--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
On Friday, Steven Ertelt at Life News, with video backup provided by prolife protesters who were on hand, relayed something New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg said at a pro-Planned Parenthood rally in Englewood, New Jersey in response to the protesters:
They want other people not to be able to have their own opinions. These people (referring to the pro-life advocates) don’t deserve the freedoms in the Constitution, but we’ll give it to them anyway.
So how did the establishment press cover Lautenberg’s tyranny-supportive remarks?
I found three reporters for two news organizations who appear to have been on hand for Lautenberg’s appearance. Two of those reporters did not report the above remarks. One relayed “these people don’t deserve the freedoms in the Constitution,” and framed it as applying to “Tea Party Republicans.”
An unbylined report at New York City’s CBS radio affiliate WINS (“Lautenberg Leads Rally Supporting Federal Funds For Planned Parenthood”) carried the following:
Dueling protests brought out passionate pro-life advocates and Planned Parenthood supporters to Englewood, New Jersey Tuesday morning.
Decked out in pink, proponents of Planned Parenthood demanded that funding for the organization continue. They were led by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, who in a news release said he was “committed to leading the charge in the Senate to protect women from the Republicans in Congress who are trying to take away their access to health care services.”
… Sen. Lautenberg, booed by protesters against funding for Planned Parenthood, egged on his opponents, who he characterized as “Tea Party Republicans” with an “extremist ideology.”
“Let’s hear their boos against cancer screening — hey where are they so quiet,” Lautenberg said. “Taken an Aspirin, think about this and maybe you’ll feel better in the morning.”
How dignified. (/sarc)
At New Jersey Media Group’s NJ.com on Wednesday (“Battle over Planned Parenthood”), Staff Writer Mary Jo Layton’s reported that the groundswell of support for the organization was less than overwhelming, and cast pro-lifers as the bad guys:
U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg and other Planned Parenthood supporters urged Congress to continue federal funding for the organization at a spirited rally in Englewood where abortion foes tried to shout down several speakers.
The rally drew nearly 100 supporters, who wore pink shirts and stood in front of a pink megabus, part of a national “Truth Tour” launched by the nation’s largest provider of reproductive health care to battle the budget cuts.
About 40 antiabortion protesters shouted “baby killers” and “lies, lies” as people spoke.
“Planned Parenthood is under attack by Tea Party Republicans who have put their extremist ideology above women’s health,” Lautenberg said while several antiabortion protesters booed him and shouted “Shame on you, Lautenberg.”
Planned Parenthood does not spend federal money on abortion services, said Michele Jaker, executive director of the Planned Parenthood Affiliates of New Jersey. Abortions are provided at three of the 29 Planned Parenthood clinics in New Jersey. The organization does not provide abortions in North Jersey. (Sidebar: “Clinics” are not part of the “organization”? If it’s even so, why does it matter? — Ed.)
Other North Jersey legislators who spoke in support of Planned Parenthood were state Sen. Robert Gordon, D-Fair Lawn, Assemblyman Gordon Johnson, D-Englewood, and Assemblywoman Connie Wagner, D-Paramus.
A separate NJ.com report by Mike Curley (“Senator leads rally for Planned Parenthood in Englewood”) captured one of Lautenberg’s most controversial statements, as well as a couple of others (bolds are mine):
Sen. Frank Lautenberg led a rally on Tuesday morning along with other officials, including Assembly Woman Valerie Huttle, to support Planned Parenthood and to urge Congress to continue providing federal funding for women’s health services.
… More than 100 people gathered outside the Planned Parenthood office on North Van Brunt Street, many in support, while others came out to protest.
Those in support waved pink signs, focusing on the organization’s services for women’s health, including cancer screenings, breast exams and birth control. Those in opposition held signs decrying the center’s abortion services. The critics shouted throughout the rally, accusing the speakers of lying and demanding they “stop killing babies.”
Huttle responding to the protestors, said, “I can scream louder than you, gentlemen.”
She thanked Lautenberg for bringing attention to the “assault on family planning.”
… Lautenberg, who spoke after Huttle, said that the Tea Party movement has “declared war on women,” adding they were lying when they said the issue was about the budget. He said the Tea Party Republicans “don’t deserve the rights in the constitution.”
Lautenberg said they were putting ideologies above women’s health, and he was counting on the peoples’ support to “defeat the toxic Tea Republicans in the War on Women.”
It seems that Democrats believe it’s preferable to tag opponents, in this case pro-life protesters, as “Tea Party Republicans” — no matter what their cause or possible party affiliation.
Thus, two of the three reports cited above ignored Lautenberg’s most toxic comment, while the third ignored Lautenberg’s intensely arrogant “but we’ll give it to them anyway.” Last time I checked, freedom wasn’t something Lautenberg, Democrats, or abortion supporters can give or take away.
What Curley did capture should have made the establishment press’s newsworthiness cut; it hasn’t. They don’t even have the excuse that only non-media people captured what Lautenberg said. Searches on Lautenberg’s last name at the Associated Press’s home site, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times return no relevant results. A March 21-28 Google News search, sorted by date, on “Lautenberg Planned Parenthood” (not in quotes) returned seven results at about 1:00 p.m. ET (an eighth listing was written in advance of Lautenberg’s appearance). Besides the four already cited above, there are posts at American Thinker and FavStocks which captured the senator’s “don’t deserve the freedoms” remark, and a link to a comment page at Mary Jo Layton’s NJ.com article. Not captured in the search: Real Clear Politics is carrying the video.
Lautenberg’s remarks, if instead said by a Republican or conservative about his or her opponents, would have become prominent national news in less than a millisecond.
Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.
The fight over Senate Bill 5 here in Ohio and the collective bargaining rights for public sector unions nationwide got personal for me last week. The school district that I attended for thirteen years of my life, Gahanna-Jefferson Public Schools, was forced to lay off 32 teachers. Honestly, I knew this was coming. The dreadful economy has depressed property tax revenue, which is by far the largest revenue stream for the district. In addition to that the voters in my school district have turned down levies in the past two election cycles. You really cannot fault the voters for turning down a tax increase in the middle of a recession. Given those facts, I was not surprised when the headline of my local paper, The Rocky Fork Enterprise, which read: “Gahanna School Board Approves Teacher Cuts for 2011-12.” As I somberly read the article, which included the names of the teachers that will be laid off, four of which I had in class or knew on a personal level, I could not help but feel sad that some quality, hard-working teachers had to be let go.
That sadness turned to anger when I read the twelfth paragraph of the article. The paragraph said, “(Superintendent Mark) White said reductions are determined through seniority and programming”. To confirm the impression that teacher reductions were based only on seniority and programming, meaning that teacher performance was not taken into account, I called Matt Cygnor, the Director of Human Resources of the Gahanna-Jefferson School District. According to Mr. Cygnor, teacher performance was not taken into account because the union contract does not allow the district to look at teacher performance when determining pay or personnel decisions. In short, the union contract protects incompetent teachers who have managed to subsist long enough to get tenure at the expense of good, young teachers who are just starting out. What is happening in my school district is exactly why the SB 5 must be passed and signed into law.
Senate Bill 5 would prohibit teachers from collectively bargaining and replace that process with a system of merit pay. With merit pay, good teachers will finally be paid what they are worth and bad teachers will be given the boot. SB 5 will ensure that good, young teachers will not be let go just because they were the last ones hired.
I attribute much of what I have been able to accomplish in my short life to the great education I received as a pupil in the Gahanna-Jefferson School District. I received a great education because I had good teachers. In order for those who are following me in the school district to receive the same quality of education that I got, the Gahanna-Jefferson School District needs to retain quality teachers. The current union contracts prevent that from occurring. That needs to change, and SB 5 will change it.
___________________________________________
Robert Roll is a freshman majoring in Finance at Ohio Northern University, and the blog owner’s nephew.
The link within Rob’s column was added by me.
To say that Illinois Governor Pat Quinn doesn’t get it fails to describe the depth of the man’s ignorance.
Here’s a recent statement he made about the possibility that one of the state’s marquee employers might leave the state — a statement which, after brief news search, I could only find in a Tuesday evening Investors Business Daily editorial:
Caterpillar is not leaving Illinois. They have well-skilled workers who know how to get the job done. They just signed an agreement with the United Auto Workers, I think for six years. I don’t think we should get in a panic at all.”
Even if Cat keeps its headquarters in Peoria and doesn’t reduce its existing Illinois blue- or white-collar workforce, it will be a hollow victory. Earth to Quinn: it isn’t just about keeping what you have, which Illinois is barely doing — maybe. It’s about capturing the new facilities growing companies like Cat build.
On that front, as Rich Miller at Capitol Fax details, Illinois has missed out on the following recent Caterpillar expansions, most if not all of which might have been reasonable prospects for the state if it didn’t have such a punishing business climate made worse recently by additional income tax hikes:
* Dec 18, 2008: Cat announces new plant in Texas …
* January 5, 2009: Caterpillar plant, 600 jobs bound for North Little Rock
* Jul 30, 2010: Cat announces new North Carolina plant – 850,000-square-foot facility will be used for axle assemblies
* October, 2010: Caterpillar Selects Victoria, TX, For New Hydraulic Excavator Facility
If an Illinois-based company like Caterpillar won’t even think about expanding in Illinois, it’s reasonable to believe that other Illinois-based companies are acting similarly, and that few out-of-state companies looking to expand are giving Illinois serious consideration.
The IBD editorial elaborates further, reminding the governor that the company didn’t just spring up out of the Illinois cornfields:
According to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation: “The (Illinois) corporate income tax will rise from 7.3% to 10.9%, a 49% increase and (making Illinois’) the highest state corporate income tax in the United States and the highest combined national-local corporate income tax in the industrialized world.”
In other words, anyplace Caterpillar moves — and that means anywhere — the tax situation will be an improvement on what it faces in Illinois.
Before he pooh-poohs the possibility of losing Caterpillar, Gov. Quinn might review the company’s history. Cat got its start not in Illinois, but in California in 1883 as the Stockton Wheel Co. After various incarnations and acquisitions through much of the 20th century, it became Caterpillar.
In 1967, the company moved its headquarters from Stockton to Peoria, where it now employs 23,000 of the 100,000 workers who make those gigantic yellow construction and mining machines that are among the best in the world, if not the best.
… Until the governor recognizes that businesses operate on real-world accounting, not the government’s big-tax approach to business, he’s looking at the migration of not only Caterpillar, but other big home-based enterprises — State Farm maybe, or McDonald’s — to states where entrepreneurs and world-class companies are treated as precious resources, not strip-mined for taxes to pay for unsustainable and inefficient government.
Caterpillar, of course, is lucky. It can move. Unfortunately, small towns that rely on business with Caterpillar workers will go under. So will many small businesses that aren’t able to move after such tax hikes.
If Quinn doesn’t think Caterpillar has given him reason to panic, he’d better think again.
Pat Quinn will not recognize that people — and companies — can and do vote with their feet. Caterpillar did so when it planted its headquarters in Illinois 44 years ago. It can do so again. So can other Illinois companies.
>
On Mar 29, 12:58 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
wrote:
> John,
>
> 1) Since you claim to be a Patriot, please provide YOUR definition of
> that word.
>
> 2) One does not need to "transcribe" the original Constitution, one
> merely has to perform a "cut and paste" action - a technique you are
> quite familiar with - as many sources of the Constitution exist on-line.
>
> 3) I would never spend 14 years making "that document" suit my "liking"
> since I firmly believe "that document" is inherently the cause of our
> existing problems. But if I were so inclined, I am certain it would not
> take me 14 years - not even 14 months - and it would certainly be less
> convoluted than your vain attempt.
>
> I would start with a Preamble such as this:
>
> With the understanding that no Person has the Right to rule over
> another, the Government instituted upon the adoption of this
> Constitution shall be Restricted to the powers specifically granted
> herein. The sole purpose of this Government shall be the protection
> of the Right to Life, Liberty, and Property for all Persons living
> within the limits of the several States. The exercise of a Right not
> infringing upon the Right of another is not subject to Regulation.
>
> I would also attach a list of definitions for words of importance
> because people are want to change the meanings of words over time. I
> remember when "bad" meant "evil; opposed to good." Now half the
> population equates "bad" with "good."
>
> 4) YOUR "already-in-place New Constitution" is already "dead in the water."
>
> On 03/29/2011 09:18 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Jonathan: Do this: Transcribe the original Constitution, and spend
> > the next fourteen years making that document to suit your liking.
> > Then, you can get a referendum on your constitution. My bet is that
> > you won't get the 60% of the votes required to change even one word of
> > my already-in-place New Constitution. � J. A. Armistead � Patriot
> > On Mar 28, 11:56 am, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > wrote:
> >> John,
>
> >> I read Article III of YOUR New Constitution in its entirety yesterday.
> >> It is both wordy and convoluted.
>
> >> Let's examine the first line of Section 8:
>
> >> * It�s a felony for any person, organization, group, or special
> >> interest � publicly or privately � to lobby judges or justices for
> >> influencing their rulings; also, for any judge or justice to
> >> accept a bribe in exchange for a judicial favor.
>
> >> It took you 39 words to state what can be stated more effectively in 26
> >> words.
>
> >> * The lobbying of Members of the Judicial system by any Person is
> >> prohibited; as is the issuance of Favor by any Member of the
> >> Judicial system.
>
> >> In addition to being wordy, YOUR New Constitution fails to provide
> >> remedy. One can provide such remedy by adding the following:
>
> >> * Persons found guilty of Lobbying or the issuance of Favor under
> >> Article III, Section 8, shall be imprisoned for not less than 10
> >> Years and/or deported.
>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >> "'My country, right or wrong' is a thing that no patriot would think of
> >> saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying 'My mother, drunk
> >> or sober.'"�Gilbert Keith Chesterton
>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >> On 03/28/2011 07:55 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> >>> Folks: Jonathan shows his anti-America ideas with every word he
> >>> utters. There are no moderators on this group. So, he, MJ and Mark
> >>> hang-out here because my readership is high. Those who love America
> >>> are invited to attack these socialist-communists. I have better
> >>> things to be doing. Thanks! � J. A. A. �
> >>> On Mar 26, 7:35 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> John,
> >>>> If "naive, pesky losers" like myself failed to ask questions regarding
> >>>> the excrement self-proclaimed intellectuals like yourself keep spilling
> >>>> forth, less-discerning individuals in this group might blindly accept
> >>>> the bull crap you have written.
> >>>> It is /highly/ unlikely that you will ever get the opportunity for an up
> >>>> or down vote on YOUR New Constitution. I say that because the casinos I
> >>>> visited during my recent trip to Las Vegas had no idea YOUR New
> >>>> Constitution even existed. If Vegas doesn't know about it, the masses
> >>>> necessary for its passage surely don't.
> >>>> In the unlikely event you ever have the opportunity to place YOUR New
> >>>> Constitution before the voters, it is my belief that ambiguous
> >>>> provisions such as "Every two years an unbiased review panel shall
> >>>> apprise the Citizens of the job performance grade, as herein, of seated
> >>>> judges and justices" and "It is TREASON for a judge or justice to rule
> >>>> with disfavor on the supremacy of a fair democracy" (both from Article
> >>>> III, Section 1) will insure more "down" votes than "up" - even from our
> >>>> dumbed-down society.
> >>>> On 03/26/2011 03:48 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>> Jonathan: The only opinions of others that matter are the one-day, up
> >>>>> or down votes for ratification of my New Constitution. I don't have
> >>>>> time to explain to a naive, pesky loser like you the sociology and the
> >>>>> psychology of how and why people make up their minds one way or the
> >>>>> other. I highly recommend "The Power of Positive Thinking" to you.
> >>>>> "Great things are never accomplished by the skeptical." � J. A. A.
> >>>>> �
> >>>>> On Mar 25, 1:12 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> John,
> >>>>>> You failed to address "the opinions of others are a necessary requisite
> >>>>>> for the passage of YOUR New Constitution." How do you envision YOUR New
> >>>>>> Constitution being enforced when you will never get it instituted?
> >>>>>> On 03/25/2011 09:53 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>>>> Dear Jonathan: If I had wanted to have the opinions of others
> >>>>>>> influence anything, I would have sought public office and had my
> >>>>>>> insightful solutions neutered in committees and on the floor of the
> >>>>>>> House and the Senate. I realized, early on, that the status quo
> >>>>>>> governmental processes are so screwed-up that our country has gotten
> >>>>>>> away from the "leave-me-alone to make-my-own-way" ideals of the
> >>>>>>> founding fathers. Not a single person would have risked their lives
> >>>>>>> to come to America if they had supposed every hard-earned dollar they
> >>>>>>> make would be taxed and controlled to serve the LAZY members of
> >>>>>>> society who want the right to vote, but are unwilling to support their
> >>>>>>> own weight in society.
> >>>>>>> It was only after the Civil War that media coverage started showing
> >>>>>>> photographs of political candidates and of rallies and conventions.
> >>>>>>> From that day forward, ego-maniacal career politicians became the
> >>>>>>> norm. And those were treated like (unconstitutional) royalty by the
> >>>>>>> media�which is largely responsible for the long, slow decline of the
> >>>>>>> US economy. My New Constitution will pin-back-the-ears of the corrupt
> >>>>>>> US media, and remove all undue influences by those purporting to
> >>>>>>> assess the events of the day. Once John Q. Public starts watching
> >>>>>>> news COVERAGE rather than 24-7 news commentary, the USA will again be
> >>>>>>> on the path to success and prosperity for the vast majority of
> >>>>>>> hardworking Americans! � John A. Armistead � Patriot
> >>>>>>> On Mar 24, 12:39 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> John,
> >>>>>>>> I am fully aware that my opinions "are neither sought, considered, nor
> >>>>>>>> appreciated." It appears that no one's opinions are ever "sought,
> >>>>>>>> considered, nor appreciated" by you. Unfortunately for your ego, the
> >>>>>>>> opinions of others are a necessary requisite for the passage of YOUR New
> >>>>>>>> Constitution. Unless, of course, you plan on seceding from the Union to
> >>>>>>>> create a one-man nation.
> >>>>>>>> On 03/24/2011 09:19 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Jonathan: Judging from quick scans of two of your TOME '+ new posts',
> >>>>>>>>> you lack the ability to be concise in your wording of ideas. I don't
> >>>>>>>>> have the time, nor the desire, to personally explain to you things
> >>>>>>>>> that I've already explained in detail, if you would only read back
> >>>>>>>>> into my thread. Please quit bugging me to get personal with you about
> >>>>>>>>> my New Constitution. I can assure you, Jonathan, that your opinions
> >>>>>>>>> in these regards are neither sought, considered, nor appreciated. �
> >>>>>>>>> J. A. A. �
> >>>>>>>>> On Mar 23, 12:47 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> John,
> >>>>>>>>>> If, as you stated earlier, YOUR New Constitution "defines the limits of
> >>>>>>>>>> both business, social, and governmental influences of our lives."
> >>>>>>>>>> Will it allow me the right to live my life in any way I choose so long
> >>>>>>>>>> as I respect the equal rights of others?
> >>>>>>>>>> Will it allow me to defend my right to life, liberty, and
> >>>>>>>>>> property-rights � rights that existed naturally before any government
> >>>>>>>>>> was created?
> >>>>>>>>>> Will it allow me the freedom to travel unrestricted � a right that
> >>>>>>>>>> existed naturally before any government was created?
> >>>>>>>>>> Will it limit government initiation of force to actions that involve the
> >>>>>>>>>> prior initiation of force by others � such as murder, rape, robbery,
> >>>>>>>>>> kidnapping, and fraud?
> >>>>>>>>>> Will it allow businesses to compete on equal footing � no special
> >>>>>>>>>> privileges to Monsanto, AT&T, Lockheed Martin, etc.?
> >>>>>>>>>> I could continue, but you have a tendency to not answer any questions �
> >>>>>>>>>> preferring instead to resort to name calling. Will this instance be any
> >>>>>>>>>> different?
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 | Obama receives "Transparency Award"...in a closed, undisclosed locationScotty Starnes | March 30, 2011 at 8:22 PM | Tags: National Security Archive, OpenTheGovernment.org, President Obama, Project on Government Oversight, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, secret, transparency, transparency award | Categories: Political Issues | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-4UA |
Once again, you simply can not make this shit up. The most 'transparent' President who hides everything from his education records to meetings with union bosses, accepted a transparency award in secret.
Politico reports:
President Obama finally and quietly accepted his "transparency" award from the open government community this week — in a closed, undisclosed meeting at the White House on Monday.
The secret presentation happened almost two weeks after the White House inexplicably postponed the ceremony, which was expected to be open to the press pool.
This time, Obama met quietly in the Oval Office with Gary Bass of OMB Watch, Tom Blanton of the National Security Archive, Danielle Brian of the Project on Government Oversight, Lucy Dalglish of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and Patrice McDermott of OpenTheGovernment.org, without disclosing the meeting on his public schedule or letting photographers or print reporters into the room.
These most be the most blind members of society to stand behind giving a transparency award to Obama.
"Our understanding going into the meeting was that it would have a pool photographer and a print reporter, and it turned out to be a private meeting," Bass told POLITICO. "He was so on point, so on target in the conversation with us, it is baffling why he would not want that message to be more broadly heard by reporters and the public interest community and the public generally."
It's because he is sick of being caught on tape, and print, saying he is for transparency only to be proven a liar.
Just hours before the White House put off the original event, White House press secretary Jay Carney was defiant in his defense of Obama's transparency record against criticism that it might have been premature.
"This president has demonstrated a commitment to transparency and openness that is greater than any administration has shown in the past, and he's been committed to that since he ran for President and he's taken a significant number of measures to demonstrate that," Carney said in a testy exchange with Fox News reporter Wendell Goler on March 16.
Even the Washington Post, a liberal rag, pointed out the record number of FOIA reguest being rejected by Team Transparency. The Sunlight Foundation even calls BS on the Obama transparency claims. It's all a facade.
Continue reading>>>
 | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! |
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com
 | Is al-Qaeda acting as the de facto U.S. infantry on the ground in Libya?barenakedislam | March 30, 2011 at 7:59 PM | Categories: EnemyWithin-foreign | URL: http://wp.me/peHnV-rLH |
Now that Barack Obama has let the rat out of the bag that we are covertly supporting/arming the Libyan (al-Qaeda) rebels, how will he spin it when these same al-Qaeda fighters, who hate blacks, get into Western Libya and start committing a genocide of the black Libyan population there? Earlier story: when-is-barack-obama-going-to-admit-we-are-fighting-for-al-qaeda-in-libya
| | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! |
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com
| | Double Speak: Obama Calls for 1/3 cut on Oil Imports...told Brazil last week he wanted to be a major importerScotty Starnes | March 30, 2011 at 6:15 PM | Tags: foreign petroleum, gas prices, Obama's energy plan, oil imports, oil production, President Obama | Categories: Political Issues | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-4Uo |
Obama is keeping his one and only promise...
Today, Obama called for a 1/3 cut on imported oil. Add this to the decrease in domestic oil production, thanks to Obama's drilling moratorium, and you get higher gas prices...higher than they already are.
From the Washington Post:
President Obama on Wednesday called for a one-third cut in oil imports by 2020, part of a plan he says will reduce U.S. dependence on foreign petroleum.
Only if U.S. companies are allowed to drill and the Obama regime stops illegally blocking them. Obama is a notorious double-speaker, just last week, he informed Brazil that he wanted to be a major importer of their oil.
With rising gasoline prices at home and political turmoil throughout the Middle East, Obama sought in a speech at Georgetown University to rally Americans — and bickering lawmakers — behind a program that draws equally from energy savings and increases in energy production.
"We've been down this road before," Obama said, acknowledging that past presidents have made similar calls for greater energy independence. But, he added, "we can't rush to action when gas prices are high and then hit the snooze button when prices are low again."
Maybe Obama will start letting U.S. oil companies drill since he allowed George Soros' Pretrobras a drilling permit.
He said that rising demand from developing countries such as China mean that oil demand will continue to rise faster than supplies, and that whatever ups and downs in prices took place, "when you look at the long-term trends, there are going to be more ups than downs."
Gas and energy prices have done nothing but go UP since Obama took office. I wonder if his policies have just a little something to do with it. He has stopped US companies from drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and his E.P.A. is trying to bankrupt the coal industry but withdrawing mining permits. They are trying to do the same thing to natural gas.
| | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! |
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com
Fences more than 13ft high, topped with barbed wire, are now being erected along an eight-mile stretch of the Yalu river around the Chinese city of Dandong. This is a popular escape point for North Korea refugees seeking food or better lives, Korea's Yonhap news agency reported.The refugees are fleeing to escape a monstrous tyranny and a looming famine. The Chinese government has decided that, for its own interests, it would be better if those refugees stayed in North Korea. (In the 1990s famine, hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, died. Estimates — and that's all we have — vary, but one common guess is that the famine may have killed more than 10 percent of North Korea's population.)
"It's the first time such strong border fences are being erected here. Looks like it is related to the unstable situation in North Korea," a resident said of the work which began last November but is ongoing.
Utility experts and economists say it will take many months, possibly into next year, to get anywhere close to restoring full power.They've lost about 10 percent nationally, about 20 percent in that region.
The places most affected are not only in the earthquake-ravaged area but also in the economically crucial region closer to Tokyo, which is having to ration power because of the big chunk of the nation's electrical generating capacity that was knocked out by the quake or washed away by the tsunami.
In theory, the Tokyo area could import electricity from the south. But a historical rivalry between Tokyo and the city of Osaka led the two areas to develop grids using different frequencies — Osaka's is 60 cycles and Tokyo's is 50 cycles — so sharing is inefficient.Some electric appliances are sensitive to frequencies. I wonder how the two regions solve that problem.)
Former President Jimmy Carter isn't in Cuba to negotiate for the release of jailed U.S. contractor Alan Gross, though he is hoping that his visit will help to thaw U.S.-Cuban relations, he said Tuesday.Sometimes I think that Carter is taking revenge on us for rejecting him in the 1980 election.
Opportunistic or not, in recent years the Russian nuclear industry has profited handsomely by selling reactors abroad, mostly to developing countries. That includes China and India — whose insatiable energy appetites are keeping them wedded to nuclear power, despite their vows to proceed even more cautiously in light of Japan's disaster.At least that's what their salesmen are telling prospective customers, with some success.
And though Fukushima Daiichi provides a new opportunity to stress the message, Rosatom has long been marketing its reactors as safe — not despite Chernobyl, but because of it.
One lesson of the financial crisis is this: When the entire financial system succumbs to panic, only the government is powerful enough to prevent a complete collapse. Panics signify the triumph of fear. TARP was part of the process by which fear was overcome. It wasn't the only part, but it was an essential part. Without TARP, we'd be worse off today. No one can say whether unemployment would be 11 percent or 14 percent; it certainly wouldn't be 8.9 percent.Samuelson admits that parts of TARP were mis-handled. I think that there is a strong argument that GM and Chrysler would have been better off if they had gone through formal bankruptcies, and an unimpeachable argument that the Obama administration did far too much for its political allies, the United Auto Workers.
The German broadcaster of "The Simpsons" said Monday it has decided not to show any episodes of the US cartoon series showing nuclear disasters in light of Japan's atomic emergency.It's almost as if they want to revive that humorless-German stereotype.
Since the conflict began, a squadron of 18 RAF Typhoon pilots has enforced the Libya no-fly zone from an air base in southern Italy. However, a shortage of qualified fighter pilots means the RAF may not have enough to replace all of them when the squadron has to rotate in a few weeks.(The Typhoon is a relatively new aircraft.)
The situation is so serious that the RAF has halted the teaching of trainee Typhoon pilots so instructors can be drafted on to the front line, according to air force sources. The handful of pilots used for air shows will also be withdrawn from displays this summer.
Fences more than 13ft high, topped with barbed wire, are now being erected along an eight-mile stretch of the Yalu river around the Chinese city of Dandong. This is a popular escape point for North Korea refugees seeking food or better lives, Korea's Yonhap news agency reported.The refugees are fleeing to escape a monstrous tyranny and a looming famine. The Chinese government has decided that, for its own interests, it would be better if those refugees stayed in North Korea. (In the 1990s famine, hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, died. Estimates — and that's all we have — vary, but one common guess is that the famine may have killed more than 10 percent of North Korea's population.)
"It's the first time such strong border fences are being erected here. Looks like it is related to the unstable situation in North Korea," a resident said of the work which began last November but is ongoing.
Utility experts and economists say it will take many months, possibly into next year, to get anywhere close to restoring full power.They've lost about 10 percent nationally, about 20 percent in that region.
The places most affected are not only in the earthquake-ravaged area but also in the economically crucial region closer to Tokyo, which is having to ration power because of the big chunk of the nation's electrical generating capacity that was knocked out by the quake or washed away by the tsunami.
In theory, the Tokyo area could import electricity from the south. But a historical rivalry between Tokyo and the city of Osaka led the two areas to develop grids using different frequencies — Osaka's is 60 cycles and Tokyo's is 50 cycles — so sharing is inefficient.Some electric appliances are sensitive to frequencies. I wonder how the two regions solve that problem.)
Former President Jimmy Carter isn't in Cuba to negotiate for the release of jailed U.S. contractor Alan Gross, though he is hoping that his visit will help to thaw U.S.-Cuban relations, he said Tuesday.Sometimes I think that Carter is taking revenge on us for rejecting him in the 1980 election.
Opportunistic or not, in recent years the Russian nuclear industry has profited handsomely by selling reactors abroad, mostly to developing countries. That includes China and India — whose insatiable energy appetites are keeping them wedded to nuclear power, despite their vows to proceed even more cautiously in light of Japan's disaster.At least that's what their salesmen are telling prospective customers, with some success.
And though Fukushima Daiichi provides a new opportunity to stress the message, Rosatom has long been marketing its reactors as safe — not despite Chernobyl, but because of it.
One lesson of the financial crisis is this: When the entire financial system succumbs to panic, only the government is powerful enough to prevent a complete collapse. Panics signify the triumph of fear. TARP was part of the process by which fear was overcome. It wasn't the only part, but it was an essential part. Without TARP, we'd be worse off today. No one can say whether unemployment would be 11 percent or 14 percent; it certainly wouldn't be 8.9 percent.Samuelson admits that parts of TARP were mis-handled. I think that there is a strong argument that GM and Chrysler would have been better off if they had gone through formal bankruptcies, and an unimpeachable argument that the Obama administration did far too much for its political allies, the United Auto Workers.
The German broadcaster of "The Simpsons" said Monday it has decided not to show any episodes of the US cartoon series showing nuclear disasters in light of Japan's atomic emergency.It's almost as if they want to revive that humorless-German stereotype.
Since the conflict began, a squadron of 18 RAF Typhoon pilots has enforced the Libya no-fly zone from an air base in southern Italy. However, a shortage of qualified fighter pilots means the RAF may not have enough to replace all of them when the squadron has to rotate in a few weeks.(The Typhoon is a relatively new aircraft.)
The situation is so serious that the RAF has halted the teaching of trainee Typhoon pilots so instructors can be drafted on to the front line, according to air force sources. The handful of pilots used for air shows will also be withdrawn from displays this summer.
