Humana Experiences Obama/Dem Thuggery

24 09 2009

Look, I know I can write a lot of crap sometimes, but I beg you to read this post, then inform anyone in your family that may have this Medicare/Humana plan.

ahumana

My wife has a lot of relatives that live within easy driving distances from us. For some it’s only a 15 minute drive… and ‘poof’ their on our doorstep. Tonight was one of those nights when ‘poof’ happened. After the conversation we had with her elderly Aunt, I was actually glad she came by (for once).

Ok, let me cut to the chase. Her Aunt has Medicare but also has supplemental health insurance with Humana. An extra $105 dollars comes out of her Social Security check every month to pay for the supplemental insurance. A week ago she recieved a letter from Humana explaining that if Congress passes this Obamacare bill that she would lose most, if not all of her Humana benefits, and some of her Medicare bennies. The letter then asked her to fill out a small business card and join what they call “Partner”. It’s a totally free service that allows you to have your voice be heard in DC concerning healthcare. So that’s the basics of the letter.

Her Aunt then went on about a segment that was done on the “Special Report” with Brett Baier, earlier this evening. We ate dinner without a TV going tonight so I totally missed it. Well, all I had to do was go to the Fox News website and BINGO, I found a video of that very segment. The segment explains how a senate panel was discussing this very issue today, when there was a stink made about it because the Democrats want to tell Humana to shut the hell up. The video is self explanatory. JUST WHO THE HELL DO THESE POLITICIANS THINK THEY ARE?  As my wifes Aunt said tonight “the government has no business telling a company that I do business with that they can’t write her a letter telling her the truth about congress”

My wifes Aunt is one smart lady. One other note of interest before you watch the video… Her Aunt has been a registered Dem her etire adult life, that all changes tomorrow.

Pass this info around!

http://www.foxnews.com/video/?playerId=videolandingpage&maven_playlistId=df4b3c7f18eea1b3fb97a8f822a8879495713cb3&maven_referrer=rss&referralPlaylistId=df4b3c7f18eea1b3fb97a8f822a8879495713cb3&referralObject=9949353





This Is NOT North Korea!

23 09 2009

First, let me h/t Steve for sending me this video. My blood pressure went through the roof, but no worries Steve, I won’t sue you if I suddenly have a stroke or something.

My headline was meant to get people’s attention, so I hope it worked. The bonus I get from writing such a headline is the fact that it’s true. If you are unfortunate enough to be raised in Communist North Korea, you are taught in school at a very young age to “Praise your dear leader”. In fact, you are taught that all things good happen only because your dear leader is so smart and cares so much for you. The only problem with this sytem is…. disagree with his policies and you get to watch as your entire family is slaughtered in front of you. Nice huh?

Our kids, yes I said our kids, are now being indoctrinated in the exact same manner. Watch the video below then pass it on to everyone you know. If this happens at your school I suggest you help shut the school down until they come to their BLEEPING senses!

Gio-

UPDATE (by Eowyn, 9/24/09):

Columnist Michelle Malkin identified the children being taught the chants and praises as attending B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington Township, N.J.

Here’s what the robots kids were chanting:

Uhm, uhm, uhm, Barack Hussein Obama
He said all should lend a hand to make the country strong again
Uhm, uhm, uhm, Barack Hussein Obama
He said we must be fair today, equal work means equal pay
Uhm, uhm, uhm, Barack Hussein Obama
He said take a stand, make sure everyone gets a chance
Uhm, uhm, uhm, Barack Hussein Obama
He said red, yellow, black and white, all are equal in his sight
Uhm, uhm, uhm, Barack Hussein Obama
YEAH. Barack Hussein Obama





Israel On The Chopping Block!

23 09 2009

FLAGISRAELThe h/t for this one goes out to our very own Eowyn. You go girl!

President Obama has slapped, one of our only trusted ally in the Middle East, across the face with a branch of thorns.

Gio-

P.S.  Wait until you get to the part where Obama makes it “all about himself”, you’re either gonna laugh or cry when you realize what he just said…. to the world no less!

From Fox News Online…

In declaring that it is time for Middle East peace “without preconditions,” President Obama used his speech to the U.N. General Assembly Wednesday to fire a warning at Israel that “America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.”

Obama’s stark declaration, which drew applause, was coupled with a call for Palestinians to end their “incitement of Israel.”

But it was the use of the U.N. forum to carry the settlement message to Israel that drew the most enthusiastic response on the floor — and incredulous reaction outside its walls.

Obama just put Israel “on the chopping block,” said former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton.

Obama said he met Tuesday with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who was not in attendance at the speech, and agreed that the two have made some progress in both strengthening security and facilitating freedom of movement, which have allowed the economy in the West Bank to grow. 

But more progress is needed, he said. 

“We continue to call on Palestinians to end incitement against Israel, and we continue to emphasize that America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements,” he said.

Obama said four issues separate the two sides: security, borders, refugees and Jerusalem, but the goal is clear: a secure, Jewish state for Israel and “a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967.”

He also said a new order is needed in dealing with the dispute. 

“The United States does Israel no favors when we fail to couple an unwavering commitment to its security with an insistence that Israel respect the legitimate claims and rights of the Palestinians. And nations within this body do the Palestinians no favors when they choose vitriolic attacks over a constructive willingness to recognize Israel’s legitimacy, and its right to exist in peace and security,” he said.

In his first speech to the world body, Obama applied his campaign slogan to the international community and challenged the global community to step up and fix the world’s problems both at home and abroad.

He said it is no longer plausible to be bad actors and then blame the United States.

“The people of the world want change,” he said, noting that “just as no nation should be forced to accept the tyranny of another nation, no individual should be forced to accept the tyranny of their own government.”

The world’s problems are not “solely America’s endeavor,” Obama said, noting the threats from poverty, global warming, disease pandemics and overpopulation. 

“Those who used to chastise America for acting alone in the world cannot now stand by and wait for America to solve the world’s problems alone,” Obama said.  

Obama said he’s led by example by prohibiting torture of detainees and ordering the closure of the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. He added that he is committed to removing all U.S. troops from Iraq by 2011 and is working to reach the goal of “a world without nuclear weapons.”

He said the G-20 industrialized nations have spent $2 trillion to keep the world from the brink of an economic collapse, and the U.S. has demonstrated its commitment to the world body by paying its bills and joining the Human Rights Council.

“Nothing is easier than blaming others for our troubles and absolving ourselves of responsibility for our choices and our actions. Anyone can do that. Responsibility and leadership in the 21st century demands more. In an era when our destiny is shared, power is no longer a zero sum game. No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation. No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold,” he said.

Speaking to the 59th opening session of the U.N. General Assembly, Obama laid out four pillars for the world community — peace in the Mideast and elsewhere, a reduction in nuclear weapons, preservation of the environment and global economic opportunity.  

Obama said he wants a post-atomic age, and he will hold countries accountable for threatening the rest of the globe with nuclear weapons as the United States tries to reduce its arsenal.

Saying the United States will work with Russia to reduce its strategic warheads through an update of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, Obama pledged to move to ratify the Test Ban Treaty, work with others so that “nuclear testing is permanently prohibited,” begin negotiations in January on a treaty to end fissile material production and host a summit in April that reaffirms each nation’s responsibility to secure nuclear material on its territory.

Obama said he was not going to single out any nation, but in the next sentence he called out North Korea and Iran as threats to world cooperation.

“Those nations that refuse to live up to their obligations must face consequences. This is not about singling out individual nations — it is about standing up for the rights of all nations that do live up to their responsibilities,” he said, adding “the governments of North Korea and Iran threaten to take us down this dangerous slope.”

“I am committed to diplomacy that opens a path to greater prosperity and a more secure peace for both nations if they live up to their obligations. … But if the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards … then they must be held accountable.”

As Obama spoke, Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi, who followed Obama in delivering a speech from the dais, scribbled notes as he listened to the U.S. president through a translation ear piece. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also sat in the chamber, his hands cusped together in his lap. He did not take notes. Neither applauded during the speech, though Qaddafi clapped when the president ended his remarks. Ahmadinejad did not.

In his 38-minute speech, Obama pressed the world to cooperate on carbon emissions reduction, saying the “wealthy nations that did so much to damage the environment in the 20th century must accept our obligation to lead” but “the fast-growing carbon emitters who can do more to reduce their air pollution without inhibiting growth.”

Obama also pledged continued aid through the Global Fund to fight HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and polio, and by contributions of H1N1 vaccines to the World Health Organization. 

He also talked about greater integration of economies through global trade and the Millennium Development Goals.

“Now is the time for all of us to do our part. Growth will not be sustained or shared unless all nations embrace their responsibility. Wealthy nations must open their markets to more goods and extend a hand to those with less, while reforming international institutions to give more nations a greater voice. Developing nations must root out the corruption that is an obstacle to progress …  That’s why we will support honest police and independent judges; civil society and a vibrant private sector,” he said.





Israel Under Obama’s Gigantic Bus

23 09 2009

This is a sad day for U.S. / Israeli relations, so I suggest we all say a prayer for the Israeli people.

I got back to the house today long enough to make myself lunch, check-in on the blog, and watch a few minutes of the happenings at the United Nations. In between making some phone calls and reading some articles on the internet I would glance at the TV. I made it just in time for the last 3 minutes of Obama’s speech, and then I watched a few minutes of Qadaffi’s show & tell.

None of what I saw during lunch really stuck with me as I went about my business for the rest of the day. However, I made it back to the house in time to watch the last 20 minutes of the Glenn Beck Show. Near the end of the program Glenn had ex-Ambassador John Bolton as a guest. This is a guy I have a ton of respect for. He’s a straightforward kind of guy but knows how and when to use some of the skills he has honed over the years. Let me put it this way… I would never play Poker with the guy, he would destroy everyone sitting-in on the game.

Glenn asked Bolton about comments that Obama made during his speech from this morning, and Bolton in his no BS fashion said “Obama has just hung out Israel to dry”, or something to that effect. Bolton also made a point to say that Obama has in effect turned his back on the Israeli people. We all know how Obama loves to throw people under a bus, but now it seems he has gone ‘big’ and has decided to throw a whole country under a bus.

I’m going to post more on this when I actually review what Obama said on this matter. If Ambassador Bolton is correct with his assessment, I will be ashamed of my government and worried for the safety of every Jew on Earth.

This is supposed to be the largest Bus in the world, but it's not nowhere big enough for Obama. He's going to need an entire fleet of these Buses in order to throw all of Israel under them.

This is supposed to be the largest Bus in the world, but it's not anywhere near big enough for Obama. He's going to need an entire fleet of these Buses in order to throw all of Israel under them. How sad!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.





Massachusetts Passes Unconstitutional H1N1 Flu Bill

23 09 2009

Both houses of the state legislature of Massachusetts have now approved the unconstitutional bill on the H1N1 “swine” flu. All it takes for the bill to become law is Democratic Governor Deval Patrick’s signature. He already said he’ll sign the bill.

Deval Patrick is the other guy.

Deval Patrick is the other guy.

The “pandemic response bill” says if there is a flu pandemic, the governor can declare a state of emergency.  At which time, citizens can be vaccinated against their will. Those who refuse the H1N1 vaccine can be quarantined and fined. Neighbors are encouraged to report on each other. The bill also authorizes forceful entry into private dwellings and destruction of citizen property. All of this is in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

~Eowyn





ACORN Sues

23 09 2009

vampires

We knew this was coming.

In the topsy-turvy America, bad people have no shame but play the Eternal Victim.

ACORN has filed a lawsuit against James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles, who posed as pimp and prostitute in a hidden-camera video that showed employees of ACORN’s Baltimore office giving tax advice to set up an underage (READ: child prostitution!) brothel.

ACORN says that the audio portion of the video was obtained illegally because Maryland requires two-party consent to create sound recordings. The multimillion-dollar lawsuit claims ACORN employees Tonja Thompson and Shera Williams suffered “extreme emotional distress.”

Conservative columnist Andrew Breitbart, who posted the videos on his Web site, is also named in the lawsuit.

Get ready to contribute to O’Keefe and Giles’ defense fund!

For the AP news story, go HERE.

~Eowyn





The Mortgage Meltdown Yet To Come

23 09 2009

Sorry, I’ve got more depressing news….

Think we had a mortgage meltdown last year?

Think again.

That was just the Sub-Prime Mortgage meltdown. Looming on the horizon is the crisis yet to come — the Adjustable Rate Mortgage (ARM) meltdown.

~Eowyn

…………

THE OPTION ARM ARMAGGEDON

Sept 21, 2009 – http://link.businessinsider.com/view/80g.jf/5cb481ee

Mortgage meltdown

The Option Arm Armageddon was supposed to strike in the spring of 2009. Across the country, option adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) were set to detonate and start a new wave of foreclosures.

But it never happened. We made it well past when this chart from Credit Suisse showed the option ARMs were supposed to begin to hit. And the crisis didn’t come.

Why not? Well, when interest rates dropped to historically low levels as the Fed fought the financial crisis, the wave of resets was held off. Unfortunately, low interest rates won’t last forever — they’ll now likely strike next year and continue well into 2011. Many borrowers who now have the option of making payments so low that they don’t even cover the interest are seeing their original loan balance grow, even as their home values continue to fall or remain flat.

The chart above shows that the option ARM reset problem is comparable to the subprime problem, and will likely last for quite some time. Armageddon may have been forestalled but it hasn’t been overcome.





America Heading to a Fall

23 09 2009

precipice

It doesn’t take a financial genius to know that our multi-trillion dollars of budget deficits are untenable.

As of 1:30pm west coast time today, our national debt is $11,823,262,840,515.00. Each U.S. citizen’s share of that debt is $38,515.44.

The U.S. national debt has continued to increase an average of  $3.88 billion per day since September 28, 2007.

~Eowyn

………..

U.S. Debt Crisis May Cause ‘Fall of Rome’ Scenario, Duncan Says

By Patrick Rial – http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aJ6jnKWHrQgI

Sept. 23 (Bloomberg) — U.S. budget deficits will continue to pile up in the next decade, eventually reaching an unsustainable level that may result in an economic collapse, according to Richard Duncan, author of “The Dollar Crisis.”

The U.S. has little chance of resolving its deteriorating financial position because the manufacturing industry continues to shrink, leaving the nation with few goods to export, said Duncan, now at Singapore-based Blackhorse Asset Management.

In “The Dollar Crisis,” first published in 2003, Duncan argued that persistent current account deficits by the U.S. were creating an unsustainable boom in global credit that was destined to break down, resulting in a worldwide recession.

“The bad news is at the end of a 10-year period we’re still not going to have fixed the problem,” Duncan said in an interview in Hong Kong yesterday. “Eventually it will lead to high rates of inflation well down the line and really destabilize things to the point where there may be irreparable damage. A kind of ‘Fall of Rome’ scenario.

The federal budget deficit will total $1.6 trillion this year, while combined shortfalls are forecast to total $9.05 trillion in the next 10 years, according to projections from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

The U.S. has run a current account deficit every year since 1982 except one, with a peak of $788 billion in 2006. Foreign purchases of U.S. debt has propped up the dollar and allowed a credit-fueled spending boom by the nation’s consumers, according to Duncan.

Falling Wages

U.S. workers are now likely to face declining wages and that may create a political backlash against free-trade policies, he said. The nation’s jobless rate jumped to a 26-year high of 9.7 percent in August, while wages logged a 2.6 percent increase from the previous year.

“As unemployment remains above 10 percent well into the foreseeable future, it won’t be long before Americans start voting for protectionism,” Duncan said. “That’s going to be bad because protectionism will mean world trade will diminish and will overall reduce global prosperity.”

Once the U.S. debt burden becomes too large and the government can no longer sell debt to the public the Federal Reserve will likely step in and monetize it, resulting in high levels of inflation, he said.





America’s Know-Nothing Youth

23 09 2009

i-know-nothing

Thomas Jefferson said a nation can’t expect to be ignorant and free.

Judging by the results of a survey of high school students, our country is in deep trouble.

News9.com on September 16, 2009, reports that a survey conducted in observance of Constitution Day last Thursday found an abysmal ignorance of United States history and government among Oklahoma’s high school students.

Only 23% of Oklahoma high school students knew who the first President of the United States was; 77% did not.

Worse still, only 10% of the students knew how many justices are in the Supreme Court, 11% knew how many years U.S. senators are elected for, and 14% knew who wrote the Declaration of Independence.

The questions on the survey were drawn from the actual exam that legal immigrants take to become a U.S. citizen. At least 6 questions must be answered correctly in order to become citizen.

Although 92% of the people who take the citizenship test pass on their first try, only 3% of Oklahoma students would have passed the citizenship test. Oklahoma is not unique. Tests done on students in Arizona had similar results.

Below is a breakdown of the % of Oklahoma students who answered each question correctly:

Question % of Students
Who Answered Correctly
1. What is the supreme law of the land?

28
2. What do we call the first ten amendments to the Constitution?

26
3. What are the two parts of the U.S. Congress?

27
4. How many justices are there on the Supreme Court?

10
5. Who wrote the Declaration of Independence?

14
6. What ocean is on the east coast of the United States?

61
7. What are the two major political parities in the United States?

43
8. We elect a U.S. senator for how many years?

11
9. Who was the first President of the United States?

23
10. Who is in charge of the executive branch?

29

Take the exam and see if you do better than the Oklahoma students. Scroll down for the correct answers.

~Eowyn

The Philadelphia Constitutional Convention, May 25 to Sept. 17, 1787

The Philadelphia Constitutional Convention, May 25 to Sept. 17, 1787

Answers to questions:

  1. The Constitution
  2. Bill of Rights
  3. The House and the Senate
  4. 9
  5. Thomas Jefferson
  6. Atlantic
  7. Republican and Democratic
  8. 6
  9. George Washington
  10. The President




Compulsory Abortion Is Constitutional

23 09 2009
We are in a waking nightmare

We are in a waking nightmare

No. Your eyes aren’t deceiving you. You saw right.

That’s what John Holdren, Barry Soetoro’s science “czar” — one of 34 unconstitutional “czars” — wrote in a college textbook.

Experts on political extremism say that at some point, the far-Left and the far-Right merge. The Obama administration is packed with people like Holdren who are so far-Left, they’re not just commies, they’re Nazis.

Remember that VA Death Book and those “death panels” in the original version of ObamaCare? Like the Nazis, before too long, these crazies will be advocating Eugenics — the extermination of, not just the unborn, but every and anyone deemed to be a “burden.” All in the interest of the fiction called man-made global warming and “sustainability.”

~Eowyn

………….

Holdren says Constitution backs compulsory abortion

Argued in writings: “Quality of life demands fewer people”

September 22, 2009 – http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=110720

Obama science czar John Holdren stated in a college textbook he co-authored that in conditions of emergency, compulsory abortion would be sustainable under the U.S. Constitution, even with Supreme Court review.

WND has obtained a copy of “Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,” published in 1977 and co-authored by Holdren with Malthusian population alarmist Paul R. Ehrlich and Ehrlich’s wife, Ann. As WND reported, the authors argued involuntary birth-control measures, including forced sterilization, may be necessary and morally acceptable under extreme conditions, such as widespread famine brought about by “climate change.”

To prevent ecological disasters, including “global warming,” Holdren argued the U.S. Constitution would permit involuntary abortions, government-imposed sterilizations and laws limiting the number of children as steps justified under the banner of “sustainable well-being.”

‘Warming’ result of too many people

A worldwide scientific agenda is emerging to link global population growth with global warming, arguing that climate change is such a severe crisis that the United States must participate in a United Nations mandate to implement global birth control in order to reduce carbon emissions.

Addressing the U.N. climate summit in New York yesterday, President Obama declared climate change resulting from global warming could leave future generations with an “irreversible catastrophe.”

A series of papers recently published by the Royal Society in Great Britain and by the United Nations have made a direct link between global population growth and anthropomorphic, or man-made global warming.

The Economist magazine summed up the current argument Monday, stating, “A world with fewer people would emit less greenhouse gas.”

“World experts, in a wide range of disciplines, explore the ways in which the inexorable increase in human numbers is exhausting conventional energy supplies, accelerating environmental pollution and Global Warming, and providing an increasing number of Failed States where civil unrest prevails,” wrote Roger V. Short of the faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences

at the University of Melbourne, introducing the series of articles in the current issue of Philosophical Transactions published by the Royal Society.

Constitutional mandate for abortion

Arguing that “ample authority” exists to regulate population growth, Holdren and the Ehrlichs wrote on page 837 of their 1970s textbook that “under the United States Constitution, effective population-control programs, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”

In the next sentence, the authors were careful to note that few in the U.S. in the 1970s considered the situation serious enough to justify compulsion.

Still, in the next paragraph, the authors advanced their key point: “To provide a high quality of life for all, there must be fewer people.”

The authors of “Ecoscience” argued that a “legal restriction on the right to have more than a given number of children” could be crafted under the U.S. Constitution in crisis situations under the standard that “law has as its proper function the protection of each person and each group of persons.”

On page 838, the authors argued, “The law could properly say to a mother that, in order to protect the children she already has, she could have no more.”

To justify the point, the authors commented “differential rates of reproduction

between ethnic, racial, religious, or economic groups might result in increased competition for resources and political power and thereby undermine social order.”

The authors continued their constitutional analysis of government-mandated population control measures by writing: “If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns – provided they are not denied equal protection.” (Italics in the original text.)

Recognizing the politically charged nature of the subject, Holdren has attempted to disavow his 1970s views that compulsory government-mandated birth control measures may be today necessary.

A Global Warming Emergency

An analysis of Holdren’s current statements on global warming strongly suggest the president’s science czar sees global warming creating an environmental emergency.

“The air and the oceans are warming, mountain glaciers are disappearing, sea ice is shrinking, permafrost is thawing, the great land ice sheets on Greenland and Antarctica are showing signs of instability and sea level is rising,” Holdren testified to the Senate’s Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation July 30.

Holdren told the Senate that the cause of these perils was human-generated carbon dioxide emissions.

“It is the emission of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping pollutants from our factories, our vehicles, and our power plants, and from use of our land in ways that move carbon from soils and vegetation into the atmosphere in the form of C02,” he told the Senate.

He warned of dire consequences: “And the consequences for human well-being are already being felt: more heat waves, floods, droughts, and wildfires; tropical diseases reaching into the temperate zones; vast areas of forest destroyed by pest outbreaks linked to warming; alterations in patterns of rainfall on which agriculture depends; and coastal property increasingly at risk from the surging seas.”

And, again: “Devastating increases in the power of the strongest hurricanes, sharp drops in the productivity of farms and ocean fisheries, a dramatic acceleration of species extinctions, and inundation of low-lying areas by rising sea level are among the possible outcomes.”

Sustainable well-being’

The St. Petersburg Times’ fact-check website, Politifact.com, argued that in his Senate confirmation hearings, Holdren disavowed “optimal population” targets, a central thesis of the 1970s textbook, as a proper role of government.

While Holdren may have abandoned “optimal population” targets as a principle of public policy, an address he gave as president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, subsequently published in Science Magazine in January 2008, shows he has adopted instead the standard of “sustainable well-being” as a guiding principle that could be utilized to set targets for acceptable population growth.

In the article, Holdren listed “continuing population growth” as a hindrance to the goal of realizing “sustainable well-being,” a point Holdren supported by footnoting Paul Ehrlich’s 1968 book “The Population Bomb,” thereby linking his current thinking with his 1970s-era thinking.

In that footnote, Holdren wrote that the “elementary but discomforting truth” of Ehrlich’s 1968 book “may account for the vast amount of ink, paper, and angry energy that has been expended in vain to refute it.”

Holdren’s “sustainable well-being” appears to be a nearly identical concept to what is known as the United Nation’s “Agenda 21″, which articulates the concept of “sustainable development” that is currently institutionalized in the Division for Sustainable Development of the U.N. Department of Economic and Social Affairs.





Oh No, Not Again

23 09 2009

Keep a close eye on the dollar people, it may be headed for an early grave!

Gio-

Wall Street Journal - Paul Evans - ‎8 hours ago‎

A_0burning%20money%201_editedTORONTO (Dow Jones)–The dollar returned to its losing ways on Tuesday, sinking to new lows for the year versus the euro and a handful of other currencies as optimism over global recovery resurfaced again just as




Obama, Again!

23 09 2009

Obama Is Considering Strategy Shift in Afghan War

I’m on a roll tonight concerning headlines and Obama. Anyway….. the only strategy shift Obama needs to consider is one where he considers WINNING!

Click on headline for story.

Gio-

P.S.  God bless out troops.





Oh This Is Rich

22 09 2009

Obama drops demand that Israel freeze settlements

That is an actual headline at CNN online. Considering my very last subject (posting), was about how Obama failed to get anything from a face-to-face with Abbas and Benjamin Netanyahu today, this headline sure made me laugh. To begin with, who the hell is Obama to make demands on Israel? Of course Obama had to drop his demand, especially since he had no right to do so in the first place. What a dolt!

dolt love it hate it
 
“A person who is stupid and entirely tedious at the same time. Many times they are oblivious to their own mental incapacity.”

Here’s the article if you want to read it in it’s entirety.





Obama Failed Again

22 09 2009

Failure to advance Middle East peace a setback for Obama

This is the headline over at the Christian Science Monitor site, and it got me to thinking…. just how many people in this country think this guy really is a Messiah with God-like powers? As far as I’m concerned, Obama is a failure at pretending to be our president. Anyway, I guess someone needs to remind Obama to bring his magic wand the next time he goes to New York to solve the worlds problems.

Gio-

After trilateral meetings Tuesday, Obama said he would continue to push Israeli and Palestinian leaders. Critics say it is a waste of time, others say US pressure is the only hope for reigniting the peace talks.

Full story here.





Young Students Indoctrination Video

22 09 2009

Glenn Beck introduced America to the “Story of Stuff” video today on his TV show. According to Glenn, this video is being shown in our public schools all over the country. Even Churches and social clubs are ordering copies of this vid to show to their people.

One of the skanky qualities of this video is the amount of incorrect information is in it. Every single time the narrator (also the creator) gives out a statistic, it’s wrong. Although this is what kids are learning in our schools today, it does take some worry off of you as a parent…. maybe it’s not your kids fault after all for being so dumb. After watching this indoctrination movie, you gotta check out the 4 vids (at bottom) that rip the STUFFING out of the Story of Stuff!

Now for the most popular ANTI-CAPITALIST, PRO-MARXISM video in our childrens class studies…

Story of Stuff De-Bunking, parts 1 – 4 for your viewing pleasure…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5uJgG05xUY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZzHU3ZfTtY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgLrZc7cws8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XeW5ilk-9Y





Another Fool Cries “Racism!”

22 09 2009

This just reminded me why I’ve never liked Dave Matthews — and I didn’t even know he’s a jerk…until now.

Matthews has jumped on the Racism Bus. You see, Matthews thinks Americans really are racist. Matthews even knows what Americans are really thinking and saying BEHIND CLOSED DOORS! Matthews also thinks SOCIALISM is a warm and fuzzy thing — it’s about respect!

Memo to Dave Matthews:

Let’s see you tell all the prisoners of conscience in Cuba, China, North Korea, and Myanmar (Burma) how warm and fuzzy socialism is. You’re not worthy to breathe the same air as valiant Aung San Suu Kyi.

~Eowyn

Aung San Suu Kyi

Aung San Suu Kyi

Aung San Suu Kyi was elected Prime Minister of socialist Myanmar (formerly known as Burma) in the election of 1990. But the military junta prevented her from taking office by imprisoning her in her Rangoon home — for FOURTEEN years and counting….

………….

Here are excerpts from a CNN article on Matthews. If you really want to read the rest of the fawning piece of garbage, go HERE. (H/t chivalrous GiovanniWorld member Steve!)

Video Watch Matthews sound off on the album — and racism »

We caught up with Matthews just as news hit the Web that former President Jimmy Carter believed racism was the root of some of the negativity directed toward President Obama in recent weeks. The 42-year-old singer-songwriter offered a unique perspective, as a man who split his childhood between the United States and South Africa during apartheid. The following is an edited version of the interview.

CNN: President Carter said he thinks that a lot of the animosity directed toward President Obama is race related.

Dave Matthews: Of course it is! I found there’s a fairly blatant racism in America that’s already there, and I don’t think I noticed it when I lived here as a kid. But when I went back to South Africa, and then it’s sort of thrust in your face, and then came back here — I just see it everywhere. There’s a good population of people in this country that are terrified of the president only because he’s black, even if they don’t say it. And I think a lot of them, behind closed doors, do say it.

Maybe I’m paranoid about it, but I don’t think someone who disagreed as strongly as they do with Obama — if it was Clinton — would have stood up and screamed at him during his speech. (Shakes his head) I don’t think so.

CNN: Everything has gone to such a frenzied pitch.

Matthews: I think a lot of it has to be on the press. We give the podium to a lot of people who shouldn’t have the podium. The message that’s delivered the loudest and in the most entertaining way is the one that we’re going to put on because that’s what we want. We want ratings more than we want to deliver information. That’s just where the culture’s gotten.

Matthews: Everyone’s outraged all the time. Why are you outraged? There’s war — there’s always been war, as long as most of us have been alive. There have always been people being abused, there’s always been horrible things in the world. Why are we outraged? We should just be quiet and figure it out, and work it out together. … There’s no solution in Washington as long as people are shouting like that.

Matthews: I don’t think socialism, and I don’t think warmness and respect are necessarily bad words.





After You, Chucky!

22 09 2009

Prince Charles

Chucky, aka Prince Charles of the UK, fancies himself a greenie environmentalist but is oblivious to his hypocrisy since he owns at least SIX cars. Not counted are the official limousines, private jets, and his mum’s humongous yacht.

Chucky just opened his big mouth decrying the “domination of the car over the pedestrian.”

This is the same man whose mum, Queen Elizabeth II, so dreads the prospect of Chucky becoming King that she’s determined to die in office.

This is also the same man who made history when taped phone conversations between him and then-mistress Camilla Parker-Bowles were leaked, displaying to the whole world what a useless fool of a man he is. Chucky said he envied and wished he was one of the tampons stuck up Camilla’s wazoo.

YUCK.

Chucky is a walking argument against the monarchy. Aren’t you glad our ancestors fought and won the Revolutionary War?

H/t loyal GoivanniWorld member Steve!

~Eowyn

………….

Prince Charles urges people to abandon car in favour of walking and public transport

The Prince of Wales is urging people to give up their cars in favour of walking and public transport to try to reduce carbon emissions.

By Andrew Pierce – 21 Sep 2009 – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/theroyalfamily/6216049/Prince-Charles-urges-people-to-abandon-car-in-favour-of-walking-and-public-transport.html

The Prince, who has two Jaguars, two Audis, a Range Rover and still drives an Aston Martin given to him by the Queen on his 21st birthday, said developers had a duty to put public transport and the pedestrian at the heart of their housing schemes.

Speaking about the “domination of the car over the pedestrian”, the future King said: “We must surely be able to organise ourselves… in ways in which we are not dependent on it to such a great extent for our daily needs.”

The Prince said the principle of “elevating the pedestrian above the car” was one of the guiding factors of Poundbury – his model development in Dorset. The importance of “pedestrian friendly public space” is central to the Poundbury ethos.

This kind of public transport-oriented development is fundamental to achieving the ultimate goal of a low carbon community, and it is very likely that such communities, far from being austere, will actually become the sought-after places where people will choose to live and spend their time.”

The Prince, in a foreword to a report Building for the Future, also highlighted how green building materials could help tackle the problem of climate change.

He said that his architectural charity – the Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment – was creating a “natural house” using green materials such as clay blocks and sheep’s wool for insulation. It is taking shape at the Building Research Establishment’s Innovation Park in Watford.

In his article, the Prince said: “The natural house will raise important findings about true sustainability that I hope will be useful to a building industry facing root-and-branch change in the next few years.

“I am sure that well-informed consumers will demand more of their new homes – not only energy efficiency, but attractive, spacious and natural constituent parts of real communities.”





Energy Behaving Badly

22 09 2009

H/T this time goes out to Littlemissmuffin.

change-to-socialismLittlemissmuffin points out this sentence, and rightly so, as an example of Obama’s administration treating the American people as you would in a Socialist/Marxist country.
“When it comes to greenhouse-gas emissions, Energy Secretary Steven Chu sees Americans as unruly teenagers and the Administration as the parent that will have to teach them a few lessons.” This line by Chu is scary, and it’s downright un-American. If an American is breaking no laws, and they pay for every bit of energy they use, they use what they want. It’s called FREE-WILL and LIBERTY in a Capitalist system!

Steven Chu: Americans Are Like ‘Teenage Kids’ When It Comes to Energy

By Ian Talley

This post was updated Monday evening.

When it comes to greenhouse-gas emissions, Energy Secretary Steven Chu sees Americans as unruly teenagers and the Administration as the parent that will have to teach them a few lessons.

Speaking on the sidelines of a smart grid conference in Washington, Dr. Chu said he didn’t think average folks had the know-how or will to to change their behavior enough to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.

“The American public…just like your teenage kids, aren’t acting in a way that they should act,” Dr. Chu said. “The American public has to really understand in their core how important this issue is.” (In that case, the Energy Department has a few renegade teens of its own.)

The administration aims to teach them—literally. The Environmental Protection Agency is focusing on real children. Partnering with the Parent Teacher Organization, the agency earlier this month launched a cross-country tour of 6,000 schools to teach students about climate change and energy efficiency.

“We’re showing people across the country how energy efficiency can be part of what they do every day,” said EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson. “Confronting climate change, saving money on our utility bills, and reducing our use of heavily-polluting energy can be as easy as making a few small changes.”

Still, Secretary Chu said he didn’t think that the public would throw the same political temper tantrum over climate legislation has has happened with the healthcare debate.

Asked if he expected a town-hall style pushback, Dr. Chu said he was optimistic the public would buy the administration’s arguments that energy efficiency and caps on greenhouse-gas emissions will spark an economic rebound.

“I don’t think so…maybe I’m optimistic, but there’s very little debate” that a new green energy economy will bring economic prosperity, Mr. Chu told reporters.

Don’t look now, but there’s actually quite a lot of debate as to the economic merits of the new green-energy economy. Whether that will spell a healthcare-style revolt against the energy and climate bill stewing in the Senate is another question.

An update: Energy Department spokesman Dan Leistikow added: “Secretary Chu was not comparing the public to teenagers. He was saying that we need to educate teenagers about ways to save energy. He also recognized the need to educate the broader public about how important clean energy industries are to our competitive position in the global economy. He believes public officials do have an obligation to make their case to the American people on major legislation, and that’s what he’s doing.”





Has Media Shift Begun?

22 09 2009

Below is a piece from CBS. They do try to protect Obama up-front by saying stupid things like “To his credit, Mr. Obama has come closer to achieving many of those promises than many may have expected him to.” but at least they do point out how Obama just can’t seem to keep his word.

Please, do read the piece, but even ABC is getting into “question the president” mode (finally). By now I’m sure everyone has seen bits and pieces of the interview Obama did with George Stephanopolis and came away from that interview giving Stephie an “atta boy”. Can the mainstream media be coming around, or are they just baiting us? Only time will tell.

Gio-

Five Health Care Promises Obama Won’t Keep

ObamaCareSymbolOn the campaign trail last year, President Obama laid out several specific promises for health care — both during the Democratic primaries and during the general election campaign. And in his first year in office, President Obama has made comprehensive health care reform the centerpiece of his domestic agenda.

But what happened to those promises?

To his credit, Mr. Obama has come closer to achieving many of those promises than many may have expected him to. For instance, the Congress is well on its way to facilitating health care coverage for nearly all Americans, providing subsidies for people who cannot afford insurance, implementing consumer protections, boosting federal funding for prevention and wellness programs, giving tax credits to small businesses that provide their employees with health coverage and implementing health information technology systems.

However, even though there is plenty of work left for Congress before it can put a health care bill on Mr. Obama’s desk the bills in development indicate that some of Mr. Obama’s promises may be long gone. Here is a look at five of Mr. Obama’s health care campaign promises that are unlikely to come to fruition.

1. No Individual Mandate

During the 2008 Democratic primary, Mr. Obama and then-Sen. Hillary Clinton both shared the goal of health care reform. By Mr. Obama’s own admission, the biggest difference between the two candidates was that Clinton supported a mandate for all Americans to acquire health care.

“Now, under any mandate, you are going to have problems with people who don’t end up having health coverage,” Mr. Obama said during a debate with Clinton on Jan. 31, 2008. “I think we can anticipate that there would also be people potentially who are not covered and are actually hurt if they have a mandate imposed on them.”

CBSNews.com Special Report: Health Care

Under the leadership of the late-Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), however, Congress wrote bills that called for an individual mandate. In June, the president indicated in a letter to Kennedy and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) that he was changing his tune to accommodate their legislation.

“I understand the committees are moving towards a principle of shared responsibility — making every American responsible for having health insurance coverage,” he wrote. “I share the goal of ending lapses and gaps in coverage that make us less healthy and drive up everyone’s costs, and I am open to your ideas on shared responsibility.”

The president now fully supports an individual mandate.

“The only way this plan works is if everybody fulfills their responsibility,” he said at a rally Thursday.

2. Complete Transparency

Candidate Obama promised that health care deliberations with Congress and special interests would be transparent to the extreme.

“That’s what I will do in bringing all parties together, not negotiating behind closed doors, but bringing all parties together, and broadcasting those negotiations on C-SPAN so that the American people can see what the choices are,” Mr. Obama said during his Jan. 31, 2008 debate with Clinton. “Because part of what we have to do is enlist the American people in this process. And overcoming the special interests and the lobbyists who — Senator Clinton is right. They will resist anything that we try to do.”

The president, members of Congress from both parties and special interest groups have indeed all participated in negotiations, but those conversations have not been broadcast. Instead, the president has announced deals with groups like the pharmaceutical industry and the insurance industry after they were worked out in backroom deals.

Meanwhile, Baucus, one of the most influential senators in the health care debate, not only shut out the public but shut out most of his own committee from his “bipartisan negotiations.”

“We spent virtually an entire year with most of the Finance Committee being excluded,” Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.V.) reportedly said after Baucus released his health care bill. “You don’t run a committee that way.”

3. Enable the Government to Directly Negotiate Drug Prices

In the Jan. 31, 2008 debate, Mr. Obama said, “If a drug company — if the drug companies or a member of Congress who’s carrying water for the drug companies wants to argue that we should not negotiate for the cheapest available price on drugs, then I want them to make that argument in front of the American people.”

“We’ll negotiate with the drug companies for the cheapest available price on drugs,” Mr. Obama said again in an Oct. 15, 2008 debate with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

It turns out, however, Mr. Obama reneged on this promise in a secretive way. In July the president praised the drug industry for its agreement to reduce its revenues by $80 billion over 10 years by discounting the cost of medicines for some seniors. After Congress sought to extract further funds from the pharmaceutical industry, however, it was revealed that the White House made some previously undisclosed deals to get the industry to stay at the negotiating table.

“The White House had tracked the negotiations throughout, assenting to decisions to move away from ideas like the government negotiation of prices or the importation of cheaper drugs from Canada,” the New York Times reported.

4. Allow Drug Importation

During the campaign, Mr. Obama said his plan (PDF) would “Allow consumers to import safe drugs from other countries” because “some companies are exploiting Americans by dramatically overcharging U.S. consumers.”

As noted above, the Obama administration secretly conceded to forgo the importation of cheaper drugs in its deal with the pharmaceutical industry.

5. Lower Premiums by $2,500 for a Family of Four

“If you’ve got health insurance through your employer, you can keep your health insurance, keep your choice of doctor, keep your plan,” Mr. Obama said in his Oct. 15, 2008 debate against McCain. “The only thing we’re going to try to do is lower costs so that those cost savings are passed onto you. And we estimate we can cut the average family’s premium by about $2,500 per year.”

This campaign promise is the trickiest to explain and to evaluate.

Mr. Obama gave this figure repeatedly, but he was not being completely forthright about what he meant. His administration never expected families to see savings of $2,500 in premiums; instead, his advisers calculated the total cost savings for both individuals and the government.

Mr. Obama and his team hoped to see those savings achieved and passed on families — but not completely in the form of lowered premiums. His advisers laid out ways to accomplish the savings in a memo (PDF) obtained by the New York Times.

“The original arithmetic was somewhat basic,” the Times reported in July 2008. “In May 2007, three Harvard professors who are unpaid advisers to the Obama campaign… produced a memorandum offering their ‘best guess’ that a menu of changes would produce savings of at least $200 billion a year… That would amount to about 8 percent of the $2.5 trillion in health care spending projected for 2009, when the next president takes office…The total savings were then divided by the country’s population, multiplied for a family of four, and rounded down slightly to a number that was easy to grasp: $2,500.”

The changes expected to produce the savings included reduced administrative costs ($46 billion), improving preventive medicine and chronic disease management ($81 billion), and investments in digitizing medical records ($77 billion).

Yet whether those changes would produce those savings is suspect. The Times explained then that the costs were drawn from recent studies — for instance the figure of $77 billion in savings achieved through health IT came from a RAND study. That study, however, says that such savings would take 15 years to reach.

Moreover, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), under the leadership of then-director Peter Orzag (now Mr. Obama’s Director of the Office of Management and Budget), decided that RAND appeared to “significantly overstate the savings for the health care system” from health IT, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Other recent studies also dispute whether Mr. Obama’s cost saving mechanisms will work. A study earlier this month published in Health Affairs showed that “preventive services for the chronically ill may reduce health care costs, but they are unlikely to generate the kind of fantastic savings that President Obama and other Democrats have said could help pay for an overhaul of the nation’s health system,” the Washington Post reported.

The study in Health Affairs is backed up by the CBO’s own recent findings.

“Although different types of preventive care have different effects on spending, the evidence suggests that for most preventive services, expanded utilization leads to higher, not lower, medical spending overall,” CBO Director Doug Elmendorf wrote on the Director’s Blog last month. In defense of preventive medicine, he at least added, “Of course, just because a preventive service adds to total spending does not mean that it is a bad investment.”

In spite of all this, it looked in May as if Mr. Obama might have been able to keep his promise, when the health care industry appeared to offer $2 trillion in spending reductions over 10 years to help pay for the president’s reforms. The administration enthusiastically said this was enough to reduce costs by an average of $2,500 for a family of four.

However, health care leaders either did not clearly spell out their intent to the White House or reneged on their offer, claiming days later that they never agreed to such large cost reductions, the New York Times reported.

In addition, the health care legislation coming out of the Senate Finance Committee could even actually result in higher premiums for customers — the insurance industry is threatening that the $6 billion industry-wide fee and other taxes Sen. Baucus has proposed will be passed on to consumers.

What this all means is that it may be years or decades before any overall savings from Mr. Obama’s plans materialize — if they do at all.

More Unknowns

The above five promises don’t have much hope of materializing in the bill Mr. Obama signs. There are, moreover, a few significant elements of reform that are still up in the air.

It is unclear, for instance, if consumers will face what would amount to a tax on their health benefits. During the campaign, Mr. Obama adamantly opposed taxing health care benefits, but Baucus’ bill in the Senate would impose a tax on insurers for plans worth more than $8,000. The president endorsed this proposal during his speech to a joint session of Congress this month, even though nonpartisan analysis suggests the intent of the tax is to shift people to cheaper plans.

Mr. Obama insists that because it is a tax on the insurers — not the employers providing the benefits — it will not affect consumers. When CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer asked the president on Sunday on “Face the Nation” whether he could still stand by his promise to not tax anyone making under $250,000, he said yes.

“I can still keep that promise because, as I’ve said, about two-thirds of what we’ve proposed would be from money that’s already in the health care system but just being spent badly,” he said. “Insurance companies, drug companies are gonna have to be ponying up, partly because right now they’re receiving huge subsidies from folks.”

Obama on “Face the Nation” (9/20/09):
Obama: No Higher Taxes With Health Reform
Obama: 24-Hour News Cycle Feeding Anger
No Answer On More Troops in Afghanistan
Obama: Moscow Move ‘Bonus’ of Missile Plan
Full Transcript: Obama on ‘Face the Nation’

Additionally, Mr. Obama has softened his rhetoric over time on a government-run health insurance plan, or “public option.” He has gone from saying his plan “must” have a health insurance exchange that includes a public option to saying that “the public option, I think, should be a part of this but we shouldn’t think that, somehow, that’s the silver bullet that solves health care.”

Four out of the five bills before Congress include a public option, but Baucus’ bill — the most recently introduced and the one garnering the most attention at the moment — does not. It remains to be seen whether the final bill will include this proposal.





Do Not Read While Eating

22 09 2009

p6_barack_obama_michelle_ob--300x300_editedI normally don’t write anything about Mrs. Obama. Everyone in the country that goes to a Supermarket already knows everything about her anyway, so how can I possibly improve on what you read in the check-out lines? Well, at least you will find my approach a 180 degrees from what you will read in the tabloids… I can’t stand the woman!

This may be about how she treats her husband, but it also raises a serious question about our society. As an example, read the two paragraphs below, which I copied from the NY Post site, and tell me if the following crosses your mind…. ARE YOU PEOPLE NUTS? Who are these people anyway? No really, who are these people?!

MICHELLE Obama gave her husband the silent treatment at one point in his campaign for president because so many women “pushed their bodies up against his, slipped phone numbers into his pockets” and whispered lewd suggestions in his ear, a new book out today claims.

In “Barack and Michelle: Portrait of an American Marriage” (William Morrow), Christopher Andersen reports, “On more than one occasion, Barack tried not to look startled when some random woman in the crowd would grasp him firmly by the derriere — and sometimes try to hold on.” After an appearance in Peoria, Ill., the future president slid into the back of his SUV, and allegedly said, “Jesus, I wish they’d stop grabbing my ass.”

You can read the rest of the story here if you feel the need, but if I were you I would simply move on to something more pleasant. Go get a tooth pulled or something.








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 30 other followers