Musings and other intemperate thoughts...

I had tried to post this for 3 days and I have been too busy to post.

I made one of my infrequent forays into the land of "Facebook", ..All I can say is *wow*...The mindless vitriol and rhetoric of our soo tolerant leftist brethren is breathtaking to behold...This happened right after the "Hobby Lobby" ruling and the left acts like it is the end of times.  I even saw "Abortion Barbie" Wendy Davis trying to revitalize her base with some asinine comments trying to be relevant.     I really believe that we are now 2 different groups in America,  on one side you have the "tolerant left" that has control of the organs of the state and the punitive powers of the same, then you have everybody else that wants to be left alone.
     The left wants to have "reasoned discourse"only if you agree with them and if you don't then you are an religious,homophobic, racist,teabagger that wants to give women cloth-hanger abortions,  asshole.  I have noticed that the conservative half of America has no problem if somebody has a different opinion, but the courtesy isn't extended back to us.  I figure that the leftist have "control" issues, they know what is best for everybody else.
       I don't know if we can survive as a country, we are soo polarized right now.  Everybody is split up into their own groups and squabbling with each other and missing the point, America is in trouble, we have the mid-east falling apart, we have thousands of illegal kids showing up at our border and we don't know how to handle that.  Obama is seeing a chance to pander to the Hispanic votes and secure a new voting block to keep the democrats in power.    We are racking up debt at an unsustainable limit that our children cannot pay for and I think that is be design to bankrupt the middle class thereby allowing only 2 groups of people, the elitist who control the government and the poor that are beholding to the same government for sustenance and basically are a serf for them.
      I almost think succession is an answer, but I as a proud American don't want to see the U.S.A balkanize along ethnic lines.  B ut this is what happens when groups are encouraged to keep their own identity and not join that was called the "mainstream".  Now we have people that are more beholding to where they came from than where they are now.  We have people that come here to escape their 3rd world shithole and yet want to transform the United States into the same place that they left.....Will we survive?

Why is Chuck Hagel SECDEF?

I saw bits and pieces of this while I was at work.  This was mentioned on Old NFO's Blog, BRM and Murphy's law and many others, the cuts are designed to bring us down to the 1940 level of the service.  They are cutting manpower and benefits to the military.  They are making military service very unattractive to the American people and raising doubts on the viability of the modern volunteer force.  if there were going to return the savings back to the treasury, I can almost accept it, but it will be used to buy more votes from the electorate thereby guaranteeing the democrats a majority in congress and the presidency keeping them in power.  Remember to a democrat, loyalty to party is paramount, all other considerations are secondary.  I keep wondering if this is part of Obama's plan to "lessen" the United States, remember he was raised to view us as "imperialist" and that we caused all the worlds problems.

Back to my original question...Why is Chuck Hagel SecDef?    Was he vetted by congress or did the squishy RINO's roll over for Obama?

you ask? WHY is a member of a "left-wing peace" movement the SecDef?

EXCERPT:  "Washington (AFP) - The Pentagon plans to scale back the US Army by more than an eighth to its lowest level since before World War II, signaling a shift after more than a decade of ground wars. Saying it was time to "reset" for a new era, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel recommended shrinking American forces from 520,000 active duty troops to between 440,000 and 450,000.

WHY?

EXCERPT:  "March 27, 2009: Ploughshares Fund President Joseph Cirincione announced today that Senator Chuck Hagel has joined  the foundation’s Board of Directors. “Senator Hagel is revered by colleagues on both sides of the aisle and around the world,” said Cirincione.  “He has served his country in Vietnam, in the Senate, and now as a champion of global engagement and a new direction in American security policy."

EXCERPT: "April 23, 2009: The Ploughshares Fund welcomes former Sen. Chuck Hagel to the Board of Directors and Jeff Skoll to the Board of Advisors.  Skoll is founding president of eBay, as well as founder of the newly-launched Skoll Urgent Threats Fund.  Sen. Hagel (R-NE) served in the U.S. Senate from 1996 to 2008, and currently serves as chairman of the Atlantic Council of the United States. “Senator Hagel is revered by colleagues on both sides of the aisle and around the world,” said Ploughshares President Joe Cirincione.  “He has served his country in Vietnam, in the Senate, and now as a champion of global engagement and a new direction in American security policy."  Senator Hagel is also a strong supporter of Global Zero, a Ploughshares-funded initiative to eliminate nuclear weapons globally."

WHO IS PLOUGHSHARES FUND? (They are a friend of Code Pink and many other leftist groups.)(http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7156)

The Ploughshares Fund was established in 1981 by the San Francisco-based philanthropist, artist and activist Sally Lilienthal (1919-2006), who had formerly served on the board of the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California during the 1960s and 70s, and had co-founded the Northern California Committee of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund in 1971. From its inception, the Ploughshares Fund's purpose was to support the nuclear-freeze movement, a Soviet-sponsored initiative that sought to further solidify the nuclear and military superiority which the USSR had gained during the post-Vietnam War era. Moreover, Ploughshares adamantly opposed NATO’s decision to place medium-range missiles in Europe, a decision that was made in response to an aggressive Soviet military buildup and to the USSR's then-recent deployment of SS-20 Missiles in Eastern Europe.
Also during the Cold War, Ploughshares claimed that U.S. militarism—particularly that of the Reagan administration—was far likelier to spark a nuclear holocaust than anything the Soviet Union might do. Identifying U.S. belligerence and aggression as the chief source of tensions between America and the USSR, Ploughshares pressured the United States but not the Soviets to initiate disarmament measures. To advance this agenda, Ploughshares pooled donations from a number of wealthy contributors and charitable foundations (including the Rockefeller and Stern Foundations) to bankroll and almost singlehandedly create a left-wing “peace” movement that denounced American defense policies and featured the progressive icon Edward Kennedy as one of its spokesmen.
Early in its history, Ploughshares awarded a grant to fund the efforts of scientists (who were affiliated with the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Soviet Academy of Scientists) seeking to prove that it would be possible for the U.S. and the Soviet Union to both comply with the terms of a nuclear test ban treaty—and that therefore neither side should be reluctant to sign such a pact.
Ploughshares was an original and consistent funder of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, which was formed in 1992.
Today Ploughshares describes itself as “a public grantmaking foundation that supports initiatives to prevent the spread and use of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and other weapons of war, and to prevent conflicts that could lead to the use of weapons of mass destruction.” It also opposes America's development of a missile defense system.
A self-defined “venture funder,” Ploughshares specializes in “giving start-up funding to promising new endeavors, and then helping to leverage more substantial support from other sources.” The organization's grantmaking strategy is to “proactively select grantees and knit them together into a collaborative network” that strives to “build comprehensive campaigns aimed at winning key policy victories.” After such groundwork has been laid, the Ploughshares network “can unlock a more ambitious strategic agenda.” Specifically, Ploughshares gives grants that are designed to do three major things:
* Promote the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons: “Building a consensus among the world’s leaders creates a global norm against nuclear weapons and increases the momentum toward zero. Along the way, concrete steps to limit and reduce current arsenals must be realized as well.”
* Prevent the Emergence of New Nuclear States: “We focus on the two most significant threats to the global nonproliferation regime – Iran and North Korea. We believe that ... solutions are possible through effective diplomacy and engagement …”
* Build Regional Peace and Security: “South Asia represents perhaps the most dangerous region on earth given the long-standing conflict between India and Pakistan and the fact that both nations possess substantial nuclear arsenals. Our investments support fact-finding missions, on-the-ground analysis, high-level dialogue, confidence-building measures, policy advocacy and media outreach to advance the transformation of conflicts in South and Southwest Asia.”
Professing to be “the largest grantmaking foundation in the U.S. focusing exclusively on peace and security issues,” Ploughshares from 1981 to 2011 awarded many hundreds of grants whose aggregate value exceeded $60 million.”
Among the organizations that have received grants from Ploughshares over the years are the Agape Foundation, the American Friends Service Committee, Americans for Peace Now, The American Prospect, the Arms Control Association, the Aspen Institute, the Berghof Institute for Conflict Studies, the Brookings Institution, the Center for American Progress, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Center for Constitutional Rights, the Christic Institute, Church Women United, Citizen Action, the Connect US Fund, the Constitution Project, the Council for a Livable World, the Economic Policy Institute, Environmental Defense, Environmental Media Services, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, the Fourth Freedom Forum, Friends of the Earth, Global Green USA, Greenpeace USA, Human Rights Watch, the Independent Media Institute, the Institute for America's Future, the Institute for Defense and Disarmament Studies, the Institute for Policy Studies, the International Crisis Group, J Street, the Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy, the League of United Latin American Citizens, the Nation Institute, the National Priorities Project, National Public Radio, the National Security Archive, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Netroots Nation, the New America Foundation, the Nonviolent Peaceforce, the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, Peace Action, Physicians for Human Rights, Physicians for Social Responsibility, the WashPIRG Foundation, the Proteus Fund, Public Citizen, September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows, the Sierra Club, TechRocks, the Tides Foundation, True Majority, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the United Nations Association of USA, Win Without War, Women's Action for New Directions, and the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom.
To view a list of additional noteworthy grantees of the Ploughshares Fund, click here.
In addition, Ploughshares is the parent organization of, and a major funder of, the Peace and Security Funders Group. The latter operates as a “special project” of Ploughshares.
Individual recipients of Ploughshares grants include such notables as Robert Edgar and Jonathan Schell.
Ploughshares identifies itself as a partner of such groups as Code Pink, Demos, the Institute for Policy Studies, the National Priorities Project, United for Peace & Justice, and the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation.
Ploughshares' worldview regarding military and nuclear issues is closely aligned with that of the Democratic Party. During the Iraq War, for instance, Ploughshares joined congressional Democrats in branding the American invasion a strategic blunder and an unjustified act of aggression.
In an effort to attract new supporters to its cause, Ploughshares in 2007 hired Fenton Communications to create and administer the “Peace Primary,” an online contest where Ploughshares grantees developed their own “peace platforms” on a wide range of topics such as the Iraq War and the genocide in Darfur. A special panel, chaired by actor Martin Sheen, selected 12 finalists. The public was then invited to vote online for the ultimate winner; participants donated money along with their votes for the organizations they deemed deserving of the $100,000 grand prize. All told, the Peace Primary raised more than $327,000, with TrueMajority taking first place.
When the Obama Administration in September 2009 canceled U.S. plans for the deployment of a missile defense shield in Central Europe—a decision that pleased Moscow but angered America's allies in Eastern Europe—Ploughshares boasted that its influence had “informed the decision” by the Administration.
In 2010 Ploughshares led a successful campaign by more than fifty non-governmental organizations to persuade the Senate to approve the New START Treaty (a nuclear arms reduction pact) between the United States and Russia.
Ploughshares advocates a policy of containment regarding Iran's nuclear program, and seeks to discredit the notion that using American military power to derail that program would be either prudent or practical. Toward that end, the organization in 2010 gave $150,000 to National Public Radio to fund “increased coverage of U.S. nuclear policy issues and the proliferation risks from North Korea and Iran.” Coinciding with that grant was the publication of numerous NPR articles and reports that largely echoed Ploughshares’ policy recommendations. One NPR piece, written by Stephen Walt, asserted that the United States was “too secure,” and praised the New START Treaty (which required the U.S., but not Russia, to cut its nuclear forces to levels that were within the treaty limits). In November 2010, just days after the Walt piece had been published, NPR correspondent Peter Kenyon delivered an on-air report calling for the U.S. to negotiate with Iran and asserting that “[m]any analysts believe there’s more time for diplomacy than had previously been thought.” In February 2011, Ploughshares gave NPR an additional $150,000 to cover “Iran, U.S. nuclear weapons policy, and nonproliferation issues.”
Of a piece with Ploughshares' Iran policy is the organization's support for the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), the Iranian regime’s principal lobbyist in the United States. A few facts about NIAC:

• NIAC was established in 2002 by Trita Parsi and Siamak Namazi (a member of the Iranian regime’s inner circle and a major figure in that country's oil industry), to act as a counter-balance to the Jewish lobby AIPAC.
• NIAC has a strong relationship with the Barack Obama administration, as indicated by Andrew C. McCarthy's report in National Review: "[NIAC's] top official, Trita Parsi, visits the White House, consults with Valerie Jarrett, briefs Secretary of State [Hillary] Clinton, lectures the CIA, and so on."
• NIAC's advisory board features University of Michigan professor Juan Cole.
• Utilizing the services of public-relations specialist David Fenton and his firm, Fenton Communications, NIAC seeks to convince the American public that U.S. sanctions punishing Iran for its suspected nuclear ambitions would be “counterproductive,” and that the use of military action against Tehran would be a grave mistake.

In November 2011, Ploughshares gave NIAC $125,000 “to shape the debate among policymakers and in the media on credible, non-military approaches to resolving the impasse over Iran’s nuclear program.”

Similarly, in 2011 Ploughshares gave the Center for American Progress (CAP) at least $150,000 “to hire two researchers for an expanded initiative on Iran aimed at countering support for military action.” In October 2011, CAP policy analyst Matthew Duss produced a report that praised the Obama Administration for pursuing a diplomatic approach to Iran’s nuclear program. Moreover, CAP's blog, Think Progress, regularly condemned what it characterized as neoconservative war mongering against Iran.

In November 2011, Ploughshares gave $25,000 to J Street “to support congressional advocacy and education against the use of a military resolution to the impasse over Iran’s nuclear program.” Two months later, J Street released a web video and policy campaign that counseled against the use of military force against Iran.
The Ploughshares Fund is supported by annual contributions from approximately 2,000 individuals and a small number of foundations. Among its benefactors are the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Compton Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Minneapolis Foundation, George Soros’s Open Society Institute, the Prospect Hill Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Scherman Foundation, the Turner Foundation, and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
To view a list of additional noteworthy supporters of the Ploughshares Fund, click here.
Since 2008, the president of the Ploughshares Fund has been Joseph Cirincione, author of the 2007 book Bomb Scare: The History and Future of Nuclear Weapons and a former senior vice president at the Center for American Progress. A vocal opponent of the Iraq War, Cirincione in 2004 co-authored a paper that not only dismissed the Bush Administration’s case for war as “dubious,” but also asserted that the United States had violated international law by attacking Iraq. In 2007 Cirincione charged, falsely, that Bush Administration officials had “repeatedly misled the press” and manipulated intelligence reports in order to justify the U.S. invasion—an allegation that was echoed by Democratic politicians. That same year, Cirincione angrily rejected news reports claiming that Syria was building a nuclear reactor with assistance from North Korea. By Cirincione's reckoning, such stories were nothing more than propaganda disseminated by the U.S. and Israel. (Intelligence officials later produced video evidence definitively establishing the Syrian-North Korean collaboration.) In 2008 Cirincione served as an advisor on nuclear policy to presidential candidate Barack Obama.
The executive director of the Ploughshares Fund is Naila Bolus, who also serves as co-chair of the Peace and Security Funders Group. Bolus is a former co-director of the environmentalist and anti-war group 20/20 Vision, and she co-founded the Women Legislators' Lobby, whose goal is to “persuade Congress to redirect excessive military spending toward unmet human and environmental needs.”
Notable advisors to the Ploughshares Fund include Hal Harvey, president and CEO of the ClimateWorks Foundation; Steven Kirsch, chairman of the Steven and Michele Kirsch Foundation; and Lawrence J. Korb, senior fellow with the Center for American Progress. Key members of the Ploughshares board of directors include the film actor Michael Douglas (a member since 2004) and former U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel.

NOTE:
[1] Paul Hollander, Political Pilgrims: Western Intellectuals in Search of the Good Society (Transaction Publishers, 1981).
(Information on grantees and monetary amounts courtesy of The Foundation Center, GuideStar, ActivistCash, the Capital Research Center and undue influence

http://www.ploughshares.org/blog/2009-04-23/chuck-hagel-jeff-skoll-join http://www.ploughshares.org/chuck-hagel http://www.ploughshares.org/sites/default/files/resources/PF%20ANNUAL%20REPORT%202013.Final_.pdf (CHECK THEIR DONOR LIST AND GRANTS! ALL HARDCORE LEFTISTS AND ANTI-WAR/ANTI-USA GROUPS)

Can we be saved?

I am going to use the scheduling thingie on this again, so it will post on tuesday.

     What prompted the title of this post is the realization "Will we survive?"   I made a comment I think on either Old NFO's blog, Murphys place or at Peters place, that we have had our last free elections in 2012.  People voted for Santa Claus instead of Scrooge.  Let me 'splain more of what I am talking about.
     The democrats promise free stuff in exchange for votes,

There are programs for food stamps, EBT, heating oil,SNAP, Section 8 housing, and some more with a quick "Google" search

Social Security Retirement

Social Security retirement benefits paid to retired workers who have earned enough Social Security credits.

Supplemental Security Income (SSI)

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a federal government benefit program providing cash to meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter to persons who are blind or otherwise disabled and have little or no other income.

Medicare

Medicare is a health insurance program for people 65 years of age or older, some disabled people under 65 years, and people with End-Stage Renal Disease (permanent kidney failure treated with dialysis or a transplant).

Medicare Prescription Drug Program

Everyone with Medicare can get this coverage benefit that may help lower prescription drug costs and help protect against higher costs in the future.

Medicaid

The Medicaid Program provides medical benefits to low-income people who have no medical insurance or have inadequate medical insurance.

Stafford Student Loans

Stafford Student Loans are available for undergraduate and graduate students at virtually every college and university in America.

Food Stamps

The Food Stamp Program provides benefits to low-income people that they can use to buy food to improve their diets.

Emergency Food Assistance

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) is a Federal program that helps supplement the diets of low-income needy individuals and families, including elderly people, by providing them with emergency food assistance at no cost.

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) is federally funded – state administered – financial assistance program for low income families with dependent children and for pregnant women in their last three months of pregnancy. TANF provides temporary financial assistance while also helping recipients find jobs that will allow them to support themselves.

Public Housing Assistance Program

The HUD Public Housing assistance program was established to provide decent and safe rental housing for eligible low-income families. Public housing comes in all sizes and types, from scattered single family houses to highrise apartments for elderly families.

More Federal Benefit and Assistance Programs

While the Top Federal Benefit Programs may represent the meat-and-potatoes from the buffet of federal assistance programs offered by the U.S. government, there are many more benefit programs that fill out the menu from soup to desert. Here you will find basic program information, eligibility and how to apply for these federal benefit programs.

Suggested Reading

• Social Security Primer
• Medicare Primer
• Student Assistance Primer

Related Guide Picks

• Extra Help With Prescription Drugs
• Assistance for Cancer Patients
• Money for a Small Business

Other Related Resources & Guide Picks

• Are You Eligible for Federal Aid
• Health Insurance for Uninsured Children

Related Articles

• Are You Eligible for US Federal Aid? – Website helps you find out if ...
• Federal Grants - Assistance and Benefits - About Federal Grants - Assistanc...
• Getting Government Assistance Without a Grant
• Us Federal Benefit and US Federal Assistance Programs – More Popular ...
• Cutting the US deficit will require sacrifices by all Americans

Robert Longley
About.com US Government Info

• Sign up for My Newsletter

• Headlines

Advertisement

See More About

• top government benefit and assistance programs
• medicare
• social security
• student loans
• food stamps

and  Obamaphones, remember this gem from the last election cycle?

     The Democrats have become the party of "GimmeDats", in exchange for votes, and more and more people are deciding to ride the government gravy train rather than work.  What has happened to our national character?  We as Americans traditionally are known as "Self Reliant Go Getters."  What has happened to our national character?   Could a weak society like we have today survive the great depression, then WWII where we were attacked at Pearl Harbor and had 6 months of bad news, followed by good and bad news until the war was won?  Could today society handle such trials and tribulations?  

       We as a society have gotten too soft, I have a good friend by the name of "ShellDude," back in the 90's have commented that "Man we as a society have too much time on our hands, when we have time to examine our navel lint in great detail, we are too idle."   We had heard something that was soo incredulous involving the burgeoning P.C. movement.   I think of what he said back then and in some ways he is prescient. 
     I am not sure when it changed, was it a continuation of the 60's counterculture movement when all these new commies freshly indoctrinated at Berkley and other places of higher learning started gathering political power and they started using our sense of laws and fairness against us, we have become the nanny state.  When we have a president willing to rule by executive orders and one party gives him a standing ovation despite the oath of office they took, the  threat to the rule of law it shows me that the political process is totally corrupted. 
     We have the democrats, the self professed party of the middle class and the downtrodden, they have claim to large groups of demographics, most of the single women and women with children vote democrats for all the free stuff they get and the promise of security.  We have very large groups of blacks voting democrats because of party and ethnic loyalty, the same with the hispanics and 40% of the white males. 

They got there by promising all sort of stuff for each demographic group,  and people responded by the promise of "Free stuff".  They don't realize that the stuff ain't free, somebody has to pay for it, and due to our joke of an educational system, people don't learn basic economics and the rule of law and the role of government on our society.  Instead all they have learned is stuff on what makes them "feel good". 
      Now I will get to the republicans, the GOP which used to stand for the "Grand Old Party", a holdover I believe from the civil war where many veterans from the North went into politics. and they took that name from the Grand Army of the Republic which was the name most associated with the union army.  The democrats were strong in the south especially after the era of reconstruction and they pushed a lot of Jim Crow Laws to punish the newly freed slaves and keep them in "their place".  Funny how things have turned out.    But the republicans are associated with the party of white males, we are the "Scrooge" party because we talk about fiscal responsibility, debt, and paying your own way.  Such talk is a killjoy for a lot of people because they have gotten used to the "free stuff" and talk of budgets, fiscal restraints and other things makes them fear for "their goodies" and they act in the predictable manner of voting for the democrats to keep the stuff coming.  The idea of running out of money they can't grasp, their attitude is "well take it from the rich bastards, they got rich by screwing somebody over, so somebody needs to screw them over" and your friendly democrat politician step forward to do the job as long as you vote for them.  This is how we got 17 trillion dollars in debt. and I don't see the train slowing down. 

    I don't know what will happen when the train finally derails, I do know that when it does, it will be very messy and a lot of people will be in the street rioting and burning.  What kind of America will my son inherit?  Will he go through his life being nothing but a wage slave and a prole to the government and the elitist?  Will any dreams he have get crushed because he can't follow them because he will inherit a crushing debt and no way out? and be stuck in a country that used to be known as the "Land of the free" and is now known as the land of entitlements and government intrusion?.  What will it take to reverse the course that has been set?  Any course corrections will involve pain and I don't think we as a society is capable assuming that burden.  Will we go into the dustpan of history like Greeks and Romans?  Will the next society that tries the same thing, will they learn from our mistakes and not repeat them?   I don't know...we knew what the Greeks and the Romans did and we would up repeating the same mistakes anyway.  Our founders knew, they were very educated and they had thought they had solved the problem and they did, we did well the first 100+ years, then it changed at the turn of the last century with the advent of Wilson and the progressive movement.  I keep on  thinking that we as a society had squandered our birthright.  There were people here and there that tried to warn the others what was coming, but were called "racist" and "haters" by the uninformed voters,

   All they saw was the gleaming future in the distance that were spun by politicians that promised "Hope" and "Change", they didn't realize the gleaming future was chains for them and their families.  I keep wondering if we can back away from the abyss and save ourselves or will we be destined to walk the desert for 40 years like the Israelite of old, the ones that fled Egypt and had to wander in the deserts of the Sinai until all the ones that were around during the flight from Egypt were gone, and the ones that were left were the ones that only knew freedom and their destiny, not the chains of slavery.  Will we have to do the same?    I don't know.

Friday rants....and other things......and Windows 8 sucks

This is my second attempt to post this rant....after the &^^%$%^&& computer downstairs digested it into 1 and zero's and spit out nothing usable....kinda like the Obama Whitehouse.

The New York Post has a startling report, which could point to yet another scandal brewing for this administration.
Take yourself back to the months right before the 2012 presidential election. In September 2012, the unemployment rate magically dropped from 8.1% to 7.8%. It certainly raised a lot of eye brows, especially since the report included an increase in new jobs we hadn't seen in quite some time.
As it turns out, those numbers may have been fabricated. A reliable source says that the numbers were knowingly manipulated by an employee who faked results of the household survey, which is used by the Census Bureau to tabulate the unemployment rate.
The employee caught faking the results claims that he was told to make up the information by higher-ups at the Census Bureau.
If this report is true, it calls into question the integrity of an entire system that relies on these numbers for our economic outlook and business decisions that effect us all. It would also highlight the desperate measures some will take just to get their guy elected.

 

 I remember back in 2009 when Rahn"Never let a crisis go to waste" Emanual stated that they would be watching and monitoring the census very closely.  I was concerned because I could see Obama and crew "padding" the census in certain areas to increase the democratic congresscritter count in the house.  I had forgotten that the Census also is part of the unemployment numbers that come from the bureau of labor statistics that is a key economic indicator for the economy.  Funny how there was a jump right before the elections.

     I also saw where Harry Reid pushed through the "Nuclear Option" to stop the minority party from interfering with his and the presidents agenda.  This is why the founders did not want "democracy"   we are a constitutional republic....In a democracy it is pure majority rule or rule of the mob.  Using an analogy, it is 3 wolves and 1 sheep voting on dinner.  What is the backdrop is that the D.C. court of appeals has jurisdiction over the rules that are pushed through by the Obama Administration and this is the court that is used to challenge them.  Right now the makeup of the court is 4 liberals and 4 conservatives.  Obama wants to stack the court to permanently change the ideology of the court to rubberstamp his policies.  FDR tried the same thing in 1937 when his "2nd New Deal" was being challenged in court.  Obama knows that he will need a willing congress and a willing court system to continue his plans to "fundamentally change America"

     Today is the 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination and the rumors still abound from it was a CIA hit, to a mob hit, to a hit organized by the KGB.  The 2nd shooter and the "Grassy Knoll" theories abound.   This is what is believed by many people, is that John F Kennedy was killed by this person Lee Harvey Oswald a  self professed Marxist.  What has happened since that the left has somehow managed to link Oswald to the conservative movement.  Saying that the people in the south hated John Kennedy and that Oswald was the first one to get a shot off at the President.   How they were able to link Marxism to the conservative movement is quite a stretch.  With the indoctrination in the schools over several generations it is being done.

I also have heard where the President is trying to push the individual mandate off until after the election....More political chicanery.  Obama needs the house and senate to be totally democrat along with the courts to push through and rubber-stamp the rest of his agenda that he wants to implement before his term of office expires.  Remember the Presidency was always about him and his legacy that he wants to leave.  I have seen where the various talking heads have started calling it " the affordable care act" rather than "Obamacare"  They are trying to distance the Chicago Messiah from his signature legislation because it is soo damaging to the image that they have built up over the past 5 years.  More people are getting their cancellation letters or letters from the insurance companies telling them that they have insurance but under a different plan that is "ACA compliant".  Which has raised their cost significantly.  Not the $2500 saving that was promised by the President during the election season.   The premise of Obamacare is that it needs a lot of young healthy workers feeding in cash to support the system to provide the coverage that the older not so healthy people and the formerly uninsured have to have.  This is basically in a nutshell a vast income redistribution system and the pisser is that the young overwhelmingly supported Obama and they got screwed.....unless they can hide on their parents insurance until age 26.

           The problem is that once they leave their parents basement and their insurance policies, the future looks bleak for the younger people.  Their job prospects are not near as good as the older generation, and they have a lot of debt and unfunded liabilities that they will have to deal with.  I am afraid for the country that my son will inherit.  Several generations of politicians have spent money the country didn't have to fund their reelection campaigns  by promising the "Gimme Generation "because it is all about them keeping the power that they have accumulated over 20 years of  "public service"   Makes you wonder how Pelosi and Reid and many others happen to be millionaires despite only having a $175,000 yearly salary.     Now the young will pay the price for their lack of vision because they were too wrapped in "Hope and Change".  to see past the snake oil salesman that was peddling the latest and greatest in socialism.

     This rant has been building up for several days and I finally got it on the computer.....Hopefully. I can post it.  

Voters Remorse and Obamacare

I pulled this stuff off several sources including the LA times, the NY Post, Drudge Report and other places.   Obamacare was never intended to be an insurance program, it is designed to control the populace.  The people that pushed this pile of crap on us made sure that they are exempt from the laws and penalties of Obunglercare.  The bad thing is that I don't know if it can be repealed if the republicans are able to get the presidency and both chambers of congress.  Quite a few people believe that this is a massive attempt to kill the middle class, have only the elitist and the poor since they will be depending on the government for benefits, it will guarentee democrat control for generations until the whole system collapses and a democratic based dictatorship starts up since the democrats already believe that they know what is best for you, to get a dictatorship at the end with them in control isn't much a stretch.
     The middle class is what made America unique in the world, other countries had rich and poor, no middle ground, basically the rulers and the serfs.  The middle class is what took power away from the elitist, check out European history and see what it did to the rule of the kings and barons.
     This program is designed to bankrupt the middle class kinda like what Stalin did to the kulaks in Russia in the 30's, the Kulaks were the landowning peasantry and they had the rule of law to an extent, well the era of the strongman or Stalin wiped them out, Stalin killed millions on engineered famine and cost controls,  He basically seized the wealth of the Kulaks to finance the heavy industry that the Communist loved.
     Think about it, the rich have their own program and the poor get subsidized, whereas the middle class pay for all the increases out of their own pocket.  The middle class will bear the brunt of Obamacare.  The government wants more people to depend on them for basic needs, easier to control a dependent population.

New York doctors are treating ObamaCare like the plague, a new survey reveals.
A poll conducted by the New York State Medical Society finds that 44 percent of MDs said they are not participating in the nation’s new health-care plan.
Another 33 percent say they’re still not sure whether to become ObamaCare providers.
Only 23 percent of the 409 physicians queried said they’re taking patients who signed up through health exchanges.
“This is so poorly designed that a lot of doctors are afraid to participate,” said Dr. Sam Unterricht, president of the 29,000-member organization. “There’s a lot of resistance. Doctors don’t know what they’re going to get paid.”
Three out of four doctors who are participating in the program said they “had to participate” because of existing contractual obligations with an insurer or medical provider, not because they wanted to.
Only one in four “affirmatively” chose to sign up for the exchanges.
Nearly eight in 10 — 77 percent — said they had not been given a fee schedule to show much they’ll get paid if they sign up.
The survey invited doctors to anonymously share opinions about the new health care law, and many took time out of their busy days to vent.
“Obama Care wants to start right away, but who see all these new patients???? Not me,” e-mailed one doc.
Another said, “I plan to retire if this disaster is implemented. This is a train wreck.”
“I refuse to participate in the exchange plans! I am completely opposed to this new law,” said a third respondent.
One doctor recycled the mantra used to attack addictions: “The solution is simple: Just say no.”
One physician was so disgusted, he threatened to taken only cash patients going forward.
“I am seriously considering opting out of all insurance plans including Medicare because of [ObamaCare].”
Some physicians said the pressure on insurance carriers to control costs is leading to rationed care.
“OBAMACARE is a disaster. I have already seen denial of medication, denial of referrals,” one doc said.
And they worry that stingy payments for medical services offered by insurers could put some doctors out of business and force others into retirement.
“Any doctor who accepts the exchange is just a bad businessman/woman. Pays terrible,” argued one doctor.
Said another MD, “Can’t imagine any doctors would be willing to work for so little money? All doctors should boycott.”
Doctors complained they’ve gotten the shaft for years even before ObamaCare.

Photo: AP/Charles Dharapak

“She said, ‘I was all for ObamaCare until I found out I was paying for it.’ ”
— The president of Anthem Blue Cross in California,
, talking about a woman who wrote the insurance company to complain about a 50 percent hike in her plan because of ObamaCare

“I get screwed from insurance companies already. I refuse to get screwed any longer,” one doctor said.
Others said they don’t have enough information to make an informed choice.
“This is a joke. We are flying blind,” said one doctor.

WASHINGTON — The White House finally admitted Monday that President Obama is breaking his promise that if you like your health insurance, you can keep it under ObamaCare.
“It’s true that there are existing health-care plans on the individual market that don’t meet those minimum standards and therefore do not qualify for the Affordable Care Act,” said White House spokesman Jay Carney, referring to plans nixed under the sweeping new law.
NBC News reported Monday that sources deeply involved in ObamaCare concede that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually can expect to have coverage canceled in the next year.
One expert said the figure could be as high as 80 percent.
Obama administration officials knew when the regulations were written in 2010 that 40 to 67 percent of consumers on the individual market would lose coverage, NBC said.
Carney insisted Monday that only “substandard” plans would be yanked under ObamaCare.
“There are some that can be grandfathered if people want to keep insurance that is substandard,” Carney added.
“What is also true: Americans who have insurance on the existing individual market will now have numerous options available to them, and six out of 10 will pay less than $100 per month in premiums for better insurance.”
Obama has repeatedly pledged that his overhaul of the health-care system wouldn’t deprive Americans of their current insurance plans or doctors.
“We will keep this promise to the American people. If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health-care plan, you will be able to keep your health-care plan. Period,” he declared on June 15, 2009.
The admission that some will, in fact, lose the plans they’ve got comes amid mounting ObamaCare headaches, including a day-long crash of the glitch-plagued Web sites where Americans are supposed to sign up for mandatory health-insurance plans.
What’s more, a growing number of consumers are shocked to discover that the law has caused them to get hit with massive premium increases, lose their doctor or simply get dropped by their insurance company.
Elderly New Yorkers were left reeling when they received notices that insurance companies were booting their doctors from the popular Medicare Advantage program because of ObamaCare, The Post recently revealed.
“Obama had said I could keep my doctor. Now they’re doing away with my doctor. They kicked him out! After 20 years, that’s not right,” said Alfred Gargiulio, who has cerebral palsy and has been seeing the same doctor in Brooklyn since 1993.
Nearly 900,000 elderly New Yorkers are enrolled in Advantage plans, which are Medicare HMOs run by private insurers.
Other New Yorkers were floored when they learned they would have to pay 100 percent of the bill if they used a doctor outside their plan’s network — a harsh penalty not imposed by most plans before ObamaCare.

The ObamaCare pain is throbbing in other states, as well.
In Florida, at least 300,000 people have lost health coverage. And just one insurer in California, Kaiser Permanente, canceled policies for 150,000 people, CBS News reported.
HealthCare.gov, the online federal exchange, crashed before dawn Sunday and didn’t come back online until 7 a.m. Monday.
The outage affected not just the 36 Web sites run by the federal government, but also the 14 sites run by states.
The crash occurred about a week after the administration promised a “tech surge” of the nation’s best computer geeks to fix glitches that have hobbled the Web site since its Oct. 1 launch.
Officials said the site would be fixed by the end of November.
The Department of Health and Human Services blamed the latest crash on an outage of a data-service hub run by Verizon Communication’s Terremark unit.
Other glitches persisted, such as an agonizingly long wait for people trying to set up an account on the Web sites.
“We are committed 24/7 to having our team dedicated to putting those fixes in place and moving forward,” said Julie Bataille, a spokeswoman for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which runs HealthCare.gov.
     

   
    
Insurance companies aren't sending out cancellation letters, they're helping people "transition" into Obamacare, according to a top Democrat.
"If [the companies] changed [the insurance plans] then they have to notify the people who have to have the opportunity to have another policy," said House Ways and Means Committee ranking member Sander Levin, D-Mich.
In fact, according to Levin, the "so-called cancellation notices" merely "help people transition to a new policy."
Levin cited comments made by Florida Blue CEO Patrick Geraghty, the insurance company executive who originally floated the "transitioning" talking point on Sunday's Meet the Press.
"We're not cutting people, we're actually transitioning people," Geraghty told NBC's David Gregory. "What we've been doing is informing folks that their plan doesn't meet the test of the essential health benefits, therefore they have a choice of many options that we make available through the exchange."
Geraghty's argument may exonerate Florida Blue, but the fig leaf doesn't cover Obamacare nearly as well as Levin suggested, given that "the test of the essential health benefits" comes from Obamacare and invalidated the previously acceptable insurance policies.

    
There's no doubt congressional investigators have their hands full probing allegations the Internal Revenue Service targeted conservative nonprofit groups. But now a different IRS scandal -- involving the chronic, ongoing, mind-bogglingly wasteful mismanagement of a popular tax credit program -- demands Congress' attention because it has taken on new importance with the arrival of Obamacare.
The program is the Earned Income Tax Credit, through which the federal government gives out between $60 billion and $70 billion to low-income working Americans each year. It's known as a "refundable" tax credit, but it is basically a transfer payment, in which the IRS sends a check — perhaps even $5,000 every year — to workers who have little or no tax liability.
The problem is, the IRS does little to determine whether recipients actually qualify for the money. A recent report by the IRS inspector general says the agency has given out somewhere between $110 billion and $132 billion in improper Earned Income Tax Credit payments in the last decade. In that time period, between 21 and 30 percent of tax credit payments went to people who didn't qualify for them.

That is bad enough. But what infuriates lawmakers is that the IRS refuses to do anything about it. Agency officials told the inspector general they couldn't fix the problem because the tax credit program is very complicated, and also because they are afraid vigorous enforcement would discourage legitimately qualified recipients from applying for credits. And the IRS is not only not working to reduce improper payments, it is refusing to report those payments to Congress as required. The bottom line, in the words of inspector general Russell George: "The IRS is unlikely to achieve any significant reduction in Earned Income Tax Credit improper payments."
Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, has heard that before. "The IRS has repeatedly ignored the fraud and abuse in the Earned Income Tax Credit program, which has already cost Americans over $100 billion," Camp said in a statement Monday. "Americans should be confident that their tax dollars are being used properly, but that confidence has been shattered by the blatant disregard this agency has shown for monitoring refundable tax credits and better protecting taxpayers."
The flow of money has continued despite the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act, which Congress passed and President Obama signed in 2010. The law "requires agencies to achieve an improper payment rate of 10 percent or less for each high-risk program," says a recent compilation of IRS reports prepared by the Ways and Means Committee. "The Earned Income Tax Credit's improper payment rate has been above 20 percent since 2003."
And now comes Obamacare. In the new national health care scheme, the IRS will do basically what it does with the Earned Income Tax Credit: It will determine Americans' eligibility for subsidies, to be paid in the form of tax credits, and then hand those tax credits out. And that has lawmakers concerned.
"Considering the IRS’ failure to address the Earned Income Tax Credit problem," says Camp, "there is no reason to think the agency will somehow do a better job administering the refundable tax credits included in Obamacare."
Indeed, it is easy to imagine the IRS arguing that it simply cannot prevent improper Obamacare tax credits because the health system is so complicated and because it does not want to discourage legitimately qualified Americans from receiving health care subsidies. If the fraud level is anything like the Earned Income Tax Credit program, improper Obamacare payments could soar into the hundreds of billions of dollars.
And what will Congress do about it? Maybe not much. Hill sources say the Ways and Means Committee is "evaluating" the latest tax credit figures and might possibly schedule a hearing. But one source adds, "We have brought this up with IRS officials in the past, but without much impact, as they tend to talk but not act."
So doesn't Congress have anything to say about that? If the IRS thumbs its nose at lawmakers, do lawmakers have to take it? Of course not. Congress has broad powers to oversee federal agencies; if lawmakers wanted, they could knock some heads and get the IRS' attention.
Whether Congress will exercise that power is another question altogether. It certainly hasn't in the past. But with the arrival of Obamacare, the question of improper payments by the IRS, already an ongoing scandal, might soar to a new level, finally demanding action.

Dammm, I hate being right....

  Well I was riding around doing errands and I was listening to the news today and I hear "Dear Leader" say that any negotiations with the GOP will have to have no stipulations, he wants to have a clean slate budget passed and he also want the debt ceiling raised BEFORE he is willing to talk to the GOP.   Damm, I hate being right, I figured the intransigence was due to the debt ceiling, so the FEDGOV can borrow more money to keep the bennies flowing to the looter class so they can expand it and stay in power.  I talked about it last Friday.  Even the lamestream media is starting to notice the strident tones coming from the White House,  and the total unwillingness of the president to want to talk to congress, he is acting imperial and they are starting to notice that.  Not enough cracks are in the facade to break the total support they have for him.     The affordable care act has started off to a rough start, and many people that actually are trying to use the exchange are discovering that the system is crashing due to many incompatibility issues and plugins that it is using.  I have heard guestimates of 6 months to fix all the problems. 

      That isn't all, they are finding out that all the information that they are entering is freely available to all facets of the government, that there is no expectation of privacy and there have had sites hacked and peoples personal information stolen.   Also people have started getting their adjusted insurance in the mail the new insurance that is in compliance with Obunglercare:   Here is an excerpt:
    

Cindy Vinson and Tom Waschura are big believers in the Affordable Care Act. They vote independent and are proud to say they helped elect and re-elect President Barack Obama.
Yet, like many other Bay Area residents who pay for their own medical insurance, they were floored last week when they opened their bills: Their policies were being replaced with pricier plans that conform to all the requirements of the new health care law.

They voted for Obungler and Obunglercare and now they are getting just what they deserve. Ain't Schadenfreude a bitch

Vinson, of San Jose, will pay $1,800 more a year for an individual policy, while Waschura, of Portola Valley, will cough up almost $10,000 more for insurance for his family of four.

The Messiah said that if people like their policies and their insurance companies...they can keep them....Yeah Right...
…

I was laughing at Boehner — until the mail came today,”
Waschura said, referring to House Speaker John Boehner, who is leading the Republican charge to defund Obamacare.
“I really don’t like the Republican tactics, but at least now I can understand why they are so pissed about this. When you take $10,000 out of my family’s pocket each year, that’s otherwise disposable income or retirement savings that will not be going into our local economy.”

 "Welcome to the Party Pal..."

The Republicans are trying to help you, you clueless idiots. They told you this law would be a disaster, but you believed all the bullshit Obungler, ex-Speaker Nancy "You have to pass it to see what is in it", and Harry the ghoul  were pushing and you voted for this disaster. You voted to screw yourselves.  You voted against your economic interest in the interest of "fairness" and Diversity....and it now bit you in the ass...

“Of course, I want people to have health care,” Vinson said. “I just didn’t realize I would be the one who was going to pay for it personally.”

 You can read more at the Link

     I have been told by several liberals   "Well it is the law of the land...so deal with it."  I replied  "Well so was Dredd Scott and 700,000 Americans died fixing that little problem.   You really want to go there again?"

   Now "Dear Leader" is pushing for a blank check on the debt ceiling, and he is totally expecting the establishment GOP to fold and capitulate like the French did in 1940, and for those that don't understand the reference, France had what many experts considered the most powerful modern armed forces in Europe, but Germany had a new way of fighting and the French were divided up with internal division, also a social rot had permeated the culture and many of the French when the time came to fight for their country, they just rolled over, they were mentally beaten by an inferior force but better tactics and leadership.  Now Obungler wants more money to spend,

         I also hear the same place at the Washington mall that was closed by imperial fiat to the average citizen and WWII vets, somehow is open so a  future democrat voters pro amnesty rally can be held today......The double standards are galling and many people still are clueless what is going one.   I am trying to wrap my head around this and I am having a hard time with it.