• Feed RSS
There was an error in this gadget
0
We got our work cut out.







 

.

 


No Matter What?  Walter Williams. . . says

Can President Obama be defeated in 2012?  No. He can't.  I am going on record as saying that President Barak Obama will win a second term. The media won't tell you this because a good election campaign means hundreds of millions (or in Obama's case billions) of dollars to them in advertising. But the truth is, there simply are no conditions under which Barak Obama can be defeated in 2012.

The quality of the Republican candidate doesn't matter.  Obama gets reelected. Nine percent unemployment?  No problem.  Obama will win. Gas prices moving toward five dollars a gallon?  He still wins. The economy soars or goes into the gutter. Obama wins. War in the Middle East?  He wins a second term. America's role as the leading Superpower disappears?  Hurrah for Barak Obama!

The U.S. government rushes toward bankruptcy, the dollar continues to sink on world markets and the price of daily goods and services soars due to inflation fueled by Obama's extraordinary deficit spending?  Obama wins handily.

You are crazy Walter Williams. Don't you understand how volatile politics can be when overall economic, government, and world conditions are declining? Sure I do.  And that's why I know Obama will win. The American people are notoriously ignorant of economics.  And economics is the key to why Obama should be defeated. Even when Obama's policies lead the nation to final ruin, the majority of the American people are going to believe the bait-and-switch tactics Obama and his supporters in the media will use to explain why it isn't his fault. After all, things were much worse than understood when he took office.

Obama's reelection is really a very, very simple math problem.

 

Consider the following:

 

1) Blacks will vote for Obama blindly.  Period.  Doesn't matter what he does.  It's a race thing.  He's one of us,

 

2) College educated women will vote for Obama.  Though they will be offended by this, they swoon at his oratory. It's really not more complex than that,

 

3) Liberals will vote for Obama.  He is their great hope,

 

4) Democrats will vote for Obama.  He is the leader of their party and his coattails will carry them to victory nationwide,

 

5) Hispanics will vote for Obama.  He is the path to citizenship for those who are illegal and Hispanic leaders recognize the political clout they carry in the Democratic Party,

 

6) Union members will vote overwhelmingly for Obama.  He is their key to money and power in business, state and local politics,

 

7) Big Business will support Obama.  They already have.  He has almost $1 Billion dollars in his reelection purse gained largely from his connections with Big Business and is gaining more everyday.  Big Business loves Obama because he gives them access to taxpayer money so long as they support his social and political agenda,

 

8) The media love him.  They may attack the people who work for him, but they love him.  After all, to not love him would be racist,

 

9) Most other minorities and special interest groups will vote for him.  Oddly, the overwhelming majority of Jews and Muslims will support him because they won't vote Republican. American Indians will support him.  Obviously homosexuals tend to vote Democratic.

 

And lastly,

 

10) Approximately half of independents will vote for Obama.  And he doesn't need anywhere near that number because he has all of the groups previously mentioned.

 

The President will win an overwhelming victory in 2012. 

 

--  Dr. Walter Williams



 

 

 

 



--
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.



   





WOW

 

 Pretty unbelievable.... 

 

Subject:  Look closely at the dots on the wall of this dam in Italy

 

 

 


  

  
This is the Diga del Cingino dam in Italy - 
But look closer, and  see spots on the dam wall?
 
  
   

  

  

  

  
They are European Ibex and they like to eat the moss and lichen

& lick the salt off the dam wall.

Oh, to be so dexterous

 

How often we've stumbled over our own feet.

 

=

 







--
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.
   

Prosser Wins Wisconsin Court Race

Friday, 15 Apr 2011 04:35 PM

Share:
More . . .
A    A   |
   Email Us   |
   Print   |

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A conservative justice has weathered attempts to link him to Wisconsin's governor and a divisive union rights law and won re-election, according to county vote totals finalized Friday.

Tallies from each of the state's 72 counties show Justice David Prosser defeated challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg by 7,316 votes. State election officials said they will wait to declare an official winner until the deadline for Kloppenburg to seek a recount passes. She has until Wednesday to call for one.

If she does, the state would pay for it because the margin between the candidates is less than a half of a percent of the total 1,497,330 votes cast.

Neither campaign had any immediate comment.

Kloppenburg faced an uphill fight against Prosser, a 12-year court veteran and former Republican Assembly speaker. But she got a boost in the weeks leading up to the election as her supporters worked to turn anger against Gov. Scott Walker and the union rights law against Prosser.

The law, which Walker wrote, strips most public sector workers of nearly all their collective bargaining rights. It also requires them to contribute more to their health care and pensions, changes that will result in an average 8 percent pay cut.

Walker, a Republican, has said the law is needed to help balance the state budget and give local governments the flexibility they need to absorb deep cuts in state aid. Democrats see it as an assault on unions, which are among the party's strongest campaign allies.

Tens of thousands of people converged on the state Capitol for weeks to protest and minority Democrats in the Senate fled the state in a futile attempt to block a vote in that chamber. The law is currently tied up in the courts and hasn't taken effect. Those legal challenges look destined for the state Supreme Court.

The law's opponents hoped a Kloppenburg upset over Prosser would tilt the court to the left and set the stage for the justices to overturn the measure.

Turnout in the April 5 election shattered expectations. Unofficial returns from election night initially showed Kloppenburg had bested Prosser by 204 votes. Kloppenburg declared victory on April 6, but the next day the Waukesha County clerk announced she had forgotten to save 14,000 votes on her computer. Those new votes tipped the election to Prosser, giving him an unofficial 7,500 vote lead.

The clerk, Kathy Nickolaus, worked for Prosser as a member of the Assembly Republican caucus in the mid-1990s. Democrats have demanded she resign, and authorities launch an investigation into why she didn't immediately report the votes. State election officials are reviewing Nickolaus' operations, but she has refused to step down, saying she made an honest mistake.

© Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.



Read more on Newsmax.com: Prosser Wins Wisconsin Court Race 
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!
0







 


--
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.
0







 


--
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.
0







 


--
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.
Stay tuned, People! Tomorrow I will write you another essay
explaining why the "ritual" of most of our political-governmental
processes are either unconstitutional, wasteful of economic resources,
or otherwise stupid. — John A. Armistead — Patriot
>
On Apr 14, 10:44 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Like me, the readers must be busy with spring buying and fix-up.  The
> present discussions will affect the fortunes and the liberty
> (happiness) of your grandchildren.  There won't be any more fortunes
> and little liberty if the US economy goes down-the-tubes.  By adapting
> my New Constitution, the survival of the USA will be assured!  — John
> A. Armistead —  Patriot
>
> Those interested are invited to read my book: "The Shortest Distance;
> Harmony Through Prosperity" (Amazon and B. & N.).  I'm thrilled that
> the word 'prosperity' is being mentioned more and more as a cure for
> our ailing economy (Capitalism over socialism).  That book explains
> the 'build-up' to my writing the New Constitution.  Simple things can
> turn this country around!  And none of them involving conducting...
> business-as-usual in Washington!  Trust me, Folks!  I know what I am
> doing.  99.5% of those in Washington are clueless!
>
> On Apr 11, 2:36 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Mark:  If you could, and would, read my document with an open mind,
> > there is nothing injurious to ordinary citizens.  Stalin didn't give a
> > damn about ordinary citizens (or soldiers).  He killed them by the
> > millions.  Are you saying that my New Constitution will harm ordinary
> > citizens?  Ha, ha, HA!  Then you can't read, for sure!  — J. A. A.
> > —
>
> > On Apr 10, 7:25 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I prefer to call it what it is.... Stalinesque.
>
> > > On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Jonathan Ashley <
>
> > > jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:
> > > >  John,
>
> > > > So you are trying to eliminate celebrities who have an opinion that differs
> > > > from yours. How fascist of you!
>
> > > > On 04/10/2011 01:53 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> > > > No, Jonathan!  Celebrities in the media and in entertainment simply
> > > > can't voice their opinions or political preferences in any MEDIUM.
> > > > The man-on-the-street doesn't get hours a week to talk about how great
> > > > Barack Obama is, the way Oprah Winfrey did.  Barbara Walters, a
> > > > celebrity, made no bones about the fact she supported Barack Obama.
> > > > What in our "Constitution" gives high-paid celebrities the right to
> > > > have more influence on the outcome of elections than the man on the
> > > > street?  As soon as Jay Leno or David Letterman make one joke about a
> > > > candidate for public office, they will immediately be fired or their
> > > > network closed.  Politics is NOT about entertainment, nor is it a game
> > > > with 24-7 play-by-play coverage with commentary and prove-nothing
> > > > polls.  Those who would like our government to be run the way the
> > > > People say, rather than the way those who publicly endorse a candidate
> > > > say, should rally behind my New Constitution—a document for the
> > > > people!  —  J. A. A. —
>
> > > >   On Apr 9, 1:01 am, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > >  John,
>
> > > > You have once again shown that you have no interest in freedom, but
> > > > instead want to dictate what others can and cannot do.
>
> > > > That you believe celebrities should have less right to voice their
> > > > opinions smacks of fascism. Or am I misinterpreting what you mean when
> > > > you state, "Entertainment celebrities, like media celebrities, have a
> > > > 'following' which would be cesseptable (sic) to vote like the
> > > > celebrities vote. The (sic) means celebrities would have more influence
> > > > at the poles (sic) than the man-on-the-street (sic).  Of course, that
> > > > shift of power runs counter to principles of fair play and democracy."
>
> > > > Please explain to the world what "principles of fair play" means and why
> > > > someone who is a celebrity will not be allowed to "play" in your world.
>
> > > > And, John, you'd better do it fast. I think your time on this forum is
> > > > about up.
>
> > > > On 04/08/2011 09:07 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> > > >  Jonathan:  Entertainment celebrities, like media celebrities, have a
> > > > "following" which would be cesseptable to vote like the celebrities
> > > > vote.  The means celebrities would have more influence at the poles
> > > > than the man-on-the-street.  Of course, that shift of power runs
> > > > counter to principles of fair play and democracy.  The 1st Amendment
> > > > says: "... the freedom of a fair and pro-democracy press or other
> > > > medium".  Having a pro-democracy press means that no one like Mark is
> > > > allowed to push socialism nor communism. His threatening me because I
> > > > correctly peg him as anti-America, would shut down Google, if Google
> > > > didn't FIRE Mark, post haste!  ï¿½ J. A. A. �
>
> > > >  --
>
> > > >       Freedom Is Always Illegal.
>
> > > > Learn How To Protect Your Identity And Prevent Identity Theft<http://8f7ab0ybg8rx5p6mloffi9yw8t.hop.clickbank.net/> <http://8f7ab0ybg8rx5p6mloffi9yw8t.hop.clickbank.net/>
>
> > > > --
> > > > Freedom Is Always Illegal.
>
> > > > Learn How To Protect Your Identity And Prevent Identity Theft<http://8f7ab0ybg8rx5p6mloffi9yw8t.hop.clickbank.net/>
>
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > > --
> > > *Mark M. Kahle H.*
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *

--
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.

0







 


--
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.
0

 





 


--
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.