Google Loves Obama

All the talk about the 'Fat Cat Corporate Bosses' and 'Big Business' from Obama is nothing but rhetoric. This man is so supported by these major corporations that when they reach in their pockets to get a few dollars, they find Barry's hand all ready in there and full of 'dough'.

And if you think the big computer companies are not involved with Barry... then check out this story. You might want to remember those other individuals such as Mr. 'Apple Computer', Steve Jobs, Mr. 'Microsoft', Bill Gates, Mr. 'Face Book', Mark Zuckerberg, and a whole list of others.

Remember when you use Google to search for something, your info has all ready been searched and stored. It will be sold to anyone who wants it and has the dollars to get it.

Check it out:

Amplify’d from floppingaces.net

Google Loves Obama [Reader Post]

By: Lysander Spooner

Despite his populist anti-free market rhetoric and record, the President has a love affair and relationship with a corporate giant. The company is Google and the incestuous relationship pays dividends to both parties but leaves taxpayers out as the third wheel.

Money magazine in an article entitled “Obama & Google (A Love Story)” described the love affair as “[F]rom his denunciations of Wall Street greed to his critiques of the auto manufacturers, Obama and his team have done little to disguise their mistrust of big business — except when it comes to one very large, very influential technology company.”

The relationship between the corporate giant and the president started before Obama’s ascension to the presidency.

Google has long supported President Obama. In his book, “The Audacity of Hope” President Obama embraces the relationship pointing out that Google managers and employees were among his largest supporters, donating nearly one million dollars to his campaign.

And the Obama administration has been good for Google as well. A 2008 Politico story detailed the relationship between the newly elected president and the company. “‘ From the staff attorney all the way up the line, everybody now knows that Google is close to Obama,’” Politico reported. “And that could subtly affect the policy playing field in Google’s favor.” Subtly was an understatement. Google executive Andrew McLaughlin was appointed to a White House position with a hand in Internet policy issues. In addition, Google has been awarded massive government contracts and the President has pushed Google-sought polices like Net Neutrality.

Seeing their investment paying massive dividends, Google appears to have stepped up once again giving the President’s re-election team a competitive advantage in raising money and online support.

Google has crafted a new ad program that will be a boon to political campaigns. And even while the program is in Beta testing, the Obama re-elect campaign has been given special access to the program by Google.

From Politico:

The new ad program would charge clients for every email address (or other piece of user data) they collect. The program is attractive to campaigns eager for that information, so when a staffer at the National Republican Senatorial Committee saw what appeared to be an Obama ad built on this technology on the RealClearPolitics website last month, she emailed a Google sales rep to ask about creating a similar ad campaign for Republicans.

The saleswoman, Sirene Abou-Chakra, replied by suggesting that Obama had a special deal.

“This is a pre-alpha product that is being released to a select few clients,” she wrote in an email, referring to the first stage of a product’s roll-out. “I’d be happy to get you into the beta if you’re interested.” A similar email went out to at least one other Republican digital media firm, a Republican source said.

“It certainly raises some red flags that the Obama campaign appears to have been given special access to a new online advertising product,” said NRSC communications director Brian Walsh in response to an inquiry from POLITICO.

Congress needs to delve into the “special relationship” between the corporate giant and the president. Failure to act will only cost taxpayers more money in the long run. Read more at floppingaces.net

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a165gv

More Lies From Your Government Nanny

Once again we see numbers thrown out for the public's consumption. Problem is, the majority of people will suck these numbers up and bet their own lives on them. Never mind the source. Never mind people like Kathleen Sebelius throw out numbers with nothing to back them up, except their own opinion.

Remember some years back when the big culprit was SALT?? Oh yeah, Americans are eating entirely to much salt. It's killing people by the millions. One of the top killers in America. I guess people stopped using salt cause that's no longer a problem.

Remember when hamburgers that were grilled (McDonald's) were one of the major causes of cancer?? Oh yeah, that grilled meat had all sorts of carcinogenics and was causing cancer in the human body. From the looks of all the closed McDonald's it looks like people aren't eating them dangerous burgers anymore.

Remember the SACCHARIN that was in your 'Diet Rite'?? Yep, it was a cancer causing agent and again just killing people up a storm. The FDA banned it and put a stop to all those deaths being causes by that terrible sugar substitute in the little pink pack called 'Sweet N Low'.
And the list goes on and on and on.....

But guess what??????? The little pink packs are still around and going strong. If people wasn't using it they would stop making it and the FDA hasn't said a thing about it.

The McDonald's hamburger joints are to be found in even greater numbers and still frying them burgers on that same grill. Still.... nothing from the FDA about all the cases of cancer being caused from these burgers.

And the salt, why that killer is still found on the table of restaurants everywhere. And if you look at the labels on the foods you buy it's still listed as an ingredient, just like before.

But now we have the newest members of the hit list. Tobacco and Obesity.

I'm not going to try and argue the pluses and negatives for these latest targets of the DDHS and the FDA. But it infuriates me when I see/hear numbers being given as fact on all the various health problems they cause and all the millions/billions of dollars they cost in health care dollars, when if FACT they can't prove the numbers.

How about the young men who died on the court/playing field and didn't have any of these bad habits??
Wes Lenoard - http://www.nwitimes.com/sports/high-school/boys-basketball/article_7b3aa7fc-4da9-524d-a27c-7d8bb74e6198.html

Jeron Lewis - http://bleacherreport.com/articles/326595-jeron-lewis-video-college-basketball-player-dies-on-court

Matthew Hammerdorfer - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1362920/High-school-rugby-player-Matthew-Hammerdorfer-dies-heart-attack-game.html

Want to bet these three deaths are included in the total deaths from which the statistics are derived for all the other categories? There are deaths everyday that have nothing to do with salt, saccharin, grilled hamburgers, tobacco, obesity and whatever else but are included with the final tab of certain groups.

=======================

Amplify’d from dailycaller.com

Feds look to regulate food similar to tobacco, with hopes of saving money on health care

12:32 AM 06/22/2011

The federal government has a growing interest in the eating habits of Americans for the same reason it has an interest in tobacco consumption, said Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.

The reason is money, because three-quarters of medical-spending is driven by chronic diseases, such as obesity and tobacco-related diseases, she said.

Sebelius’ comments came at the tail-end of Tuesday’s White House press conference where officials showcased nine new photos that must be carried on cigarette packs. Officials used a survey of 18,000 people to find the images that would have the most distressing impact on groups of smokers, including young smokers and mothers of young kids.

“We want teenagers to understand smoking is gross, not cool,” said the HHS chief. If the public becomes desensitized to the distressing pictures, they’ll be replaced by new pictures, she said.

The regulations are justified, she said, because tobacco causes 443,000 premature deaths, and creates “$200 billion a year in health costs that we clearly could spend better elsewhere,” she said.

But the press questions shifted to food labels when a reporter pressed officials about new food-labeling standards being promoted by the government.

The standards are part of a much larger push by medical professionals to regulate the food sector. The medical professionals, led by the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, have allied with professional advocacy groups, such as Center for Science in the Public Interest, and with leading Democratic politicians, to blame the food-sector for increasing obesity rates in the American population, and especially among African-Americans.

People like to eat the increasing amount of cheap food produced by the food industry, and the rate of obesity has climbed steadily. In turn, obesity has spiked government and private health-care costs, because fat people are more prone to expensive diseases such as heart-failure and diabetes.

Federal health-care bills have risen in step, partly because of obesity’s costs, but also because many medical-professionals and Democrats want the federal government to fund a growing portion of the nation’s health-care spending.

These political interests reinforce each other. Health-care professionals say their expertise can reduce the federal government’s health-care costs, and politicians say they need professional expertise to curb the growing cost of expanding federal health-care programs.

First Lady Michelle Obama, for example, has accelerated the process by simultaneously supporting the Obamacare expansion of government spending, while also establishing her ‘Let’s Move’ anti-obesity campaign. The professional campaign is aimed chiefly at African-Americans, and urges parents and children to exercise more and to eat carefully.

In April, the FDA published a new set of rules requiring restaurants to show the calories in each menu item, and the Federal Trade Commission released a set of guidelines for food that is marketed to children. These steps were mandated by the 2009 Obamacare health-sector law.

In turn, the Grocery Manufacturers Association and industry-backed Food Marketing Institute developed their own ‘Nutrition Keys’ labeling system. The labeling system will be publicized with a $50 million campaign, and will be used by companies that sell 70 percent of the packaged-goods in the United States. Participating companies are required to list the calories, saturated fat, sodium and sugar per serving of a product on the front of food packages.

The industry’s labeling system was established “not to avoid the specter of regulation, but out of a desire to do the right thing for consumers, and to provide them with the tools and products they need for a healthy diet, which in turn will help us combat obesity,” said Sean McBride, vice-president for communications at the Grocery Manufacturers Association.

When asked if the government would extend tobacco-style regulations to food deemed fattening, Sebelius told the reporters that the federal guidelines are only voluntary.

In the same press conference, Margaret Hamburg, the FDA’s chief, added that “we need to work with industry to provide consumers … with the best possible information about nutrition and health so that we can all make good choices in terms of promoting and protecting health.”

“The food industry recognizes there are ways they can improve,” said Hamburg. “We certainly have a vested interest in that as a public health agency, and we want to work with them on that.”

“When the combined voice of the four most important regulatory agencies for [your industry] speak, it is hard for companies to ignore those guidelines, even if you feel they are unwarranted or unfounded,” said McBride. “Industry shares Ms. Obama’s goal of solving childhood obesity within a generation, and we will continue to work with government stakeholders towards that goal,” he said.

Sebelius deflected questions about whether food officials would mandate distressing pictures on food they consider unhealthy. Tobacco is unique, she said, because it is “the number one cause of preventable death.” But Sebelius did not rule out tobacco-style treatment for food. “It has a lot to do with underlying health costs and overall health of our nation … the work around obesity and healthier, more nutritious eating, more exercise, will continue to be I think an ongoing focus,” she said.

But as she stepped off the podium, Sebelius finally threw an answer back to the reporter who had asked if distressing images would be mandated for fattening foods. “Just lots of celery stalks and broccoli,” she said.

URL to article: http://dailycaller.com/2011/06/22/feds-look-to-regulate-food-similar-to-tobacco-with-hopes-of-saving-money-on-health-care/ Read more at dailycaller.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a15uk4

No It's Not A Government Agency BUT...

... it's being ran as one.
If private business were to operate the way the USPS does, it would be in the same situation as the USPS. Going BROKE! One problem with the USPS is although it's a private business, it's business model is one of a government agency.
I've searched for a link I saw back sometime between 1998 and 2003 which gave a break down of the USPS Financials. There was one item that showed the USPS had bought hundreds of trailers, for their 18 wheeler transports, and these trailers had never been used, painted/decal-ed, or made ready for use. Hundreds of trailer just sitting on a parking lot and going to ruin. A waste of several million dollars.
That's only the tip of the Postal-berg.

"reduce costs in order to bring the institution back to fiscal solvency when the Postal Service goes into default to the Federal government"
I loved this little quote. 'BACK to fiscal solvency'????? This 'company lost $8.5 Billion last year (2010), it's going to lose at lest $8.3 Billion this year (2011) and projected to lose $8.5 Billion next year (2012). This 'company (USPS) hasn't been solvent for so long that they have no idea what the word means.

Amplify’d from dailycaller.com

Issa introduces bill to ‘prevent bailout’ of Postal Service

Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the congressional oversight committee, introduced legislation on Thursday to significantly reform the United States Postal Service in order to prevent the need for a “taxpayer bailout.”

The legislation follows USPS’ announcement on Wednesday that it will no longer pay money into its Federal Employee Retirement System in order to cut costs.

Issa said that such a solution was not acceptable.

“The Postal Service lost $8.5 billion last year,” he said in a statement. “It is going to lose, at least, $8.3 billion this year. And it is projected to lose $8.5 billion the year after that. Congress can’t keep kicking the can down the road on out of control labor costs and excess infrastructure of USPS and needs to implement reforms that aren’t a multi-billion dollar taxpayer funded bailout.”

reduce costs in order to bring the institution back to fiscal solvency when the Postal Service goes into default to the Federal government

It would also create the Commission on Postal Reorganization, whose purpose would be to make recommendations to Congress on closures or consolidations with the goal of reducing USPS costs by $2 billion a year.

Benefits and salaries for Postal Service employees would be cut, putting them more on the level of what private sector employees receive for similar jobs. Oversight estimates that such measures will save $700 million dollars in the 2010 fiscal year, which ends in September.

Oversight estimates that the reforms will save the Postal Service $6 billion dollars a year when all of them have been enacted.

Among other things, the legislation will also permit USPS to move to five-day delivery of mail, and would alter the bargaining process between the Postal Service and the employee unions.

The Postal Service issued a statement that it was predominantly disappointed in the bill.

“We strongly oppose a provision in the bill that provides for an additional $10 billion in borrowing authority from the U.S. Treasury. The Postal Service does not need to incur additional debt — we need the money back that is already owed to us,” the statement said, referring to the surplus money paid into the FERS account. “We also strongly oppose sections of the bill that would create more government bureaucracy and slow our progress on streamlining our operations.”

USPS also reiterated suggestions it had made before, namely, that Congress allow it access to the surplus funds it has paid into FERS, an amount USPS estimates to be $6.9 billion, and that the Postal Service be exempted from pre-paying retiree health benefits.

“The Postal Service,” the statement warns, “is in danger of running out of cash as early as this October.”

NALC also took exceptional issue with the idea of reducing delivery to five days, something it has adamantly spoken out against.

NALC President Frederic Rolando called the bill “a draconian downsizing plan and a misguided and unjustifiable attack on hard-working postal employees who provide the most affordable and highest-quality mail service in the world.” Read more at dailycaller.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a15u4e

What can one say about the disrespectful attitude this President has for the American Citizen?
Disrespect, you say? Yes, DISrespect.
A young man VOLUNTEERS to join the military to serve his country. He knew the various situations he may be put into. He may stay Stateside for his full enlistment. He may be sent to serve is some 'peaceful' Country. He may be sent to some Country where there is a war going on. He may serve an "8 to 5" job or he may be required to carry his full pack and fight in some fire fight. He may get to come home unscratched or he just might give his very life, as young as it might be, for the purpose of preserving the freedoms the folks back home have. Oh yes, a lot of situations but he still chooses to VOLUNTEER.
I'll be the first to admit that I have a hard time remembering names. Many times I'm introduced to someone and by the time the, 'glad to meet yous' are done, I've forgotten the person's name. But by the same token, if I'm involved with a ceremony that is to bestow an honor upon someone, such as this ceremony, I think I would be more aware of the Name, Rank, Serial number and any other important facts about the person being honored.
I haven't looked to see if Mr. Teleprompter was there to help out the President or not but still, the President should have had his 'thoughts/facts' together.

Obama flubs on Medal of Honor recipient

By C.J. Ciaramella   6:39 PM 06/23/2011

President Obama got his Medal of Honor recipients mixed up today, accidentally referring to a posthumous recipient as alive.

Speaking in upstate New York to troops at Fort Drum Thursday, the president was remembering the times he spent with the US Army’s 10th Mountain Division.

“Throughout my service, first as a senator and then as a presidential candidate and then as a president, I’ve always run into you guys,” Obama said. “And for some reason it’s always in some rough spots.”

“First time I saw the 10th Mountain Division, you guys were in southern Iraq. When I went back to visit Afghanistan, you guys were the first ones there. I had the great honor of seeing some of you because a comrade of yours, Jared Monti, was the first person who I was able to award the Medal of Honor to who actually came back and wasn’t receiving it posthumously.”

Jared Monti was killed in Afghanistan on June 21, 2006. He was awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously, September 17, 2009.

When contacted about the gaffe by CBN reporter Dana Ritter, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said, “At Fort Drum, the President misspoke when discussing the first Medal of Honor he presented posthumously to Jared Monti, who was a member of the 10th Mountain Division. The President paid tribute to Monti in his remarks to troops in Afghanistan in March 2010. Last year, the President presented the Medal of Honor to Salvatore Giunta, who was the first living recipient of the Medal who served in Afghanistan.”

The Medal of Honor is the highest military decoration awarded by the United States. It is awarded to military service members only in cases of “conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his or her life above and beyond the call of duty while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States.” Read more at dailycaller.com

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a15tyr

Mr Perfect Shows His Imperfections

I guess George Bush made President Obama get confused. But then I wonder if he was confused or just doesn't know what 'posthumous' means. He was probably thinking that was some sort of fertilizer Michele uses in her 'garden'.

Amplify’d from dailycaller.com

Obama flubs on Medal of Honor recipient Published: 6:39 PM 06/23/2011 | Updated: 9:43 AM 06/24/2011

By C.J. Ciaramella Archive | Email C.J. Ciaramella Get C.J. Ciaramella Feed

President Obama got his Medal of Honor recipients mixed up today, accidentally referring to a posthumous recipient as alive.

Speaking in upstate New York to troops at Fort Drum Thursday, the president was remembering the times he spent with the US Army’s 10th Mountain Division.

“Throughout my service, first as a senator and then as a presidential candidate and then as a president, I’ve always run into you guys,” Obama said. “And for some reason it’s always in some rough spots.”

“First time I saw the 10th Mountain Division, you guys were in southern Iraq. When I went back to visit Afghanistan, you guys were the first ones there. I had the great honor of seeing some of you because a comrade of yours, Jared Monti, was the first person who I was able to award the Medal of Honor to who actually came back and wasn’t receiving it posthumously.”

Jared Monti was killed in Afghanistan on June 21, 2006. He was awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously, September 17, 2009.

When contacted about the gaffe by CBN reporter Dana Ritter, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said, “At Fort Drum, the President misspoke when discussing the first Medal of Honor he presented posthumously to Jared Monti, who was a member of the 10th Mountain Division. The President paid tribute to Monti in his remarks to troops in Afghanistan in March 2010. Last year, the President presented the Medal of Honor to Salvatore Giunta, who was the first living recipient of the Medal who served in Afghanistan.”

The Medal of Honor is the highest military decoration awarded by the United States. It is awarded to military service members only in cases of “conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his or her life above and beyond the call of duty while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States.” Read more at dailycaller.com

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a15tkr

Big, Ugly and Stupid – the Buildings Cities Build

Finally, some one tells the truth about these building monstrosities that are called 'Art'. Just tax payer rip offs and money pits.

Amplify’d from www.lloydmarcus.com

ESSAY BY GARY PADUCH: 407-415-2718

Big, Ugly and Stupid – the Buildings Cities Build

I’ve seen it for 40 years: Big, ugly, stupid buildings. A prime example is the Ocean Center at Daytona Beach, Florida. I see it over and over. Huge, ugly conference centers, convention centers, performing arenas, art centers, every kind of center imaginable and they are all built “to save” a downtown or commercial area.

They cost the taxpayers millions and they “never” work. If we knew the truth regarding their costs and operations, we would all be sick to our stomachs. And we taxpayers sit there like idiots and let them do it. Once built they require a constant supply of cash, just to keep these projects maintained. They produce not one penny in net revenue, not one penny after expenses. They then make up figures about how the economic impact to the area economy is what they really are there to do.

It is a “bald faced lie”, a total rationalization at the very best. I have never seen an operating statement on one of these facilities. Not one! A true statement of gross sales, other revenue from sales and an honest statement of expenses: Light bills, marketing expenses (all marketing expenses) including salaries and advertising, an honest to God reporting of the cold hard facts. All we ever hear about is the “roll over” effects of the visitors or user spending in restaurants, hotels, gift shops, etc.

The truth is the visitors would have come anyway. The hotel and others would have built to fulfill a need “if” there was one. The idea that if you build it, they will come, only works in the movies. Any developer can tell you that the rules of successfully developing any property is to (1) identify a need (2) determine whether you have the demographic numbers (3) design your project accordingly (4) location, location, location.

Politicians with absolutely no understanding of this simple process, project numbers from their imaginations, then they ask an architect what he thinks. Of course, the architect agrees that it should be built and he will pull up examples of other similar projects that have been a great success, yet none of these projects has ever put out a set of hard numbers, operating statements, revenues, management, marketing, maintenance, replacement reserves, utilities, etc.

Every failed project is supported by feasibility studies that are based on “dream world economics.” These white elephant projects are spread all over the nation and cost taxpayers billions each year. Of course, they pay no property taxes, which places an additional burden on the poor “sucker” taxpayers. It’s no wonder so many cities, counties and states are broke.

Little towns such as Johnson City, Tennessee, do it. They have a conference center. It doesn’t bring in enough money to pay the light bill and maintenance, but if you read the newspaper account of its operations, there will be glowing accounts of its future and what great progress has been made, the reality is that it never had the “numbers”, it is functionally obsolete, just like the ridiculous Johnson City downtown parking garage. If we knew the “cold, hard” numbers, we would be absolutely enraged; yet on they go.

Daytona Beach’s Ocean Center has cost the taxpayers 223,000,000.00 dollars, in addition, they built a performing arts center on the mainland side of the Halifax River, with no parking. It was bankrupt before they opened the doors (cost 33 million dollars). If a forensic CPA ever took these places apart and the newspapers would actually print what they found, a vigilante posse would be formed to punish the “well intended” commission who perpetrated these frauds on the taxpayers.

The location of these buildings rarely, if ever, is selected to take into account traffic patterns. The Ocean Center is built right beside the ocean; no one lives in the ocean. It’s green, demographically speaking, it’s located ten miles east of I-95 through a maze of traffic. I-95 is the primary arterial mover of traffic in a “bacon-strip” demo. 100,000 cars a day cannot see the Ocean Center. It’s absolutely ridiculous and the facility has totally inadequate parking in an automobile culture that will not change in the next 50 years. The supporters of this project have said they are trying to attract conventions and conferences. Good luck, Disney World, Universal, Sea World and 50,000 hotel rooms with everything imaginable are located 50 miles away. It’s just not a smart move to fight an 800-pound gorilla. There is no way you can compete — you lose.

Other criteria such as visibility, ease of access/egress, free parking at grade, demographic make up (both income and location of potential users and patrons), user friendly interior spaces and seating. Costs analysis prior to design aesthetics and so on are not even considered. Many of these recently built (last 15 years) look like munition factories or automobile factories; totally lacking in any classical architectural order or fundamentals. Many look like giant manufactured components which they then try to spruce up with banners, fancy street lighting and exotic plants. It’s difficult to tell where the front of the building is. I get a migraine headache when I look at them, they are absolutely dreadful.

It’s design by committee, many of whom, are totally artless and lacking in any practical thinking. It’s pure politics. Often the “political” architects that are hired share the same qualities. The results are municipal projects that are consistently miserable. Cities become developers of these type buildings because of the ease of financing, politics and their taxing authority. It has been a recipe that promotes poorly conceived projects.

I once had a practical construction man tell me that these people only listen to each other; the reality is “they wouldn’t listen to Jesus.” As soon as they build these big, ugly, stupid projects they start complaining that someone “goofed”. There are hundreds of these senseless projects. One example, maybe the most graphic, is the Miami, Florida Performing Arts Center; their first month’s electric bill was $640,000.00, the thing costs over $500,000,000.00, My guess it was even more; “outrageous”!

Orange County (Orlando) Florida built a convention center (2 million square feet), at an estimated cost of two billion dollars. It doesn’t take in enough money to pay their basic expenses (lights, management and marketing). It is a colossal joke. The list is endless.

Savannah, Georgia, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, St. Louis, Daytona Beach and on and on. The only one, I know of, that’s a success is the Newberry, South Carolina, project and its leadership was in private hands for the most part. It’s “development 101″. It’s so simple. These cities are like “lotto winners”. They go crazy, but the taxpayer is left with the “tab” when these “geniuses” leave office with their plaques and awards for a job well done.

Now, they are building a performing arts center in Orlando. Costs around $365,000,000.00. It’s in the worst possible location. It can’t be seen until you are on top of it. I predict the costs will be over $420,000,000.00 but we’ll never really know. The location is in a traffic blind, I can’t imagine how local art groups can afford to use it. They just built a new basketball arena; there are already rumblings that it is a financial disaster. We’ll hear more, but we’ll never really know the truth, but we will pay for it directly or indirectly. Smaller centers for local use with a high visibility profile and multiple uses would make more sense.

We’ve all heard the expression “if you dig yourself into a hole, stop digging.” We’ll be forced to stop, soon enough. We’ll be broke. Check out Detroit and Flint, Michigan. They managed to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. If someone ever did it right, it would be an international sensation. But it’s human nature: What are you going to do?

If you want to argue my perspective, show me the numbers, the honest hard numbers. That is your only real argument. Recently I heard the Mayor of Orlando defend the Amway Arena with a compliment from the Commission of the NBA “that we have the finest facility in the NBA”. What else would he say? He’s not a jerk, but the thing is losing money and will continue to do so. No parking. Look at the United Center in Chicago completely surrounded by parking (360) all around the arena (Building, Development 101). The Amway is a big, ugly, stupid building. It will cost the taxpayers of Orange County millions and we’ll never really know the truth – “never”. I just hope and pray these people don’t start building pyramids.

Gary Paduch,

Arts Supporter, Retired Developer, Writer

E-mail info@gfpaduch.com Website: www.gfpaduch.com Read more at www.lloydmarcus.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a15scv

'Gunwalker' -- The Story

You just have to read this whole story to understand the vast expanses between the guys 'on the street' and those bosses in their 'ivory palaces'. Those men/women who are dedicated to doing the job they are assigned to do and those who sit behind the desks giving orders.
This story makes you shake your head and wonder to yourself if the 'bosses' are really that stupid or you just don't understand the events that have occurred.
More evidence that AG Eric Holder should be arrested and sent to prison in these lines.
A long post but a needed read.
kaj

Amplify’d from pajamasmedia.com

What — and Who — Made ‘Gunwalker’ Tick? The politics of police promotions reveals the answer. June 20, 2011 - 12:12 pm - by Mike McDaniel

My co-blogger Bob Owens’ recent PJMedia story, “The Definitive Scandal: ‘Gunwalker’ Much Worse Than ‘Iran-Contra,’” laid out the parameters of an incredibly flawed Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) operation known as “Operation Fast and Furious,” or “Operation Gunwalker.”

As early as 2009 and until recently, ATF agents were ordered to allow weapons illegally purchased in the United States to “walk” across the southern border into the hands of drug traffickers. The attempts of honest, competent line agents to stop the flow of guns were met with orders to ignore their duty and threats by their supervisors who told them that the highest levels of the ATF and Department of Justice were behind the program. Gun dealers who complained were told to cooperate and to sell large numbers of guns to criminals. So loose were the controls that, to this day, the number of guns involved is not precisely known, but ranges from the hundreds to the thousands.

ATF managers and administrators have tried to justify the operation by a variety of means. The Obama DOJ has denied that any guns were ever allowed into the hands of criminals and has engaged in Clintonian language parsing.

Phoenix ATF “Group VII” supervisor David Voth, in an April 2, 2010, e-mail, noted that there were 187 murders in Mexico in March, including 11 policemen, and that the ATF allowed the purchase of 359 guns in March, including “numerous Barrett .50 caliber rifles.” According to lower-ranking agents, Voth was excited about what was happening in Mexico, apparently believing that the level of violence proved the value of the investigation which would lead to the arrests of high-ranking drug cartel criminals.

The idea that the heads of Mexican drug cartels might eventually be implicated in the straw purchases of American guns is sheer lunacy, and the available evidence indicates that line ATF agents had no such delusions, but their supervisors and high-ranking ATF and DOJ officials may have. The heads of cartels are well known, and are guilty of far greater crimes than any with which they might have been charged under Gunwalker. Such people are responsible for hundreds or even thousands of murders. (Mass graves are continually being discovered in Mexico.) The kinds of drug, money laundering, and conspiracy charges — to say nothing of intelligence indicating that such criminals are actively aiding Islamic terrorists in their designs on America — relegate any charge that could have possibly been leveled as a result of Gunwalker to the category of spitting on the sidewalk. And of course, Mexico has been, at best, reluctant to extradite cartel heads to America for the violation of any law. Because the ATF has no jurisdiction in Mexico, or any foreign country for that matter, the idea of arresting a cartel head on such laughable charges is doubly ridiculous.

We are left with the knowledge that the ATF ignored common sense and its own procedures — and that at least two American LEOs and at least 150 Mexican LEOs have to date paid the price. The highest levels of the ATF and the Holder DOJ are apparently willing to blatantly lie, and to appear to be incompetent. But why?

Is it possible that managers at the highest levels of the ATF truly believed that they were working a competent, significant law enforcement operation that would result in spectacular, international results? There is evidence that acting ATF head Kenneth Melson was intimately involved, including his request for IP addresses of cameras hidden in an Arizona gun shop so that he could watch straw purchases being made, but this could be little more than neophyte voyeurism. Even considering the enormous practicality and experience gulf that commonly exists between law enforcers and federal managers, this seems unlikely. That level of idiocy is probably rare, even in the federal government.

More likely is that Melson and others were pursuing Obama administration policies in pursuit of gun controls they could not secure through legislative means. Obtaining policy goals in this way is a common Obama administration tactic, and there is reason to believe, including the often repeated lie that 90% of the guns used illegally in Mexico come from America — stated by Mr. Obama himself — that this may be the case. But if so, it would suggest a willingness to pursue unpopular and arguably unconstitutional policies regardless of the consequences. This too is a common Obama administration tactic. It would also suggest an appalling lack of concern for the lives of American and Mexican LEOs and citizens.

There remain only two alternatives: that the managers of the ATF truly are stunningly incompetent — or that they are willing to appear to be dangerously incompetent to protect others, others in higher positions, because the truth is worse, much worse. Read more at pajamasmedia.com

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a15qpj

Al Gore Says Fewer Kids Will Help Slow Down Pollution

What an idiot!!! Really, I'm lost for words, well, words my mom-ma would approve of.

Amplify’d from dailycaller.com

Gore promoting fewer children to curb pollution Published: 7:42 PM 06/21/2011 | Updated: 7:52 PM 06/21/2011

By Jeff Poor - The Daily Caller

The global warming debate has always been a touchy one for both sides, and when the world’s top global warming activist is talking about the size of population and how that contributes to the choices societies make, it might be worth taking note. In an appearance Monday in New York City, former Vice President Al Gore, prominently known for his climate change activism, took on the subject of population size and the role of society in controlling it to reduce pollution. He offered some ideas about what might be done for females in the name of stabilizing population growth. (h/t Chris Horner via wattsupwiththat.com) “One of the things we could do about it is to change the technologies, to put out less of this pollution, to stabilize the population, and one of the principle ways of doing that is to empower and educate girls and women,” Gore said. “You have to have ubiquitous availability of fertility management so women can choose how many children have, the spacing of the children. “You have to lift child survival rates so that parents feel comfortable having small families and most important — you have to educate girls and empower women,” he said. “And that’s the most powerful leveraging factor, and when that happens, then the population begins to stabilize and societies begin to make better choices and more balanced choices.”

See more at dailycaller.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a15o28

Will Activist Base Really Sit on Sidelines in 2012?

Will Activist Base Really Sit on Sidelines in 2012? : Roll Call Politics Because my two cents worth has turned into a quarter's worth, I'm not quoting any of the article. Please read it and be informed.

It's unthinkable that some people would vote for Obama in 2012, knowing what he has done to this Country in this term of President. Yet, there are those, such as these die-hard liberals, who will. They say they will not work to support Obama but they'll vote for him before they will vote for any Republican. They won't knock on doors but they'll vote for him. They won't reach in their pockets to support him financially but they'll vote for him.

I've tried to compare this with the attitude Conservatives had in the 2008 election. We didn't want McCain but reluctantly we voted for him. We didn't send him any financial support but we voted for him. We didn't knock on any doors but we voted for him. As a matter of fact, we didn't even support his campaign to be nominated but we voted for him.

I find the difference is, between McCain and Obama was the education level of the voters.

A whole lot of voters voted for Obama because they had no idea what he was about, they just liked the way he gave speeches. He looked good and sounded good. They didn't understand the things he said he would do, for the most part, were just promises he was making to get elected. Very few took the time to verify his background. Very few listened to the warnings being given that his plans were not supportive of the 'American Dream'. Then the race part came into play. Because he was half Black he would be the first Black President and for some the opportunity to be part of making history was just to much to reject. Others voted for him because he was Black and that's all they knew about him.

As for McCain, many people did their homework and checked him out. They didn't like his 'association' with a hand full of liberals. They didn't like the way he was wanting to give amnesty to the Illegal Aliens. But when compared to Obama, he was the least of two evils.

Now with a pretty good field of possible nominees for the 'Republican' nominee these people, who still support Obama, will reject sensibility and vote for what might be called the 'straw that broke the camel's back' for our next President.

I guess it just shows that these hard core liberals don't really care about America and the freedoms offered and enjoyed here. I don't think they have honestly given any serious thought to the FACT that the freedoms they enjoy now, will probably be wiped from the face of America if Obama is reelected. Selfishness is their main stay. As long as they can get what they want they don't care about the other citizens, who don't want to be controlled by the government but have the freedoms they now have.

I wish someone in Washington, DC would talk to the leaders of those foreign countries who are under the rule of Socialism and Communism and make a deal that we would be willing to send them to the Country of their choice, moving expenses paid, but they would have to stay there and never return to America. We could even throw in a few dollars to help the Country they go to with the set-up expenses on their end. Probably within six (6) months 90% would be screaming to come back to America.

These are the products we are reaping from the seeds that were sown from the previous generation of liberals. It's all about 'me'. No discipline'. No self responsibility. No compassion. No thought for one's fellowman. Uncaring for the country that gives you liberty and freedom.

OK. Enough. I think I'll go throw-up.

God bless America.

Ryan vs Obama on Economic’s Plans | Kajunman's Blog

Ryan vs Obama on Economic’s Plans
Here’s an easy to read video, for those like myself who prefer to watch and listen as opposed to actually ‘reading’ an article.
While I’m not a Ryan supporter, I do like some of the things he proposes in this plan.

Romney won’t sign abortion pledge | Kajunman's Blog

Romney won't sign abortion pledge - Kendra Marr - POLITICO.com.

By: Kendra Marr

June 17, 2011 09:08 PM EDT

Five Republican presidential candidates have signed a pledge to advance the anti-abortion movement if elected to the White House, but the current front runner for the 2012 GOP nomination — Mitt Romney — isn’t one of them.

Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum each signed the pledge, sponsored by Susan B. Anthony List, vowing to nominate judges and appoint executive branch officials who are opposed to abortion. The pledge also commit signers to push legislation to end all taxpayer funding of abortion and to sign a law to “protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.”

Mitt Romney, who’s leading in national and early state opinion polls, declined to sign.

“Governor Romney pledged in the last campaign that he would be a pro-life president and of course he pledges it today,” said spokeswoman Andrea Saul in a statement. “However, this well-intentioned effort has some potentially unforeseen consequences and he does not feel he could in good conscience sign it.”

----- snip -----

Other than Romney, two other GOP presidential hopefuls — Herman Cain and Gary Johnson — also declined to sign the pledge, according to the group. The SBA List’s announcement did not say whether or not former Ambassador Jon Huntsman was asked to sign.

Cain has said he opposes abortion and that he supports cutting funds for Planned Parenthood. In a statement issued Saturday, Cain said his respect for the separation of powers prevented him from signing. “[T]he fourth requirement demands that I ‘advance’ the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. As president, I would sign it, but Congress must advance the legislation,” the statement said, adding that Cain remains “a consistent and unwavering champion of pro-life issues.”

----- snip -----

==========================

Here are the four (4) requirements of the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act:

Susan B. Anthony List’s Presidential Pledge:

• * One, only nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court and federal bench judges who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, not legislating from the bench;
• * Two, select pro-life appointees for relevant Cabinet and Executive Branch positions, in particular the head of National Institutes of Health, the Department of Health & Human Services, and the Department of Justice;
• * Three, advance pro-life legislation to permanently end all taxpayer funding of abortion in all domestic and international spending programs, and defund Planned Parenthood and all other contractors and recipients of federal funds with affiliates that perform or fund abortions; and
• * Four, advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.

Mitt knows he's going to owe some 'favors' so he's not going to strap his self into something he can't uphold, such as this pledge. Sure he's against abortion, when it's what the people want to hear.

Gary Johnson isn't really anti-abortion. He takes the more liberal path which puts him on the Pro-choice side.

Herman Cain surprises me and he might just lose any support I have for him.

Mr. Cain says, "his respect for the separation of powers prevented him from signing. “[T]he fourth requirement demands that I ‘advance’ the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. As president, I would sign it, but Congress must advance the legislation,” . As President aren't you suppose to be 'leading' this Nation?? Isn't the 'job' of the President to have plans that he presents to the Speaker of both Houses and tries to get them to 'advance' it through Congress?? If elected President are you going to sit around and wait on Congress to make and pass all the bills and then you'll decide if you're going to sign them or not?? In all honesty Mr. Cain I think you may be copping out here and that doesn't look well. You will have the responsibility for getting things done and this will be one of those things. No one is asking you to write up a Presidential Executive Order.