know that Obama has failed to take a strong human rights position on Muslim women who are treated like chattel.

Six, we know that Obama has failed to take a position on Sharia law which is outdated, barbaric and has little or no tolerance for other religions.

Seven, we know that Obama has openly disrespected Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – to his face and behind his back.

Eight, we know that Obama openly uses “radical” anti-Israel rabbis to trick people into believing he supports Jews.  

Dinner with Ahmadinejad

Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb / olympiabds.org

A Republican Jewish group is calling on the Obama campaign to distance itself from a controversial rabbi who has met with anti-Semitic Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and who sits on the board of an organization that has been listed as one of the “Top Ten Anti-Israel” groups by the Anti-Defamation League.

The rabbi in question is Lynn Gottlieb, who was listed as one of 613 “Rabbis for Obama,” a new Obama campaign effort to highlight its support among Jewish religious leaders.

Gottlieb dined with the Iranian president in 2008, and was among the first American rabbis to travel to the Islamic republic, according to the Jerusalem Post.

Gottlieb said that Americans should not pay attention to Ahmadinejad, despite his genocidal rhetoric.

“He’s the mouthpiece—we spend way too much time focusing on him,” the Jerusalem Post quoted her as saying in 2008.

She advocated that the U.S. government sit down for talks with Iran.

“We were all there for the sake of pressuring the US government to engage in direct dialogue and conversation,” she said, according to the Jerusalem Post. “The emphasis shouldn’t be on [Ahmadinejad] per se.”

Gottlieb, a devotee of the far-left J Street, also sits on the board of an organization that the Anti-Defamation League has dubbed one of the “Top 10 Anti-Israel Groups In America.”

The group, Jewish Voice for Peace, routinely criticizes the Jewish state and advocates in favor of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which wages economic warfare on Israel by boycotting goods produced in the country.

Gottlieb, a staunch supporter of BDS, gave a video tribute to the anti-Israel movement in 2010.

Gottlieb, who signs onto the video by giving the traditional Arabic greeting, “Salaam Alaikum,” or “Peace be unto you,” explains why Jews should boycott Israel.

“I believe the time now is to support Palestinian in their call for Boycott, Divest, and Sanctions … to pressure the Israeli government and people to cease and desist from the occupation of Palestinian lands,” she says. “I urge you all to consider boycott.”

Gottlieb says that BDS is the best method to pressure Israel into making concessions in the peace process.

“For me as a person committed to nonviolence for the past 40 years, I have seen this conflict try to be resolved by negotiation yet every peace plan has led to more and more occupation of Palestinian land,” she says. “I believe it is time to adopt the time honored tool and strategy of boycott. Boycotting governments, corporations and individuals that are somehow profiting from the illegal seizure from land.” <Source>

Bottom line …

Even though Jews are traditionally democrats and may support Obama, I have my doubts as whether or not Obama can be trusted as Iran prepares to become a nuclear nation.  Obama was the one that suggested that Israel compromise her defense posture by returning to her old borders as a condition of peace in the Middle East. And not one word about Muslims forgoing violence and daily rocket attacks.

I have my doubts – and you should too!

Can we trust a man who refuses to release his records, discuss his associations with radicals and who routinely lies to the American public? I think not.

Mitt Romney is a friend of Israel and a personal friend of Netanyahu from their time at the Boston Consulting Group. I think Romney and Ryan would be a better choice for America’s future than someone who hides in darkness and refuses to tell us who he is.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell