Last Night’s Politburo Vote in the House

October 17, 2013 in America's Collapse, America's Heritage, Amnesty, Anarchy, Budget, Constitutional, Debt Crisis, Debt Limit, DICTATORSHIP, Economic Deception, Hope and Change, Intimidation, Liberty in Jeopardy, ObamaCare, Obamanation, Patriotism, Police State, Political Deception, President Obama, Progressivism, Socialism, Tea Party, The Stakes for the 2014 Election, United States Constitution

 
The following Roll Call vote took place in spite of the fact that House members were not provided copies to peruse before the vote, even if they requested it. 87  Republican Traitors voted Yea! The means by which this legislation was moved and passed gives new meaning to the word “Treachery”.  The House voted to give Republican Mitch McConnell his $2 Billion Earmark and  voted a  stipend of $174K of our treasure was to  Millionairess Senator Frank  Lautenberg of NJ’s  widow in this purported “Clean CR”. Now that it has passed  we will have a  chance in the weeks aheadto review the entire bill and we will surely find other treacheries like a trick-provision that was added that will require a 2/3 vote  to stop the next Debt Limit increase.This morning the Wall Street Journal in an article by Laura Meckler, Business Voices Frustration With GOP, writes that “In interviews with representatives of companies large and small executives predicted a change in how business would approach politics. They didn’t foresee a new alignment with Democrats but forecast backing challengers to tea-party conservatives in GOP primaries…”

This is just the beginning of a planned blitz creed against Tea Party   Conservatives by the Establishment and their Progressive allies.  We are now joined in a battle,  not only a fight for Conservative values, but for the Survival of our Constitutional Democracy.

As Jeff Kuhner of WRKO in Boston recently stated, America has now become a functional “Dictatorship” under the tutelage  of our “Dear Leader” Barrack Hussein Obama.

And

Lastly, the Wall Street journal today had another front page headline, More Illegal Immigrants As for Asylum, thereby joining   next skirmish in our battle to save our American Way of Life.

Had enough yet?

 

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 113th Congress – 1st Session

 

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 550
(Republicans in roman; Democrats in italic; Independents underlined)

H R 2775      YEA-AND-NAY      16-Oct-2013      10:18 PM
QUESTION:  On Motion to Concur in the Senate Amendments
BILL TITLE: To condition the provision of premium and cost-sharing subsidies under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act upon a certification that a program to verify household income and other qualifications for such subsidies is operational, and for other purposes 

YEAS NAYS PRES NV
REPUBLICAN 87 144 1
DEMOCRATIC 198 2
INDEPENDENT
TOTALS 285 144   3

—- YEAS    285 —

Andrews
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barrow (GA)
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boehner
Bonamici
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brooks (IN)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cárdenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Courtney
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Daines
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Fortenberry
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibson
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Gutiérrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Luján, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Michaud
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
Nunes
O’Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pittenger
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reichert
Ribble
Richmond
Rigell
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stivers
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Webster (FL)
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (IN)

—- NAYS    144 —

Aderholt
Amash
Amodei
Bachmann
Barr
Barton
Bentivolio
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Broun (GA)
Bucshon
Burgess
Campbell
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Culberson
Denham
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith (VA)
Hall
Harris
Hartzler
Hensarling
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
King (IA)
Kingston
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lankford
Latta
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCaul
McClintock
Meadows
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Pearce
Perry
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Reed
Renacci
Rice (SC)
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stockman
Stutzman
Thornberry
Turner
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho

—- NOT VOTING    3 —

McCarthy (NY) Rush Young (FL)

Barack Hussein Obama Settles the Score with S&P

February 5, 2013 in Abuse of Power, Budget, Debt Crisis, Economic Deception, Economy, Obama-Nomics, President Obama, Socialism, The Hope and The Change

S&POn August 5th 2011 in an unprecedented move, the  Standard & Poors Rating Agency lowered the Debt Rating of the United States from AAA to AA+. The lowered rating represented the first downgrade in 70 years and was preceded by numerous warnings to our government that the unprecedented Debt by the Obama Administration was crippling our economy and”..had grown increasingly skeptical that Washington policy makers would make significant progress in reducing the deficit, given the tortured talks over raising the debt ceiling.”

“S&P said the downgrade “reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s medium-term debt dynamics.” It also blamed the weakened “effectiveness, stability, and predictability” of U.S. policy making and political institutions at a time when challenges are mounting. ”

S&P also put the new grade on “negative outlook,” meaning the U.S. has little chance of regaining the top rating in the near term.”

Barack Hussein Obama is now jawboning Congress  for even more fiscally irresponsible  $Trillions in debt to satisfy his lust for a a new Socialist Order in America and this lawsuit appears to be a warning shot across the bow of S&P.

It will also serve as a warning to the other Rating Agencies not to challenge the Obama Administrations  continuing black hole Debt lest they too succumb to the same fate that faces S&P .

[subscribe2]

 

Sandy Provides Congress with a Path Towards Even More Pork Barrel Legislation!

January 15, 2013 in Budget, Congress, Debt Limit, Economic Deception, Economy, Political Deception, Political Incompetence

PorkbarrelJPGWhile the insurance industry reports loses from hurricane  Sandy at about $20B,  NY region Congressmen lament about the pain their constituents are feeling and cast aspersions at an uncaring Republican led House, they forget to mention that the pork filled bill is more than DOUBLE the estimated Losses.

They are using their constituents as a Trojan Horse to hide  yet again,billions in pork to connected contributors. This while we have just concluded the Fiscal Cliff Legislation with No spending cuts and contemplate the Debt Limit!

Sounds to me that Congress is back to their old tricks and don’t give a damnn about their constitutiencies or the debt load to present and future generations.

Insurance Losses from Sandy to be $20 Billion or More

Published January 08, 2013

Dow Jones Newswires

The insurance industry will likely post losses totaling $20 billion or more from Hurricane Sandy, as losses reported so far reached $16 billion to $17 billion, Fitch Ratings said.

That estimate would put the total industry loss just below the high end of the range of the most recent insured losses estimated by third-party catastrophe modelers, the ratings firm said.

Fitch added that the complexity of assessing the losses from such a large and intense storm over such a large area–particularly when evaluating the impacts of flooding and business interruption claims–has created uncertainty in estimating total insurance losses from Sandy. With that in consideration, insurance companies were unable to report credible loss estimates until almost two months after the storm hit on Oct. 29.

Due to the size and nature of Sandy, a larger proportion of losses were incurred from commercial lines versus personal lines, Fitch said. Primary writers with substantial Northeast catastrophe exposures are incurring the most significant losses, with reinsurers taking a more reduced, although still meaningful, share.

Write to Ben Fox Rubin at ben.rubin@dowjones.com

Subscribe to WSJ: http://online.wsj.com?mod=djnwires

 

Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/news/2013/01/08/insurance-losses-from-sandy-to-be-20-billion-or-more/#ixzz2I53g8Sfg

The ‘Europe-ization’ Of America One Step Closer To Europe? Congress Passes Deal To Avert ‘Cliff”

January 2, 2013 in America's Collapse, Anarchy, Bail Out, Budget, Congress, Cooking the Books, Debt Crisis, Economic, Economic Deception, Economy, Fiscal Cliff, Government, Hope and Change, Jobs, Obama-Nomics, Politics

Cut NoneTaxes Are Going Up!! What Congress Past Was To Try To Keep some Taxes The same!!!!
One Step Closer To Europe? Congress Passes Deal To Avert ‘Cliff” – Stuart Varney
Smoking Mirrors There are No Cuts!!!

Here’s The Deal: $1 Spending Cuts For Every $10 In Tax Hikes
Tax And Spend – Deal Cuts $15 Billion, Raises Taxes $620 Billion
Here’s The Deal: $1 Spending Cuts For Every $10 In Tax Hikes – Judge Andrew Napolitano

The Obama Legacy

December 7, 2012 in Budget, Christmas, Obama-Nomics, Political Deception, President Obama, Tax Hike, Taxiation with Representation, Who Is Barack Hussein Obama?

While many Americans are facing a difficult at best or Bleak  at worst financial Christmas Season, President Obama and his entourage will be once again a enjoying a 21 day Hawaiian vacation, at taxpayer expense. The cost to us taxpayers will be well over $20,000,000 or approximately $1,000,000 per day. Meanwhile, while we continue down the path to financial Armageddon, President Obama continues to spend our hard earned confiscated treasure on outrageously decadent vacations. Perhaps we should look on the bright side, it could have spent even more. With all the tax increases coming our way in  2013, he will have more of  our hard earned treasure  to re-distribute for even more lavish $$$ getaways.

 

1.4 BILLION Spent On The Obamas In 2011 – British Taxpayers Only Spent 57.8 Million On The Royal Family

By Michael, on September 27th, 2012

 

While most of America is suffering through one the worst economic downturns in U.S. history, the Obamas are living the high life at your expense.  During 2011, U.S. taxpayers spent an astounding 1.4 billiondollars on the Obamas.  Meanwhile, British taxpayers only spent 57.8 million dollars on the entire royal family.  Does anyone else see something wrong with this picture?  So where did the 1.4 billion dollars go?  That money paid the salaries of their staff members, it paid for their transportation and housing costs, it paid for entertainment and vacations for the Obamas, and $102,000 was even spent on a “dog handler” for the family dog Bo.  In his new book entitled “Presidential Perks Gone Royal: Your Taxes Are Being Used For Obama’s Re-election“, author Robert Keith Gray reveals some absolutely shocking details about the enormous amounts of U.S. taxpayer money that are being spent on the personal needs of the Obamas.  At a time when the U.S. national debt is absolutely exploding this kind of outrageous spending is completely and totally inappropriate, but of course the mainstream media is not going to report on this because they don’t want to do anything to put the Obamas in a bad light this close to the election.

Some of the things that Robert Keith Gray has uncovered are absolutely mind blowing.  The following are a few facts from his new book….

-Never before has so much money been spent on a president and his family during a single year

-The Obamas have the “biggest staff in history at the highest wages ever

-While Obama has been in office, Air Force One has been “running with the frequency of a scheduled air line

-Obama has 469 senior staff working under him, and 226 of them make more than $100,000 a year

-There is always at least one projectionist at the White House 24 hours a day just in case there is someone that wants to watch a movie.

-The “dog handler” for the family dog Bo reportedly makes $102,000 per year and sometimes he is even flown to where the family is vacationing so that he can care for the dog

Are you outraged yet?

When the Obamas are at the White House the expenses are outrageous, but the expenses really kick in to a whole new level when the Obamas go on vacation.

And the Obamas sure do love to go on vacation.

Over one recent 12 month period, Michelle Obama spent 42 days on vacation (and that does not even count Saturdays and Sundays).  The following is an excerpt from a Daily Mail article about the legendary Obama vacations….

The First Lady is believed to have taken 42 days of holiday in the past year, including a $375,000 break in Spain and a four-day ski trip to Vail, Colorado, where she spent $2,000 a night on a suite at the Sebastian hotel.

And the first family’s nine-day stay in Martha’s Vineyard is also proving costly, with rental of the Blue Heron Farm property alone costing an estimated $50,000 a week.

The source continued: ‘Michelle also enjoys drinking expensive booze during her trips. She favours martinis with top-shelf vodka and has a taste for rich sparking wines.

‘The vacations are totally Michelle’s idea. She’s like a junkie. She can’t schedule enough getaways, and she lives from one to the next – all the while sticking it to hardworking Americans.’

As I wrote about the other day, many Americans are working so hard just to survive in this economy that they don’t ever get to take any vacations at all.

But it doesn’t seem to trouble the Obamas that many of their vacation trips cost more than many American workers will make in an entire decade….

The following is from a recent Newsmax article….

A trip to Spain in 2010 by Michelle Obama, family, and staff cost taxpayers $467,585 and a trip by the First Lady and family to South Africa and Botswana last year cost $424,142 for the flight and crew alone, according to Judicial Watch.

Yes, when the family of the president travels it is going to be expensive, but this is ridiculous.

It can even be insanely expensive for the Obamas to take a vacation even if they don’t leave the country.

For example, in 2010 an Obama family vacation to Hawaii ended up costing U.S. taxpayers more than a million dollars.

So how much is too much?

It has been reported that Michelle Obama spent over 10 million dollars of U.S. taxpayer money on vacations during just one recent 12 month period alone.

At a time when there are 46 million Americans on food stamps is this an appropriate amount of U.S. taxpayer money to spend on vacationing?

It seems that Barack Obama does not have his priorities in order.

Barack Obama may not have time to meet with important world leaders such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but he sure always seems to find time to play golf.  In fact, since he has been in the White House Obama has played more than 100 rounds of golf.

A lot of hard working American men have not played that many rounds of golf in their entire lifetimes.

Sadly, the Obamas are not the only ones that are blowing U.S. taxpayer money as if there is no tomorrow.

In a previous article, I detailed how the U.S. Congress is also living the high life at your expense.  The following are a few facts from that article….

-In 2010, the federal government spent $33,387 on the hair care needs of U.S. Senators.

-In 2010, U.S. Senators pulled $72,370 out of the “Senate Restaurant Fund”.

-In 2010, U.S. Senators took $166,673 out of something called the “Senate Gift Shop Revolving Fund”.

-In 2010, an average of $4,005,900 of U.S. taxpayer money was spent on “personal” and “office” expenses per Senator.

-Insider trading is 100% legal for members of Congress, and they refuse to pass a law that would change that.

So why don’t these politicians get voted out?

Well, the truth is that both political parties are deeply corrupt, and both parties have learned that they can buy votes by promising lots of free stuff and benefits to the voters.

I have written previously about how the U.S. government gives out free cell phones and free cell phone minutes each month to welfare recipients.

In the video posted below, a protester outside of a Romney campaign event explains that one of the main reasons why she is going to vote for Obama is because he gave her a free cell phone….

http://youtu.be/tpAOwJvTOio

Meanwhile, our national debt is growing out of control and the middle class is being absolutely crushed by taxes, regulations and the declining economy that Obama is overseeing.

According to one recent survey, 55 percent of all small business owners in America “say they would not start a business today given what they know now and in the current environment.”

The economy is completely and totally falling apart, and yet the Obamas are partying as if it was 1999.  Their attitude seems to be “let them eat cake”.

So what do you think about the crazy amount of money that is being spent on the Obamas every year?  Please feel free to post a comment with your thoughts below….

Be Sociable, Share!

Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on printMore Sharing Services25

Copyright © 2012 The Truth – May all of you be blessed with good work, health and peace – If you came here looking for hope, you just found it.
Powered by WordPress & Atahualpa

The Coming Republican Fiscal Cliff Betrayal

November 29, 2012 in America's Collapse, Bail Out, Budget, Congress, Fiscal Cliff, Freedom, Government, Liberty, Political Deception, Politics, Republicans Vs. Tea Party, Socialism, Tax Hike

Republicans and Taxes

 

False congressional fiscal conservatives begin to reveal their true selves.

Andrew Napolitano | November 29, 2012

 

When President Obama won re-election last month by a larger margin than even his most fervent supporters had expected, though with fewer popular votes than he received in 2008, most commentators initially opined that not much had changed in Washington. The president would remain in the White House for another four years, the Democrats would keep control of the Senate, and the House would stay in Republican hands. Most Republicans re-elected to both houses of Congress had publicly pledged not to vote to raise taxes under any circumstances. And most of those Republicans have adhered to that promise—until now.

RELATED ARTICLES

David Harsanyi| 11.29.12

A. Barton Hinkle| 11.28.12

Ira Stoll| 11.26.12

MORE ARTICLES BYAndrew Napolitano

11.15.12 7:00 am

11.08.12 7:00 am

11.01.12 7:00 am

Over the Thanksgiving weekend, the false congressional fiscal conservatives in the Republican Party began to reveal their true selves. Led by the Republican presidential standard bearer in 2008, Arizona Sen. John McCain, at least a half-dozen Republican members of Congress have renounced their public promises never to vote to raise taxes. In the case ofC Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., Congressman and Senator-elect Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., they had restated their promises, directly or indirectly, as recently as last month during their successful campaigns. Did they blatantly dupe the voters?  Did they genuinely change their minds? Did they ever sincerely accept the pro-freedom anti-tax logic?

The Founders certainly embraced the pro-freedom anti-tax logic, as they gave us a Constitution that barred the federal government from imposing any direct tax on any persons. That was part of the genius of the document. If the feds really needed cash, they’d need to tax the states. If the states were feeling over-taxed, they could block federal taxes in the Senate, where for 135 years senators were chosen by state governments as delegates to the Senate, rather than elected by voters. This procedure, too, was part of the Founders’ genius. It came about in order to assure a place at the federal table for the states, many of which were older than the federal government and all of which retained their sovereignty when they voluntarily joined the union. This procedure for choosing senators was also a check on the growth of the federal government.

Those constitutional provisions were cast aside during the progressive era about 100 years ago, when, during a period of just five years, the Constitution was amended so that the states lost their place at the federal table and Congress could tax incomes, and the feds got a new printing press for cash in the form of the Federal Reserve.

I have described this dreadful time in our history in my new book, Theodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom. They did so by inverting the concept of limited government. With the exception of Abraham Lincoln, every president from George Washington to TR’s predecessor, William McKinley, accepted the truism that the federal government is one of limited powers, and it may only in engage in behavior that is specifically authorized by the Constitution or reasonably inferable therefrom.

Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, who ran against each other and who hated each other, turned this value on its head. They jointly argued that the Constitution does not mean what it says and is not the Supreme Law of the Land as it states. They held that the federal government can do whatever it wishes unless those wishes are expressly prohibited by the Constitution.

For 100 years, the Republican Party resisted the progressive onslaught. As recently as this past election just a few weeks ago, Republicans argued that increased tax revenue, whether from increased tax rates or from decreased tax deductions, effectively moves wealth from the productive sector and delivers it to the consuming sector—which would be the government.

This argument is really one of the basic laws of economics, so why are Republicans now rejecting it? I suspect that they are drunk with power and have concluded that they—just like Obama did—can assure their re-elections, their continued possession of governmental power, if they deliver bigger pieces of the federal pie to the folks back home. Stated differently, they are unwilling to address a system that soon will deliver more in entitlement payments and interest payments on government debt than it collects in revenue by reducing the entitlements, shrinking the government, cutting the debt, returning to the confines of the Constitution and letting hardworking Americans retain what is theirs. Instead, they now want to raise federal taxes.

They would be unwise to try to pull this off—and would be wise to recall recent history. The last Republican president to pledge “Read my lips. NO NEW TAXES” and then violate that promise was dispatched by the voters to a hotel suite in Houston, rather than to four more years in the White House. I bet George Herbert Walker Bush today would stick to his pledge.

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. Judge Napolitano has written seven books on the U.S. Constitution. The most recent isTheodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom.

A Chilling Letter from Proctor & Gamble to Obama

October 17, 2012 in Abuse of Power, America's Collapse, Benghazi Coverup, Budget, censorship, Constitutional, Debt Crisis, DICTATORSHIP, DOJ, Economic Deception, Economy, Election, Energy, Environment, Eric Holder, Events, Food Police, Food Stamp, Foreign Policy, Freedom, Gas Price, Gun Control, Hope and Change, Immigration, Iran's Nuclear Threat, Israel, Liars, Michele obama, Middle East Peace, Middle East War, Nanny State, Obama's America 2016, ObamaCare, Obamanation, Oust Obama, President Obama, Propaganda, Redistribution of Wealth, Shariah Law, Slacker In Chief, Socialist, The Hope and The Change, The Stakes for the 2012 Election, United Nations, United States Constitution, United States Sovereignty, US Military, White House Fraud, You Didn't Build That

 Chilling Letter from Proctor & Gamble to Obama
Who would have thought, and yet many are thinking it.


By Lou Pritchett, Procter & Gamble

                                A LETTER FROM A PROCTER AND GAMBLE EXECUTIVE TO THE PRESIDENT

* THE LAST SENTENCE IS THE MOST CHILLING

Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America ‘s true living legends

– an Acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world’s highest
Rated speakers. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize
Him as the foremost leader in change management.. Lou changed the way
America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to
Be known as “partnering.”

Pritchett rose from soap salesman to Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and Gamble

and over the course of 36 years; made corporate history.

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA 

Dear President Obama: 

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike 
Any of the others, you truly scare me. 

You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you. 

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive 
Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no 
Visible signs of support. 

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth 
Growing up in America and culturally you are not an American. 

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll. 

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus 
Don’t understand it at its core. 

You scare me because you lack humility and ‘class’, always blaming others. 

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned 
Yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to 
Publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.. 

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the ‘blame America ‘ 
Crowd and deliver this message abroad. 

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style 
Country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector. 

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system 
With a government controlled one. 

You scare me because you prefer ‘wind mills’ to responsibly 
Capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves. 

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose 
That lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of 
Living in the world. 

You scare me because you have begun to use ‘extortion’ tactics 
Against certain banks and corporations. 

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from 
Challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals. 

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider 
Opposing points of view from intelligent people. 

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both 
Omnipotent and omniscient. 

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything 
You do. 

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the 
Limbaugh’s, Hannitys, O’Reillys and Becks who offer opposing, 
Conservative points of view. 

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing. 

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will 
Probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years. 

Lou Pritchett 
*
*
This letter was sent to the NY Times but they never acknowledged it.
Big surprise. Since it hit the Internet, however, it has had over
500,000 hits. Keep it going. All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for
good men and women to do nothing.. It’s happening right now.

The CHANGE is here!!

90% of Americans will forward this.

WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH!

MA Dems set to Introduce a Plethora OF New Taxes in 2013 on Top of Expiring Bush Tax Cuts

October 6, 2012 in Budget, Debt Crisis, Deval Patrick, Economic Deception, Economy, Election, MA, The Hope and The Change

Barack Hussein Obama and our nitwit Vice-President Joe Biden , if re-elected , promise to  let the Bush tax cuts expire which will result in increased taxes at every income  level.

What happens to you if the cuts expire? The Tax Foundation has done the math and provides a handy map to show the likely economic impact on people in every state. (For the record, the Tax Foundation describes themselves as, “a nonpartisan tax research group based in Washington, D.C.”)

 

The Five States Facing The Biggest Tax Increases (avg. per household):

  1. Connecticut $5,783
  2. New York $5,542
  3. New Jersey $5030
  4. Massachusetts $4277
  5. California $4242

 

 

Meanwhile, according to a report from the State House News Service our own House Speaker Robert DeLeo, in collaboration with Deval Patrick  is hinting at raising taxes in 2013 in the middle of a recession, in  order to support Taxachusetts’s burgeoning spending pogram. Taking their cue from Barack Hussein Obama, they will likely spring details of their proposals after the election when they and their minions are safely back in office.

On top of the Federal Tax Increases for 2013 and according to the Wall Street Journal a Loss of $4,019 in real Income during the Obama years we are now looking at additional MA State Tax increases as well.  Could there be a stronger reason to help Fiscally Responsible, Small Government Championing, Free Market Conservative candidates this fall?

 

“Flat tax collections in September have left state government trailing budgeted revenue benchmarks by $95 million one quarter of the way into the new fiscal year, according to figures released Wednesday by the Department of Revenue. Collections last month of more than $2.2 billion were up $8 million over September 2011, but were still $32 million shy of the monthly benchmark. Tax collections are up 0.03 percent over the first quarter of fiscal 2013.
Murray and DeLeo over the past few years have embraced the no-new-taxes approach after voting in 2009 to boost the sales tax by 25 percent to 6.25 percent. Though some more liberal Democrats on Beacon Hill have advocated for higher cigarette taxes to pay for health programs, members of the House and Senate from both parties have largely cheered the reluctance of leaders to force votes on new revenue, particularly in an election year.”

House Minority Leader Brad Jones of North Reading on Thursday said DeLeo’s reluctance to rule out tax hikes next year was “disappointing.”

“I will say that I am well aware that numerous discussions have been going on about increased taxes and that obviously members of the majority party don’t want to have those go public until after the election.

 

The 4 October 2012 press release from State House News follows:

 

ON RESISTANCE TO NEW TAXES, DeLEO TAKING WAIT-AND-SEE APPROACH FOR 2013

By Matt Murphy and Mike Deehan

STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE

STATE HOUSE, BOSTON, OCT. 4, 2012….After holding the line on new taxes since 2009, the pledge by legislative leaders to not upset the delicate economic recovery by increasing broad-based taxes or fees on residents and business is showing signs of cracking.

House Speaker Robert DeLeo told the News Service this week he doesn’t yet know if his proscription against new taxes or fees will apply to the 2013 legislative year when the Legislature is expected to address long-term financing of the state’s transportation system and may need to look to new sources of revenue.

DeLeo said he wants “to see where the numbers fall on next year’s budget” and with transportation financing before making a decision on whether to rule tax hikes in or out, a line the Winthrop Democrat has drawn the past several years, and which Democrats have followed, prior to the release of the House budget in April.

“That’s never been a desire of mine to increase taxes. But on the other hand . . . I’m smart enough to know that until you see the figures of what you’re working with, you don’t make any pledges.” DeLeo, the former House budget chief, said after a meeting Tuesday afternoon with UMass officials and local entrepreneurs.

Senate President Therese Murray last year deferred to the House, noting tax bills originate in there, while working to craft the Senate’s spending blueprint for the year that began July 1, though she showed no signs of appetite herself for higher taxes. Through a spokesman, Murray declined comment on the appetite for taxes next session.

Flat tax collections in September have left state government trailing budgeted revenue benchmarks by $95 million one quarter of the way into the new fiscal year, according to figures released Wednesday by the Department of Revenue. Collections last month of more than $2.2 billion were up $8 million over September 2011, but were still $32 million shy of the monthly benchmark. Tax collections are up 0.03 percent over the first quarter of fiscal 2013.

Murray and DeLeo over the past few years have embraced the no-new-taxes approach after voting in 2009 to boost the sales tax by 25 percent to 6.25 percent. Though some more liberal Democrats on Beacon Hill have advocated for higher cigarette taxes to pay for health programs, members of the House and Senate from both parties have largely cheered the reluctance of leaders to force votes on new revenue, particularly in an election year.

House Minority Leader Brad Jones of North Reading on Thursday said DeLeo’s reluctance to rule out tax hikes next year was “disappointing.”

“I will say that I am well aware that numerous discussions have been going on about increased taxes and that obviously members of the majority party don’t want to have those go public until after the election but they are absolutely underway and going on,” Jones said.

DeLeo has used his position over the past few years to thwart proposals by Gov. Deval Patrick to tax candy and soda, raise taxes on cigarettes and expand the scope of the state’s five-cent bottle redemption law, an idea encouraged by some environmentalists to improve recycling rates and generate $20 million in new revenue.

Any new debate over taxes in Massachusetts will also likely play out over a backdrop of the national discussion about how to address the federal debt and deficit, including the looming expiration of tax cuts on Jan.1 that could increase payroll taxes on Massachusetts residents and millions of Americans.

With unemployment at 6.3 percent after having risen moderately over the past two months, legislative leaders like DeLeo, if he wins reelection as anticipated, will be challenged to come up with a justification for new revenue after years of touting their reluctance to raise taxes as a selling point of their fiscal discipline and rationale for new businesses to locate and grow in Massachusetts.

In May, DeLeo published an open letter in the local Menlo Park, California newspaper to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg suggesting the company, and others like it in Silicon Valley, consider expanding in Massachusetts.

“Unlike California, where Governor Brown just announced a $16 Billion budget deficit sure to mean massive cuts in services and increases in government revenues, Massachusetts leaders have passed budget-after-budget on-time and with no new taxes or fees,” DeLeo wrote. “There is no denying California’s strengths, but a lot has changed in Massachusetts in the eight years since Facebook moved out. It’s a place where young workers, start-up companies and innovation entities want to be.”

Jones said that in addition to consideration of raising gas taxes, he has heard mention of raising the state income tax from 5.25 percent to 5.95 percent.

“Unfortunately the Democrats don’t want to have that discussion before the election because they know the public isn’t going to be welcome to it, isn’t going to be open to it. People are still hurting. They’re very apprehensive. We have a fragile economy,” Jones said.

Jones said there is a “reasonable consensus” that some people would like to put more resources into transportation and infrastructure, but said the idea of “going down the tax path is a dangerous one.”

“I think we’re going to be faced with the false choice of, well, we have to raise taxes to do this as opposed to, well, isn’t some of it maybe reprioritizing spending?” Jones said.

Citizens for Limited Taxation earlier this week rolled out endorsements of 40 legislative candidates, including 17 incumbents – all Republicans – who scored well on the group’s issues test and signed a “Taxpayer Protection Pledge” to “oppose and vote against any and all effort to increase taxes.”

Through its political action committee, CLT also gave maximum donations of $500 to many of its endorsees, including candidates challenging Sen. Murray and Reps. Thomas Calter (D-Kingston), Thomas Sannicandro (D-Ashland), Carolyn Dykema (D-Holliston), John Rogers (D-Norwood) and James O’Day (D-West Boylston.

-END-

10/04/2012

Serving the working press since 1910

Obama Administration Breaks Laws Again – Unlawfully indemnifies Contractors with Taxpayer Dollars

October 2, 2012 in Abuse of Power, America's Collapse, Anarchy, Budget, Constitutional, Debt Crisis, DICTATORSHIP, Economic Deception, Economy, Election, Liars, Obamanation, President Obama, The Hope and The Change, White House Fraud

The Washington Post

By , Published: October 1

Defense contractors back off layoff notice threats ahead of sequestration

Several defense contractors on Monday backed off threats to issue layoff notices to employees in coming weeks, a move they had said might be required given the threat of mandatory federal budget cuts in January.

Bethesda-based contracting giant Lockheed Martin and the U.S. arm of Britain’s BAE Systems, which is based in Arlington County, said they would not issue the notices this year. Under the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, or Warn Act, states require advance notice of mass layoffs or facility closures.

The White House issued a memo late last week that directs contractors to follow the guidance of the Labor Department. In a July letter, the department said the Warn Act does not require contractors facing sequestration to send notices to their workers that they could be let go.

In its new guidance, the White House said that if sequestration occurs and an agency terminates or changes a contract that results in a plant closing or mass layoff, the contractors’ liability and litigation costs under the Warn Act would be “allowable costs” covered by the contracting agency.

“The additional guidance offered important new information about the potential timing of DOD actions under sequestration, indicating that DOD anticipates no contract actions on or about 2 January, 2013, and that any action to adjust funding levels on contracts as a result of sequestration would likely not occur for several months after 2 Jan,” Lockheed said in a statement.

Brian Roehrkasse, a spokesman for BAE Systems’ U.S. business, said BAE also will not issue Warn notifications to its employees.

“However, if specific information becomes available that certain company facilities may suffer mass layoffs due to sequestration, we will issue Warn notices at that time as required by law,” he said in an e-mail. “Unless sequestration is avoided, we eventually may have no choice but to issue Warn notices to potentially impacted employees.”

“Your Government Lied to You” – Huckabee

September 23, 2012 in Abuse of Power, America's Collapse, Anarchy, Budget, censorship, Constitutional, Freedom, Media Bias, Middle East War, Obama's America 2016, Oust Obama, Politics, President Obama, Propaganda, radical islam, Shariah Law, Socialist, Terrorism, The Hope and The Change, The Stakes for the 2012 Election, United States Sovereignty

 

The Middle East events of the last two weeks have resulted in such gross negligence by this administration that in their confusion and rush to minimize their collateral damage they gave us a brief glimpse into their corrupt “Machine.” A “Propaganda Machine” that has permeated and been an integral part of Barack Hussein Obama’s regime since his Chicago beginnings.  These past four years have seen the melding of a corrupt Political Machine with a corrupt News Media whose end result has been the largest disinformation campaign ever perpetrated against an American citizenry.  The Obama Administration’s Libyan misinformation campaign has been so blatant that Mike Huckabee, a Protestant Minister, felt compelled to call out and at the same time warn the American people that “Your Government Lied to You”.

Please take our polls on the front page whose purpose is to determine whether we trust various government institutions.