Wednesday, October 31, 2012


US to hit borrowing ceiling at year-end: Treasury
A bank employee checks US currency. The United States will hit its statutory borrowing limit near the end of 2012, just as a new Congress gears up to do battle over the country's huge debt burden and fiscal deficits.
A bank employee checks US currency. The United States will hit its statutory borrowing limit near the end of 2012, just as a new Congress gears up to do battle over the country's huge debt burden and fiscal deficits.
AFP - The United States will hit its statutory borrowing limit near the end of 2012, just as a new Congress gears up to do battle over the country's huge debt burden and fiscal deficits.

The country's current debt is around $16.2 trillion, and continued borrowing needs to finance the budget shortfall will send the government past the fixed $16.39 trillion sometime in the final days of the year.

The limit will be struck between the November 6 presidential and congressional elections and the time when the new Congress is sworn in in early January.

If Republican Mitt Romney defeats President Barack Obama in the White House race, it would also come while Obama serves as a lame duck president before his successor takes office on January 20.

That raises the prospect of a possible political battle spanning both the old, outgoing Congress and a possibly reshaped new legislature, over how to finance the deficit, which hit $1.1 trillion in the fiscal year that just ended.

And it would also come as Republicans and Democrats seek a compromise on an alternative to the "fiscal cliff" crash austerity plan of budget cuts and tax hikes that will be implemented from January 1, threatening to send the country back into recession. (NO QUESTIONS WERE LAID ON THE TABLE DURING THE THREE DEBATES AS TO HOW THIS WOULD BE HANDLED! BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN SOMEONE DIDN'T GET LAID … YUP DID YOU FEEL THE EUPHORIA, THAT WAS RIGHT BETWEEN THE HORSES AND BAYONETS AND BOATS THAT AIRPLANES LAND ON … )

In July 2012 Washington went through a vicious political battle over raising the debt ceiling. In the end, the fight culminated in the poison pill compromise that has become the fiscal cliff trajectory.

Without a timely increase to the ceiling, the Treasury said it would likely be able to take "extraordinary measures" to sustain government spending without adding to the debt into January 2013.

"Treasury has the authority to take certain extraordinary measures to give Congress more time to act to ensure we are able to meet the legal obligations of the United States of America," the department said.

"We continue to expect that these extraordinary measures would provide sufficient 'headroom' under the debt limit to allow the government to continue to meet its obligations until early in 2013."


New Yorkers in fuel scramble as storm-hit pumps dry up

More than half of all gasoline service stations in the New York City area and New Jersey were shut because of depleted fuel supplies and power outages, frustrating attempts to restore normal life, industry officials said.
Reports of long lines, dark stations and empty tanks circulated across the region. Some station owners were unable to pump fuel due to a lack of power, while others quickly ran their tanks dry because of increased demand and logistical problems in delivering fresh supplies. (WELL WHAT ABOUT ELECTRIC CARS?)
The lack of working gasoline stations is likely to compound travel problems in the region, with the New York City subway system down until at least Thursday and overland rail and bus services severely disrupted.
Homeowners and businesses relying on back-up generators during the power cuts, including many Wall Street banks in lower Manhattan, may also run short of fuel.
"I don't have any lights and need this gasoline for my generator," said Abdul Rahim Anwar at a Getty service station in Gowanus, Brooklyn, as he put two full jerry cans into his trunk.
Tempers flared as a queue of at least 30 cars spilled down the street, with drivers blaring horns, shouting and getting out of their cars. Pump attendant Nadim Amid said the station had already run out of regular gasoline and only had a tiny amount of super unleaded and diesel left.
One driver, a doctor who asked not to be named, said she had driven all the way across New York City from New Jersey, where half of all businesses and homes are still without power. More than 80 percent of filling stations in the state were unable to sell gasoline as of Wednesday morning, said Sal Risalvato, head of the New Jersey Gasoline, Convenience, Automotive Association.
"It's going to be an ugly few days until we can see both power and supplies restored," Risalvato said.
Gasoline stations on New York's Long Island and the city borough of Staten Island also reported shortages, while lengthy lines were seen in the borough of Queens. Commuters may see higher prices at the pumps in the coming days, though oil traders said that with so many people unable to buy gasoline it may eventually lead to a surplus in the region.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency temporarily waived clean gasoline requirements for 16 states on the eastern seaboard through November 20 in a bid to help ease the supply crunch.


Kevin Beyer, president of the Long Island Gasoline Retailers Association in Smithtown, New York, estimated that less than half of all stations were able to sell fuel Wednesday morning.
"I have gas in the ground but no power. For many others they're facing the opposite problem, with power but no gasoline. For the few stations that are lucky enough to have both they've got huge lines out front," Beyer said.
"With the kind of demand they're seeing they're likely to run out of gasoline within the next 24 hours."
Beyer estimated it could take until the end of next week to get all fuel stations operating again.
New York State and New Jersey fuel retailers sell a combined average of 26 million gallons (620,000 barrels) of gasoline a day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
The problem is not a severe shortage of gasoline in the Northeast, but widespread power outages and the storm-related logistical problems of getting the fuel from refineries and terminals to those who need it.
Jenn Hibbs, an account director at marketing firm Marden-Kane Inc in Garden City, Long Island, said there was only one gasoline station open within 10 miles of her house. Friends were sharing tips on Facebook about where they could get fuel, but two lines for gas leading to the service station were both over half a mile long.
"It's making people think about whether they can get to work, whether they have enough gas in the tank to get there and back," Hibbs said.
A line of cars at a gas station on Route 1 and 9 South in Linden, New Jersey, at one point stretched at least two miles.
On the New York Mercantile Exchange, oil traders bid up benchmark gasoline future contracts for November delivery, which expire on Wednesday, by as much as 20 cents a gallon during the trading session, before they fell back to settle just 3 cents higher at $2.76.
In Connecticut, the Gasoline & Automotive Service Dealers Of America said around 15 percent of gasoline stations were shut and warned drivers could see higher prices in the coming days.
Four of the region's six oil refineries were back to full production or increasing run rates on Wednesday. The second-largest - the Bayway plant in New Jersey - was still idle after flooding damage that traders fear could delay its return to full service. Key import terminals were also shut.
"Most of the problems are at the service station level with power and transportation to the stations," said Ralph Bombardiere, head of the New York State Association of Service Stations and Repair Shops.
Gasoline inventories in the Mid-Atlantic region were 16 percent below last year's level before the storm, but were enough to cover almost 23 days of total demand.
Power is slowly being restored. The Department of Energy said on Wednesday afternoon that 51 percent of homes and businesses in New Jersey were still without power. That was down from around 65 percent on Tuesday.
(Additional reporting by Robert Gibbons, Matthew Robinson, Janet McGurty and Edward McAllister; Editing by Claudia Parsons, Grant McCool, Dan Grebler and Tim Dobbyn)


New ADP Count Slashes Job Creation for September

Published: Wednesday, 31 Oct 2012 
By: Jeff Cox Senior Writer

Revisions to the way payroll data firm ADP counts private sector job creation have resulted in a sharp drop in the September employment count.

ADP's new calculations put the monthly job creation at just 88,2000, down from the 162,000 the firm originally reported earlier this month.

Muslim scholars teach that Muslims should generally be truthful to each other, unless the purpose of lying is to "smooth over differences. 
There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause Islam - in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them. 
Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers in order to defeat them. The two forms are:
Taqiyya - Saying something that isn't true.
Kitman - Lying by omission. An example would be when Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone kills "it shall be as if he had killed all mankind") while neglecting to mention that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of "corruption" and "mischief." 

The firm recently has entered into a partnership with Moody's Analytics that will change the way the private payroll count is calculated.
ADP will announce its October count on Thursday, with the Labor Department to follow on Friday.

ADP is expected to announce a further revision to the September count along with its October totals.

In announcing the partnership Oct. 24, the two firms said the partnership will help align the private sector job count with the Labor numbers.

At the same time, the new reports will provide a more detailed breakdown of the numbers while expanding the number of businesses that participate.

ADP occasionally has come under criticism for releasing data that is often widely disparate with the government's final count.

© 2012


Take a few minutes to read this -- Subject:  Washington Post and Newsweek hit Obama


Finally, the Washington Post and Newsweek speak out about Obama. This is timely and tough. As many of you know, the Washington Post and Newsweek have a reputation for being extremely liberal. The fact that their editors saw fit to print the following article about Obama and the one that appears in the latest Newsweek, makes this a truly amazing event, and a news story in and of itself. At last, the truth about our President and his agenda are starting to trickle through the “protective wall” built around him by the liberal media.


I Too Have Become Disillusioned.
By Matt Patterson

(Columnist - Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner)

Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?

Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer;" a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.

He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?

Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama
was given a pass - held to a lower standard - because of the color of his skin.

Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon - affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily
to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.

Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow.  Liberals don't care if these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin - that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn't racism, then nothing is.

And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois ; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the  contrary.

What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people - conservatives included - ought now to be deeply embarrassed.

The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clich├ęs, and that's when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth - it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.

And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise
his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.

"In God We Trust"

   "United We Stand - Divided We Fall"
         "One Nation Under God"
           "God Bless America "

Mike Osip

Tuesday, October 30, 2012


New Obama slogan has long ties to Marxism, socialism

By Victor Morton - The Washington Times

The Obama campaign apparently didn't look backwards into history when selecting its new campaign slogan, "Forward" — a word with a long and rich association with European Marxism.
Many Communist and radical publications and entities throughout the 19th and 20th centuries had the name "Forward!" or its foreign cognates. Wikipedia has an entire section called "Forward (generic name of socialist publications)."
"The name Forward carries a special meaning in socialist political terminology. It has been frequently used as a name for socialist, communist and other left-wing newspapers and publications," the online encyclopedia explains.
The slogan "Forward!" reflected the conviction of European Marxists and radicals that their movements reflected the march of history, which would move forward past capitalism and into socialism and communism.

The Obama campaign released its new campaign slogan Monday in a 7-minute video. The title card has simply the word "Forward" with the "O" having the familiar Obama logo from 2008. It will be played at rallies this weekend that mark the Obama re-election campaign's official beginning.

There have been at least two radical-left publications named "Vorwaerts" (the German word for "Forward"). One was the daily newspaper of the Social Democratic Party of Germany whose writers included Friedrich Engels and Leon Trotsky. It still publishes as the organ of Germany's SDP, though that party has changed considerably since World War II. Another was the 1844 biweekly reader of the Communist League. Karl Marx, Engels and Mikhail Bakunin are among the names associated with that publication.

East Germany named its Army soccer club ASK Vorwaerts Berlin (later FC Vorwaerts Frankfort).

Vladimir Lenin founded the publication "Vpered" (the Russian word for "forward") in 1905. Soviet propaganda film-maker Dziga Vertov made a documentary whose title is sometimes translated as "Forward, Soviet" (though also and more literally as "Stride, Soviet").

Conservative critics of the Obama administration have noted numerous ties to radicalism and socialists throughout Mr. Obama's history, from his first political campaign being launched from the living room of two former Weather Underground members, to appointing as green jobs czar Van Jones, a self-described communist.

Read more: New Obama slogan has long ties to Marxism, socialism - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter


White House assumes storm victims have Internet

Despite the heightened expectation of widespread power and cable television failures, everyone from the president to local newscasters seem to expect the public to rely entirely on the Internet and their TVs for vital news and instructions. ...

A call to FEMA’s news desk, however, found even they didn’t have any non-Internet information readily available beyond suggestions that people call 911 in an emergency.

Read more:


President Barack Obama could lose his home state of Illinois in November, a new poll shows.
A poll conducted by Illinois-based pollster and political strategist Michael McKeon found Obama leading Republican Mitt Romney by 49 percent to 37 percent in Cook County, the home of Chicago. That puts him ahead by a far thinner margin than expected in a county he should be winning handsomely.
Cook is the most Democratic leaning county in the state. It is also the most populous.
Those numbers do not bode well for the president.
“He has to come out of Cook County with a big lead or he’s gonna have problems downstate,” explained McKeon, who said that based on the numbers he had seen, Obama polled only in the forties in downstate Illinois.
“It’s not like his policies are very popular downstate,” McKeon said. “He’s viewed as more part of Chicago than he is part of Illinois.”
According to the poll, which surveyed 629 registered voters last week, Obama’s problems are not in Chicago proper, but in suburban Cook County.
In the city of Chicago itself, he retains a 60-29 lead over Romney. But the Republican challenger leads 45-38 in the surrounding areas. Across the county as a whole, Romney leads 43-31 among independent voters, a crucial voting bloc. Romney also holds a 44-38 lead among male voters, and a 53-40 lead among white voters.
Illinois is not considered a swing state by any means; it is seen as solidly blue, and has been for the past two election cycles. But McKeon pointed to the 2010 gubernatorial race when Republican Bill Brady came within a single percentage point of now-Gov. Pat Quinn because Brady won most of the downstate counties. That is a feat Romney could repeat this year, leaving Obama vulnerable if he cannot expand his lead in Cook County.

Read more:

Monday, October 29, 2012


Barack Obama's presidency 'has not helped cause of black people in US'

Far from ushering in a new post-racial age, say studies, historic election did not lead to advancement of civil rightsl
Barack Obama election
Barack Obama supporters celebrate at his presidential win in 2008. Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty Images
Barack Obama's election win in 2008 was hailed by some as ushering in a post-racial age in the US. However, recent books and surveys have shown that black American progress has often either halted or declined.

From increasing segregation in the workplace, to hundreds of thousands of young black men in prison, to stuttering levels of black voting and a black middle class sent into reverse by the recession, the election of America's first black president – and his fight to win a second term – seem to have had little impact on any of this.

Some of the most shocking revelations are detailed in a new book calledInvisible Men by sociology professor Becky Pettit from the University of Washington. Pettit realised that many surveys conducted by government agencies exclude people in the prison population from their research and findings. When Pettit added them in, she found that it dramatically altered the picture of the status of black America, as the number of black Americans in jail is disproportionately high. About half of the 2.3 million people in US prisons are black.

The results of Pettit's work, some argue, have exploded what she calls "the myth of black progress" since the civil rights era of the 1960s.

"This work dispels the notion that we live in a post-racial society. It not only deconstructs the myth of black progress, but also the myth of American progress overall," said Inimai Chettiar, a director at the Brennan Centre for Justice at New York University's school of law.

For example, adding the prison population to the voting statistics shows that black voter turnout in 2008 – believed to have been a historic high as Obama was elected – was overestimated by 13%. A greater percentage of young black high school dropouts turned out to vote in the 1980 election, when Jimmy Carter lost to Ronald Reagan, than when Obama beat John McCain in 2008.

When prisoners are included, the employment rate for young black men who have dropped out of school sinks from an already low 42% to 26%. Far from advancing over the past half-century since Martin Luther King championed the civil rights struggle, the picture being painted is one of troubled decline. "We have developed a distorted view of how black Americans are faring in our society," Pettit said. The reason given for this in Pettit's work is the high rate of incarceration of black Americans. The rate is so steep that government estimates suggest that eventually one in three of all black male adults will spend some time in prison if current trends continue.

In the 1930s, blacks were three times more likely to be incarcerated than whites, but the figure now is seven times more likely. Some experts put this down to the "war on drugs", which has affected black communities far more than others, seeing increased arrests of blacks, often for non-violent offences. "There is no evidence that drug use is dramatically different by race or ethnicity, but the pattern of arrests is very different," said Ernest Drucker, author of a recent book, A Plague of Prisons.

The recession, too, has taken a huge swipe at what gains the black middle class may have made. A swath of recent data has revealed a major reverse. The Pew Charitable Trust showed that 68% of middle-class Americans are predicted to see their economic status decline in the next generation. The National Urban League civil rights group also showed that from 2005 to 2009 the average black household's wealth fell by more than half. Nor has economic decline stopped. From 2009 to 2012, median annual household income for blacks fell by 11.1%, compared with a drop of 5.2% for whites and 4.1% for Hispanics. The current black unemployment rate of 14% is roughly double that of the white jobless. However, it is not just recent economic turmoil that has dampened black progress in America.

Another new book, Documenting Desegregation, has examined racial equality in the workplace since the 1960s and found that progress largely halted in 1980 and has gone into reverse in some industries since then. Racial segregation between white and black men is increasing in one in six industries.

In fact, far from painting a picture of black progress, the book's examination of more than five million private sector workplaces revealed that it is white men who have gained access to managerial jobs since the 1960s.

Documenting Desegregation has a grim but simple conclusion that stands in stark contrast to the general perception of a racial breakthrough that accompanied the election of Obama as the country's first black president. "The United States is no longer on the path to equal employment opportunity," it says.


Obama Administration: First to Fund Organization Tied to Cop-Killing Terrorist Group

We’re continuing a list of Obama’s “firsts” as President. There will be one more, since this takes up so much time and effort especially when time and effort is now needed to show how Obama covered up the September 11, 2012 terrorists attack upon United States Citizens and which shows that Al Qaeda is now growing, not running scared as Obama would like for us to believe, the more one knows about Obama, the more he displays his Marxist/Communist upbringing!

Obama is the first President to have his administration fund an organization tied to the cop-killing terrorist group, the Weather Underground.

Now just how could this happen? Consider the fact that Bill Ayers had a fund raising party at his house for his neighbor and dear friend, Obama! Just how many other Presidents could be found that have done such an outrageous and very close to treasonous act? We will not write a huge explanation why this should never happen mainly due to the fact that we wish to cover the remaining 32 Firsts by Obama or any other President in the history of our great nation, sorry, but Obama does not think our nation should be that “great’ so let us now look at the rest of his demeaning and sometimes scary Firsts!

Obama is the first President to publicly announce an enemies list (consisting of his opponents campaign contributors; and to use the instrumentalities of government to punish those on the list).

I guess if I keep writing about all the bad stuff this Liar, Coward, and heaven knows what else, will place my name on his list and if he wins in November, I may get picked up and sent to one of his camps to re-educate me into the Socialists ideology!

Obama is the first President to attempt to block legally-required 60-day layoff notices by government contractors due to his own cuts to defense spending, because the notices would occur before the election.

We have seen a bit of this on the news lately where Obama told the companies to ignore, let me repeat that, ignore the law and not hand out any layoff slips and the Government, meaning the taxpayers, will pick up any law suits filed against the company for not abiding with the LAW! Now just how many former Presidents, from any party has ever told anyone to ignore the Law as it is written? And now he wants another term, I would think he would not even tell the companies that if he were re-elected since he would then claim himself as dictator and no laws would be in affect!

Obama is the first President to intentionally disable credit card security measures(in order to allow over-the-limit donations, foreign contributions and other illegal fundraising measures)

Let me see here, to “allow over the limit and foreign and other illegal fundraising measures”? What is going on here? Why are Congress and the rest of Washington just allowing Obama to do, as he wants? He is not a dictator, yet.

Obama is the first President to send 80 percent of a $16 billion program (green energy) to his campaign bundlers and contributors, leaving only 20% to those who did not contribute.

Is it a big surprise to learn that nearly everyone of these companies have either failed or they are in the process of failing? How could anyone do this to our nation unless they had intended to destroy our nation to give rise to a more Marxist ideology, remember that it was Obama whom while at Occidental in California did in fact say he wanted a revolution so he could “change” the United States. Now why would an elected President even consider changing the United States?

Obama is the first President to propose an executive order demanding companies disclose their political contributions to bid on government contracts.

Now just why was this done? Could it be that if these companies did not contribute to the Obama camp, then they would not be chosen or maybe even allowed to bid on Government Contracts? Does this sound like a proper and “open” administration to anyone? It is like Obama does not want anyone to openly bid on any contract that did not contribute to his campaign! Just how does a President get the power to decide this? Where is the separation of Powers here?

Obama is the first President to issue an executive order implementing a “racial justice system”, a system that tries to achieve “racially equivalent outcomes” for crimes.

Just how is this done? Do they determine if maybe a Hispanic did a crime due to his lack of education? Or maybe it is a black that had education but found it more profitable to deal drugs? Just what does the term, “racially equivalent outcomes” really mean? Once again, so many questions so few answers! But once again, why does this President find it better to use or rather Abuse his power to create new laws? Is this really what he wants to do, circumvent Congress and create his own laws, which by the way can be ignored according to the very Constitution he is Circumventing!

Obama is the first President to send millions in taxpayer dollars to his wife’s former employer.

Just what did her “former” employer do? Maybe he “contributed” thousands to his campaign. Why is he even allowed to do this at all, is this not a form of corruption? This lends itself to more questions than answers.

Obama is the first President to preside over a cut to the credit rating of the United States government. (Source: Reuters)

Now this is something that should rattle everyone as it has an affect upon anyone whom tries to borrow money since this was the First time our triple A credit rating was downgraded! If this happened to us as individuals, it would mean that we could NOT borrow anything until the rating was brought down yet this President, ignores this as if it were a mere bother!

Obama is the first President to bypass Congress and implement the DREAM Act through executive fiat. (Source: Christian Science Monitor)

Wait, does the Constitution mention that Congress has the power to make and enforce laws? Is this an indication of what Obama is planning? Is he really just bypassing Congress and the Constitution because as he says, “This thing called the Constitution keeps getting in my way of doing things.”? President Barack Obama. How many other Presidents even tried to do this as openly as Obama is? Obama took an Oath to uphold the Constitution and yet if Congress says no to him, Obama goes out and makes the very thing Congress said NO to a law by way of a pen! Sounds like a want to be Dictator to many!

Obama is the first President to move America past the dependency tipping point, in which 51% of households now pay no income taxes.

Now if 51% pay no income taxes, just how will the Government run without any revenue coming in from 51% of those working? How can any nation sustain itself when it does not have enough money coming in to cover the expenses? I am very sure that if individuals did this, they would lose everything and maybe be sent to jail for some sort of fraud!! But Obama does not care, all he does is call up Geithner and tell him to print more money that goes down in value each time he does that! What a way to run a nation!

Obama is the first President to increase food stamp spending by more than 100% in less than four years.

We are going to just say what? It just does not make any sort of sense unless, unless one is planning to ruin the nation so he can take over as dictator!

Obama is the first President to spend a trillion dollars on ‘shovel-ready’ jobs — and later admit there was no such thing as shovel-ready jobs. (Source: President Obama during an early meeting of his ‘Jobs Council‘)

Now this may have been the golden moment when Obama actually admitted he made a mistake, one that cost taxpayers nearly $1 trillion!

Obama is the first President to threaten insurance companies after they publicly spoke out on how Obamacare helped cause their rate increases. (Source: The Hill)

Of course Obama does not want the public to know that HIS plan for health care is going to run Doctors, hospitals, and nurses out of the nation in addition to costing much more than if he had just left it alone! But this was not his plan; actually it was one doctor’s idea from when Obama ran for Senator!

Obama is the first President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.

Can you say General Motors? It should really be called Government Motors since it is the first company to be nearly bought out by the federal government. Why even do this? Our laws are very specific and should have been followed. If GM was going to fail due to bad practices, they could have just claimed Title 7 and cleaned up their act, but no, Obama wanted to help his Socialist friends in the Unions, especially Trumka who sat with the Communist Party! Is it strange that a lot of Obama’s friends somehow are all linked by either the Communist or Socialists? Maybe they just sat at the wrong table for a few moments…. like the entire night!

Obama is the first President to propose budgets so unreasonable that not a single representative from either party would cast a vote in favor. (Sources: The Hill,Open Market)

Now this is really strange, all of Obama’s budget proposals were voted down by a vast amount of both parties. Wait, the Socialist Democrat Party voted for them, all 74 of them!

Obama is the first President whose economic policies have the number of Americans on disability exceed the population of New York. (Source: CNS News)

Obama had just recently brought the ceiling for getting welfare down to new LOW levels, all one has to do now to say they need welfare is to say they read a book about employment! Now that is a great first! According to Obama, if you sneeze and hurt your back, you should be on disability! That may not be far off the mark by the way! People should be happy with what we have here because if all of these handicapped individuals were in any other part of the world, they would have to fend for themselves because the United States is the only place that takes care of the handicapped, as of now, but maybe Obama plans to do away with that also since he likes the Europe model that does not have handicapped!

Obama is the first President to sign a law requiring all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.

Obamacare became the first law that mandated that every person in the United States have healthcare insurance. If one didn’t purchase healthcare insurance, then one would be taxed due to not purchasing the product.

There will be a final article demonstrating the rest of “firsts” by Barack Obama. It’s quite amazing to see how in just one term he could have been first at some of these things and yet, he still remains in office.

About Leon Puissegur
Leon Puissegur is a Disabled Vietnam Veteran with 3 children and 9 grandchildren, he has been married to the same wonderful lady for 43 years. He has been writing opinion pieces over the years and in just the last few years has written 4 books and a large amount of articles on many sites. You can purchase his books at Pick up his latest "The Oil Man" at his site.


Christopher Stevens, Tyrone Woods, **** Glen Doherty, and Sean Smith were murdered in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. The media is barely mentioning their names. According to Special Ops Lt. Colonel “Doug,” who called Rush Limbaugh on Friday, there are standing orders for instant flash communication about any attacks on US Ambassadors or four-star generals. As soon as the assault on the Benghazi mission started, local personnel notified the US Embassy in Tripoli, which triggered an instant alarm in Washington, DC. The President’s military aide knows within a few minutes and is required to notify POTUS immediately. Two separate “In Extremis” rescue teams were alerted, a C-130 was ready, and F-18 jet bombers. US personnel laser-spotted the Libyan mortar team that killed Americans, pointing the way for bombs that never came. This is an historic video of instant testimony by Rush Limbaugh’s military caller. No need to wait for an “investigation” long after the election.
The main stream media are protecting Obama. The editors and producers have decided to black out the news on benghazi. If these murders had occurred when Bush was in office, the liberal elite media would be hammering and pounding this story 24/7. The Senate Investigation will not commence until after 11/6/2012. The liberal media remain silent. The liberal media is as responsible for these murders as Obama. Obama knew what happened within minutes of the attack. Do not believe Axelrod, Obama, Jarrett, Paneta, carney, Clinton, or Rice. They are all liars.
Obama and his advisors froze on 9/11/2012. Obama made a political decision and left these 4 men to die. Obama told the public that he could answer the telephone call at 3:00 a.m. He lied. He failed. Four men died because Obama failed to act and failed to lead. Over the next eight days, the facts of the Libya attack are going to bury Obama and his administration. Always remember the four corners of deceit in the universe of lies: academia, science, media, and government. Always love your country. Never trust your government.
The liberal elite media can no longer control the message. They cannot control the Internet and the social media. Obama is not trust worthy and the Libya matter proves that.
POSTED BY: BOB CHARLES | OCTOBER 28, 2012, 12:08 PM 12:08 PM

Saturday, October 27, 2012



Obama Incriminated in Benghazi … the sounds of silence

Saturday, October 27, 2012


Central Intelligence Agency director David Petraeus has emphatically denied that he or anyone else at the CIA refused assistance to the former Navy SEALs who requested it three times as terrorists attacked the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on the night of Sep. 11. The Weekly Standard and ABC News report that Petraeus’s denial effectively implicates President Barack Obama, since a refusal to assist “would have been a presidential decision.”

Earlier today, Denver local reporter Kyle Clarke of KUSA-TV did what the national media largely refuses to do, asking Obama directly whether the Americans in Benghazi were denied requests for aid. Obama dodged the question, but implied that he had known about the attacks as they were “happening.”

Emails released earlier this week indicated that the White House had been informed almost immediately that a terror group had taken responsibility for the attack in Benghazi, and Fox News reported this morning that the two former Navy SEALs, Ty Woods and Glen Doherty, had been refused in requests for assistance they had made from the CIA annex.

In piecing together the details of the Benghazi attack up the U.S. consulate, it is becoming clear that there were U.S. Special Operations forces on the ground, at least two drones overhead and lasers being used to paint at least one target. The question then becomes, if these things were in place for a strike against attackers, who called it off? There can only be one answer, the commander-in-chief Barack Obama.

Fox News reports on the laser being used to paint the target:
At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights.

This went on for four hours and the White House was able to watch this all take place live. Two drones were above recording what was taking place and it seems one was called in to relieve the other, presumably because of fuel issues. A former Delta operator over at BlackFive writes:

Having spent a good bit of time nursing a GLD (ground Laser Designator) in several garden spots around the world, something from the report jumped out at me.

One of the former SEALs was actively painting the target. That means that Specter WAS ON STATION! Probably an AC130U. A ground laser designator is not a briefing pointer laser. You do not “paint” a target until the weapons system/designator is synched; which means that the AC130 was on station.

Only two places could have called off the attack at that point; the WH situation command (based on POTUS direction) or AFRICOM commander based on information directly from the target area.

If the AC130 never left Sigonella (as Penetta says) that means that the Predator that was filming the whole thing was armed.

If that SEAL was actively “painting” a target; something was on station to engage! And the decision to stand down goes directly to POTUS!

There is also the issue of the former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods and a small team that ignored orders to stand down after they requested permission to go and help.

Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to “stand down.”

Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood denied claims that requests for support were turned down.

“We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi,” she said. “Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night-and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades.”

I can’t help but think that this sounds, at least with the information that we are getting, like much of the response to the attacks of September 11, which was no response. Even more disturbing is what BlackFive writes, ““This is bigger than Watergate!… The worst has to be the team on the ground knowing that the President just left you to die.“

All of this was responded to by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Thursday. He said, “The U.S. military did not get involved during the attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, last month because officials did not have enough information about what was going on before the attack was over.”

Just how much information did you need? The White House had emails. They had forces on the ground, drones overhead, a live feed, painted targets. For four hours nothing was done while the consulate was attacked. There was a Special Operations team operating in Central Europe that could have been called upon, but weren’t, and could have flown there in less than two hours. But none of this was done.

It is looking more and more as though this was not only a planned attack, but also that either the White House was either negligent and irresponsible in their “non-response” or complicit.

Read more:


Over $60,000 in Welfare Spent Per Household in Poverty

3:27 PM, OCT 26, 2012 • BY DANIEL HALPER

New data compiled by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee shows that, last year, the United States spent over $60,000 to support welfare programs per each household that is in poverty. The calculations are based on data from the Census, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Congressional Research Services.

"According to the Census’s American Community Survey, the number of households with incomes below the poverty line in 2011 was 16,807,795," the Senate Budget Committee notes. "If you divide total federal and state spending by the number of households with incomes below the poverty line, the average spending per household in poverty was $61,194 in 2011."

This dollar figure is almost three times the amount the average household on poverty lives on per year. "If the spending on these programs were converted into cash, and distributed exclusively to the nation’s households below the poverty line, this cash amount would be over 2.5 times the federal poverty threshold for a family of four, which in 2011 was $22,350 (see table in this link)," the Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee note.

To be clear, not all households living below the poverty line receive $61,194 worth of assistance per year. After all, many above the poverty line also receive benefits from social welfare programs (e.g. pell grants).

But if welfare is meant to help bring those below the poverty line to a better place, it helps demonstrate that numbers do not add up.

As for the welfare programs, the Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee note:

A congressional report from CRS recently revealed that the United States now spends more on means-tested welfare than any other item in the federal budget—including Social Security, Medicare, or national defense. Including state contributions to the roughly 80 federal poverty programs, the total amount spent in 2011 was approximately $1 trillion. Federal spending alone on these programs was up 32 percent since 2008.
The U.S. Census Bureau estimated that almost 110 million Americans received some form of means-tested welfare in 2011. These figures exclude entitlements like Medicare and Social Security to which people contribute, and they refer exclusively to low-income direct and indirect financial support—such as food stamps, public housing, child care, energy assistance, direct cash aid, etc. For instance, 47 million Americans currently receive food stamps, and USDA has engaged in an aggressive outreach campaign to boost enrollment even further, arguing that “every dollar of SNAP benefits generates $1.84 in the economy… It’s the most direct stimulus you can get.” (Economic growth, however, is weaker this year than the two years prior, even as food stamp “stimulus” has reached an all-time high.)
Here's a breakdown of the welfare spending: