Fairness For Terrorists, Illegal Immigrants And Banksters

A great deal of the anger on the questions of Illegal Immigrants, Terrorism and Bank bailouts, comes from a perceived lack of fairness. This is part of what drives the Tea Party movement. Anyone who has ever been on a line (for concert tickets, bus tickets, plane tickets, supermarket cashier, bank assistance, etc.), particularly a long line, understands the politics of line jumping and fairness.

The anger felt by those waiting on a line, as they witness “line jumpers” squeeze ahead of those who have waited patiently, is easy to understand because most of us have been in that situation. The anger is greater when there are “security” guards assigned to keep order on the line, but they do nothing to stop “line jumping”. Sometimes hired “security” guards are not the cleverest, or they don’t care. When the “security” guard does nothing to prevent, let alone discipline line jumpers, you can be sure the anger will be greater than when there is no hired and paid “security” guard.

The line jumping fairness issue is particularly relevant to the issue of illegal immigration. Immigrants who follow the law to become United States citizens witness “line jumpers” simply walk into the country. Instead of equality and fairness for all, what is delivered is a “racist” charge. The issue of fairness for immigrants who follow the law in order to become American citizens is rarely raised or is condemned as “nativist” or “racist” (even though poor African-Americans and poor immigrants are victims of these line jumpers).

We do hear “fairness” raised as an issue but it is usually attached to the difficult situation of illegal immigrant parents with children born in the United States and therefore citizens. Undoubtedly that situation is more complicated, some would say a deliberate strategy to stay in the country if caught, but it is usually the only time when fairness or sympathy is allowed to be discussed.

American labor unions, instead of representing their workers and at least raising the fairness question of low wages and potential increased unemployment, prefer to stay silent or take the side of illegal immigrants. As the unemployment rate continues to rise, and unemployment does indeed continue to rise both officially and unofficially, one would expect some discussion – from the left side of the spectrum, about the issue of wages undercut by illegal immigrants most of whom are afraid to complain when labor laws are violated. The labor unions collect dues from their members but do not address an issue which directly affects their members. Not even a discussion of the impact on wages and unemployment is heard from labor unions. Fairness to their membership, which pays union dues, should be on the agenda, but it is not. It is not allowed. It is “racist”.

While the best way to end illegal immigration would be to deny unemployment to illegal immigrants, the fact of the matter is that is not going to happen. This is because of some rather simple economic reality. It’s why Arizona acted as it did and why so many Americans are supporting Arizona’s action. The reason why Americans hire illegal immigrants is because of the low wages paid to illegal immigrants. Even some of those who protest the loudest, which includes many of the wealthy and even public officials (and we are sure some anti-illegal immigration protesters are hypocrites in this matter), hire illegal immigrants to avoid Social Security taxes and minimum wage requirements.

Businesses are not exempt, particularly in the agriculture industry, from exploitation of illegal immigrant workers. Very few of us, if any, are free from hypocrisy because in many respects we all profit, due to cheap wages, from exploitation of illegal immigrants. We all benefit from low paid supermarket baggers, household help, and agricultural workers who paid little keep food prices down, many of whom are illegal immigrants.

The fairness question is allowed to be raised when it is sympathetic to those who illegally immigrate to the United States in some large part because these people do come here for a better life. But fairness for American workers who lose out in the equation, is a discussion which should be examined but instead is considered “racist”.

Likewise, after the Times Square failed bombing we witnessed article after article in Big Media with explanations of the foreclosure difficulties of Faisal Shahzad. This is a man who could not pay his bills but had enough money to travel to Pakistan (“Pock-ee-stan” in Hopium Guzzler speak) repeatedly. Americans with foreclosure problems have not had the luxury of many vacations and trips yet we are supposed to feel understanding for a nut who squanders whatever resources he had with expensive and repeated trips.

Americans, and those who hate Americans, also witnessed the ease with which Faisal Shahzad purchased last minute tickets with cash and no one stopped him from getting on an airliner. Americans who travel on airplanes are forced to take off their shoes and submit to searches and possibly electronic gizmos which strip them naked (did you hear about the TSA related violence because an airport scanner led to jokes about a small penis?) and other humiliations. But Faisal Shahzad, who tried to murder Americans, apparently can traipse through no-fly lists:

“While grandmas and grade-schoolers and war heroes patiently pass through a gauntlet of wands, checkpoints and screening obstacles, the nation’s safety watchdogs are asleep at the wheel. They’ve mentally checked out at the check-in counter. And they’re in over their heads at federal counterterrorism centers, where “watch list” means putting the names of dangerous operatives into massive databases — then idly watching potential bombers waltz through our airports and onto our tarmacs.

The federal no-fly scheme was bypassed or breached easily by both the Christmas Day bomb plotter and the Times Square bomb plotter. In the former case, Nigerian terror operative Umar Abdulmutallab had been on the counterterrorism radar screen for his radical jihadi threats (which had been reported by his father to U.S. embassy officials in London). But the young, single, rootless Muslim extremist with suspicious travel patterns — ding, ding, ding, ding, ding! — did not meet the standards for watch-listing and didn’t even make it onto the second-tier “selectee list” of potential threats who can fly only after additional screening.

By contrast, beleaguered 8-year-old Mikey Hicks of Clifton, N.J., still can’t get off the selectee list after years of ridiculous harassment while traveling on family vacations.

In the Times Square case, Team Obama immediately pointed fingers at the airline industry — and Emirates airlines, in particular — for failing to check no-fly list updates. The hindsight cops at the White House are now touting ex post facto rules mandating that the airlines check no-fly alerts every two hours instead of every 24 hours.

But law enforcement officials themselves neglected to contact all airlines directly and red-flag the addition of would-be Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad’s name to the government no-fly list. Moreover, despite paying cash for his trip to the Middle East and being listed on the Department of Homeland Security travel lookout list since 1999, Shahzad received no extra screening from the Transportation Security Administration (confirming once again the bureaucracy’s own inside joke that TSA stands for “Thousands Standing Around”).”

Quite simply, Americans are harassed then given the bill, and that is not fair.

Without belaboring the point, the bailout of Big Banks and the speculators and Banksters was not fair either. Bailouts of Big Insurance and Big Auto makers was not fair either. It’s why Americans are angry. The “security” forces that were supposed to monitor these industries did not do their jobs and Americans had to pick up the bill. It’s not fair and Americans know it.

In the Gulf coast states many who work for themselves in the fishing industry will not get bailed out now that their businesses have been destroyed. There won’t be unemployment checks for these self-employed, hard working people either. It’s not fair and Americans know it.

Recently Congressman Henry Waxman threatened to hold hearings to humiliate companies that issued huge write-offs on health care costs due to the Obama health scam. Waxman scampered away from those hearings when his own staff informed him that the companies were forced to do what they did due to U.S. accounting laws. But Waxman had subpoenaed documents which only now we are beginning to see:

The great mystery surrounding the historic health care bill is how the corporations that provide coverage for most Americans — coverage they know and prize — will react to the new law’s radically different regime of subsidies, penalties, and taxes. Now, we’re getting a remarkable inside look at the options AT&T, Deere, and other big companies are weighing to deal with the new legislation.

Internal documents recently reviewed by Fortune, originally requested by Congress, show what the bill’s critics predicted, and what its champions dreaded: many large companies are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the health care coverage they provide to their workers in exchange for paying penalty fees to the government.

That would dismantle the employer-based system that has reigned since World War II. It would also seem to contradict President Obama’s statements that Americans who like their current plans could keep them. And as we’ll see, it would hugely magnify the projected costs for the bill, which controls deficits only by assuming that America’s employers would remain the backbone of the nation’s health care system.”

Is there any way to deny that the Tea Party anger is genuine when we witness this level of lying by Barack Obama and his gangster government? Americans are lied to in massive ways and get called “racists” in the bargain. This level of lying and collaboration by Big Media transcends a call for fairness and creates a demand for justice. Americans see the lack of fairness is indeed a plot to fool and squeeze the very economic life out of the ordinary citizen:

“Amazingly, the corporate documents that prove this point became public because of a different set of unintended consequences: they told a story far different than the one the politicians who demanded them expected.

In the days after President Obama signed the bill on March 24, a number of companies announced big write downs due to some fiscal changes it ushered in. The legislation eliminated a company’s right to deduct the federal retiree drug-benefit subsidy from their corporate taxes. That reduced projected revenue. As a result, AT&T (T, Fortune 500) and Verizon (VZ, Fortune 500) took well-publicized charges of around $1 billion.

The announcements greatly annoyed Representative Henry Waxman, who accused the companies of using the big numbers to exaggerate health care reform’s burden on employers. Waxman, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, demanded that they turn over their confidential memos, and summoned their top executives for hearings.

But Waxman didn’t simply request documents related to the write down issue. He wanted every document the companies created that discussed what the bill would do to their most uncontrollable expense: healthcare costs.

The request yielded 1,100 pages of documents from four major employers: AT&T, Verizon, Caterpillar and Deere (DE, Fortune 500). No sooner did the Democrats on the Energy Committee read them than they abruptly cancelled the hearings. On April 14, the Committee’s majority staff issued a memo stating that the write downs were “proper and in accordance with SEC rules.” The committee also stated that the memos took a generally sunny view of the new legislation. The documents, said the Democrats’ memo, show that “the overall impact of health reform on large employers could be beneficial.”

Nowhere in the five-page report did the majority staff mention that not one, but all four companies, were weighing the costs and benefits of dropping their coverage.”

Americans have been repeatedly lied to by Barack Obama and his gangster government, aided and abetted by Big Media. Americans increasingly see that there is no fairness, the books are cooked, and they are the chumps.

Only the line jumpers and scam artists are allowed on the “get fairness” line.

Share

104 thoughts on “Fairness For Terrorists, Illegal Immigrants And Banksters

  1. Admin, I had wondered what was going on w/ Waxman’s write-down hearings. Thanks for the update.

    I have quite a few clients employed by AT&T (they have several large offices nearby) and they have all expressed concern about their employer provided plans. In ’09 the employee’s insurance was free to them, but family coverage came at another rate. In ’10, even before the HCR bill was shoved through, they had to start paying for their own insurance in addition to their family plans, because health care expenses have risen dramatically over the last few years while telecommunications profits have decreased due to a price war started by Sprint and Verizon.

    It’s a shame these families will now be looking at being on SoonerCare (our state welfare benefit system) because the insurance industry has friends in DC. Tax payers are going to be seriously hosed and patients will lose out on good care (many doctors started dropping from SoonerCare 5-6 years ago because payouts were less than break-even).

    Fuckers…

  2. It’s not “fat fingers” but fat-heads.

    http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/07/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm

    Stocks slumped Friday, with the three major indexes ending in negative territory for the year, as investors mulled the Greek debt crisis in the aftermath of one of the most gut-churning days in Wall Street history.

    The Dow Jones industrial average (INDU) lost 140 points, or 1.3%, after seesawing in the morning, having gained as much as 59 points and lost as much as 279 points. The S&P 500 index (SPX) lost 17 points, or 1.5%. The Nasdaq composite (COMP) lost 54 points, or 2.3%.

    According to tentative numbers, the Dow is now down almost 7.5% off the April highs, while the S&P 500 is down 8.7%. However, the Nasdaq is down 10.4%, meeting the technical definition of a correction.

    All three indexes moved into negative territory for the year.

    All three indexes also closed lower for the fourth straight session and the second straight week.

  3. Americans increasingly see that there is no fairness, the books are cooked, and they are the chumps.

    And as you said, WE ARE PAYING the bills for their corruption, mistakes and stupidity.

    Any taxpayer that isn’t angry, isn’t paying attention.

    Since the MSM is decreasing in readership and those that follow them on teevee, my guess is that less are still mainlining the Kool-aid.

    I betcha many more obots are against the fraud then admit it, they might be afraid of being called a racist or having to defend their corrupt party.

  4. nobama, Thanks for commenting on my question. I posted 4 similar questions on my facebook page to see what my RWN co workers would say, but to no avail they had no comment.

    I am really curious about the voucher system and the privatizing of public schools. I was wondering then if would still have to pay school taxes…since of have no children in school it irritates me to pay them, but I am not sure how privitizing public schools would really improve the schools in the ghetto?

    I know the for profit prisons compared to the state run ones here in Texas are sadly below standands. Most of the escapes happen in the privately owned ones…we do have well run prisons here in Texas, but the pay is bad, but the retirement is fabulous and I imagine that the retirement is where they want to make the cut…I say goodluck with that as they don’t have enough correctional officers now, much less when they get rid of the retirement. THe retirement for TDCJ is much like the Greece public retirements…full retirement after 20 years of service with full bene’s for life and 80% of the pay. I wish I could get such a retirement as a healthcare worker…there is nothing like that anywhere in my profession.

  5. Tidbits…

    White House doesn’t rule out sabotage in Thursday’s wild market fluctuation

    President Barack Obama The Fraud has not ruled out sabotage in the near-panic on Wall Street Thursday afternoon.

    White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Obama’s economic team was jolted by the news and met with Obama shortly after the market plunged.

    The president announced Friday morning that a full review is being conducted, and Gibbs said Obama is waiting to hear the results of a review before ruling out what might have caused it, including the possibility of sabotage.

    “I wouldn’t rule anything in or rule anything out,” Gibbs told reporters in his West Wing office Friday. “I think that’s, appropriately, why they’re reviewing what may or may not have happened.”

    Gibbs said Obama thinks the “the circumstances around this is something that should be watched or should be reviewed and looked at.”

    And some of the comments from this article:

    BY typical white person
    OBAMA’S REICHSTAG MOMENT HAS ARRIVED!

    BY GUNNYG
    An Oil Rig blows up and no one suggests sabotage? Give me a break.

    BY Charles Ambrogio
    Yes, it makes you wonder if the same thing happened in the fall of 2008. The timing was just perfect to propel Obama into the spotlight to save us all. A little too perfect.

    (I have been thinking this for the past 2 years!!)

  6. Hillary Clinton will be on “60 Minutes” this Sunday…

    May 7, 2010

    Sec. Clinton on Pakistan and The War on Terror
    Says Pakistan More Helpful in War on Terror; Warns of “Severe Consequences” If Successful Terror Attack Originated There

    (CBS) Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the Pakistani government has been warned that if a terror operation like the failed Times Square bombing were to be successful and found to be originated in their country, “there would be very severe consequences.”

    Clinton also acknowledged Pakistan’s increased cooperation in the war on terror, but said the U.S. wants and expects even more from the Muslim nation.

    The interview was conducted in Washington Friday by “60 Minutes” correspondent Scott Pelley for a report to be broadcast this Sunday, May 9, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

    “We’ve made it very clear that if, heaven-forbid, an attack like this that we can trace back to Pakistan were to have been successful, there would be very severe consequences,” Clinton tells Pelley. The car bomb that fizzled out in Time Square last week was planted by Faisal Shahzad, a naturalized American citizen who was born in Pakistan and says he had terrorist training there.

    Clinton says Pakistan’s attitude toward fighting Islamic terrorists has changed remarkably. “We’ve gotten more cooperation and it’s been a real sea change in the commitment we’ve seen from the Pakistan Government. [But] We want more. We expect more,” says Clinton.

    Since the relationship with Pakistan turned around, the results are encouraging she says. “We also have a much better relationship, military to military, intelligence to intelligence, government to government than we had before,” Clinton tells Pelley. “I think that there was a double game going on in the previous years, where we got a lot of lip service but very little produced. We’ve got a lot produced. We have seen the killing or capturing of a great number of the leadership of significant terrorist groups and we’re going continue that.”

    “60 Minutes” has been following the secretary of state for the past six months, capturing Clinton in her duties in places including Afghanistan, the White House and the United Nations.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/07/60minutes/main6468740.shtml

  7. Iran to host UN Security Council members in New York

    Iran has invited all 15 UN Security Council members to dinner in New York, following fresh threats of sanctions regarding the country’s nuclear programme.

    06 May 2010

    Manouchehr Mottaki, Iran’s foreign minister, issued the unexpected invitation on the sidelines of the Non-Proliferation Treaty review at UN headquarters.

    It also came as the five permanent Security Council members – China, the United States, France, Britain and Russia – began talks on a fourth sanctions resolution against Iran over its controversial nuclear program.

    “All 15 members will be represented at this dinner,” a UN diplomat said.

    Washington has led the drive for three rounds of UN Security Council economic sanctions on Iran since December 2006 to get it to stop enriching uranium, which can be used to make atomic bombs.

    Western powers suspect that Iran’s civilian nuclear program is really aimed at producing nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran vehemently denies.

    Iran and Western powers are at an impasse over a UN-drafted nuclear fuel swap deal for Tehran, which envisages supplying Iran with nuclear fuel in exchange for its low-enriched uranium stocks.

    The deal stalled after Iran insisted the two materials be exchanged simultaneously within its borders – a condition the world powers reject.

    Washington sees the dinner “as another opportunity for Iran to show the Council that it is prepared to meet it’s obligations and play by international rules,” a US official said.

    “We’ll make sure this fact is understood by all members so that this is not an opportunity for obfuscation by Iranian officials.”

    The dinner “is also an indication that the Iranians recognize that the efforts in the Security Council and elsewhere to get them to live up to their obligations are isolating them from the rest of the world and doing them harm,” the official added.

    Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was at the NPT conference on Monday, charged that the United States was blocking other nations’ access to peaceful nuclear energy and was threatening Iran with nuclear weapons.

    The United States, after a recent review of its nuclear policy, declared that it would not use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states that are in compliance with the NPT, an implicit warning to Iran and North Korea.

    US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton dismissed the Iranian leader’s charges as “wild accusations” in her speech to the opening session of the three-week review conference.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/7688342/Iran-to-host-UN-Security-Council-members-in-New-York.html

  8. Shadowfax
    May 7th, 2010 at 6:35 pm

    ——————

    Is it just me or does anyone else think that whenever a catastrophe/potential catastrophe occurs, Obama barely moves a muscle? His comments are lukewarm at best and his actions are always too little too late.

  9. Mirandizing huh?

    “If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.” And tell you to sing….

  10. As I remember, when the stock market had the crash the last time, McCain was hurt. So surely this should hurt O. After all he has been in office one year plus, and this has got to be on his watch. Of course the media is avoiding blaming him on this one. So what else is new.

  11. gonzotx
    May 7th, 2010 at 7:10 pm

    ——————
    Thank you for that clip. It was very brave of her to come forward like that.

  12. “While the best way to end illegal immigration would be to deny unemployment to illegal immigrants,..”

    Am I misreading, or should this be “to deny employment to illegal immigrants?”

  13. Should have bought P&G at 47. Would have made a killing but I was at work and freaked out anyway.

  14. JanH
    May 7th, 2010 at 7:20 pm

    Is it just me or does anyone else think that whenever a catastrophe/potential catastrophe occurs, Obama barely moves a muscle? His comments are lukewarm at best and his actions are always too little too late.
    ———-
    I think it is because he doesn’t know what to do. He, after all, voted present as a Senator, most of the time because he didn’t care about the issue.
    He still isn’t ready for that 3 am call.

  15. NewMexicoFan
    May 7th, 2010 at 7:31 pm

    As I remember, when the stock market had the crash the last time, McCain was hurt. So surely this should hurt O. After all he has been in office one year plus, and this has got to be on his watch

    ———-
    When the stock market crashed, McCain came back to DC to try and ‘help’…and when the market didn’t improve…the MSM blamed McCain for not knowing what to do to fix the problem.
    On the other hand, the Fraud just followed McCain to DC, (photo opt) and ran back to campaigning…and the MSM said, for his going back to his job of campaigning the American voter trusted the Fraud more to handle the economy.

    Even if you scratch your head until it’s a bloody stump, it still doesn’t make sense.

  16. Mike Marks
    May 7th, 2010 at 8:03 pm

    “While the best way to end illegal immigration would be to deny unemployment to illegal immigrants,..”

    Am I misreading, or should this be “to deny employment to illegal immigrants?”
    ——–
    Actually, both work.

    Don’t give work to illegals, and therefore, no unemployment payments for not working.

  17. Shadowfax @8:23PM:

    That didn’t occur to me. Can out-of-work illegals collect unemployment payments from somewhere?

  18. Mike Marks
    May 7th, 2010 at 8:34 pm

    Shadowfax @8:23PM:

    That didn’t occur to me. Can out-of-work illegals collect unemployment payments from somewhere?
    ———-
    As far as I know, if you use someone’s social security number, get a legal job, you could collect unemployment. I worked at a bank once, we ran someone’s social security number to check their credit and 28 people came up on it…

  19. I just thought of a way to get the ‘racist’ aspect out of the Arizona immigration law (that is the same as the feds law)…assuming they are stopped for breaking the law or doing something that is illegal…

    how about asking people that don’t speak English for their ID?

    That way, it wouldn’t single out Hispanics… If you only speak Russian, French or any other language…show your proper papers for entering our country, like we have to when we enter yours.

  20. how about asking people that don’t speak English for their ID?

    Nah…that would give a free pass to anyone that learns English

    Forget that idea…………

  21. NewMexicoFan
    May 7th, 2010 at 8:53 pm

    Great Billboard in a TX town. You voted for Obama. Are you embarressed yet?
    &&&&&

    To tell you the truth, I would venture to guess that 50% of the people who voted for him would probably say, “I don’t follow politics; 2008 was my first time voting, and maybe my last”. This might be “all those young people”, and under-informed African-Americans.

    Meanwhile, many informed AAs and liberals are surely feeling betrayed, on issue after issue, and would probably be too embarrassed to admit how they voted.

    So it depends on their political IQ.

  22. So now the WH is going to dabble in conspiracy theories when it might be good for them??? What a crock! We all know the stock market is artificially inflated and the bottom is about to fall out…
    Now I am suspect about this oil rig as I have lived on the Gulf Coast my entire life…something just does not add up.

  23. SENATORS NOT FORT HOOD-WINKED

    The Somali pirate indecision.
    Ft. Hood.
    Xmas Bomber dude.
    Times Sq. failed bomber.

    All situations where Obama’s response reflected ineptitude and indecision. What a fuck up.

    If this was Bush, WHAT WOULD THE OBAMA-SUPPORTERS BE SAYING NOW???

    thehill.com/homenews/senate/96547-lieberman-collins-leaning-toward-taking-administration-to-court

    Lieberman, Collins leaning toward taking administration to court over Fort Hood
    By J. Taylor Rushing – 05/06/10 05:22 PM ET

    Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and ranking Republican Susan Collins (Maine) on Thursday said they are poised to press their subpoena fight with the Obama administration into court.

    Lieberman and Collins, speaking separately, both said the Justice and Defense departments have been uncooperative with their efforts to obtain more information about the November 2009 shootings at Fort Hood, Texas, that killed 13 people.

    Both senators stopped short of saying they’ve made a final decision, but made it clear they are probably headed toward a court confrontation with administration lawyers based on doubt that the final round of negotiations would bring success.

    “If they won’t respond, I think we have an obligation. It’s not easy to enforce a subpoena against the executive branch, but I’m going to make the fight,” Lieberman said.

    “If we yield to the executive branch’s argument that they can’t provide us these witnesses because there’s a criminal proceeding, we’re going to create a terrible precedent for future Congresses that will allow future administrations to just cite that. It makes no sense to me.”

    Calls for comment to the Pentagon were not returned immediately. The Pentagon has been concerned that releasing the information would jeopardize the criminal case against Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan.

    Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he hasn’t gotten involved so far in the struggle between Lieberman and the administration, but that he remains hopeful of a resolution.

    “I haven’t been asked by either Lieberman or the White House to do anything on that, so I’m just going to wait and see what they work out,” he said.

    A court fight with the administration wouldn’t happen without a full vote by the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and the Senate, which is far from certain. Congress could also cite Attorney General Eric Holder or Defense Secretary Robert Gates in contempt, but the enthusiasm for that among Democrats is similarly unclear.

    Collins told The Hill she is “absolutely” in lockstep with Lieberman.

    “I feel it’s our duty and I think it’s unfortunate that it’s come to this. But I think we have an obligation to get the information we need to do our investigation,” Collins said. “The administration just does not want to cooperate, and I think that’s just really unfortunate.”

    Lieberman and Collins specifically want access to witnesses to the shootings, allegedly committed by Hasan, as well as data such as Hasan’s personnel file.

    Since Lieberman subpoenaed Gates and Holder last month, the administration has shared limited information, but not enough to satisfy Lieberman or Collins. The two senators offered to follow a certain protocol regarding the sought-after information. The administration has also offered some private briefings.

    Both Lieberman and Collins said Thursday that the administration has still been resistant to share information, even with their offer of safeguards.

    “We’ve tried to show just what we would do to allow us to interview these people and to double-, triple-protect against pre-trial publicity, which is what they’re worried about,” Lieberman said.

  24. Hi all!! Was just reading a post on FDL (I have been reading some of their posts on the oil spill). It looks like the dispersants they are using to scatter the oil are toxic. I guess this rules out seafood for the rest of my life.

    Obama-EPA—-totally missing in action. Guess there was a cocktail party to go to. Wouldn’t want to worry about us peasants. This is so maddening.

  25. FUCKING STONEWALLERS.

    Feeling the heat, Obama curls up into the fetal position, and the rest of his administration curl up with him.

    Somehow…Hillary is “outside the administration”. The only competent one.

  26. He really doesn’t care—we are insignificant since we don’t have millions to donate to his campaign.

  27. I just received an email response from Rep John Carter of Texas re HR2499. It was on letterhead but I could not post that here, just the text:

    May 6, 2010

    [ShortTermer]
    unknown

    Dear [ShortTermer]:

    Thank you for contacting me with your thoughts regarding H.R. 2499, the Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2010. I appreciate having the benefit of your views on this matter.

    In 1917, the U.S. granted U.S. citizenship to Puerto Ricans, and in 1952, the islands became a U.S. commonwealth — a status that has raised legal questions about whether Puerto Ricans have full constitutional rights. Its residents do not vote for the U.S. president or pay federal income tax on income earned on the islands. They have had several opportunities in previous Congresses to become a state.

    As you may know, H.R. 2499 passed the House on April 29, 2010 by a vote of 223-169. While I was originally a cosponsor of this bill, I found it unacceptable that no cost analysis of this bill had since been done and that amendments were added to allow anyone either born in Puerto Rico or having at least one parent from there to vote in the election H.R. 2499 would authorize.

    H.R. 2499 is not legislation that would by itself make Puerto Rico a state. However, the bill would provide an opportunity for the people of Puerto Rico to register their satisfaction, or dissatisfaction, with their current relationship with the United States. Additionally, it would authorize the island’s government to conduct a plebiscite (a direct vote in which the entire electorate is asked to either accept or reject a particular proposal) asking Puerto Ricans to choose between retaining its status as a U.S. commonwealth or seeking a new political designation. If a majority supported a new status, a second vote would give residents four options: statehood, full independence, independence with a special political association with the United States, or the existing status as a commonwealth.

    This bill now awaits action in the Senate. Should I be called upon to vote on this legislation once more, I will keep your thoughts in mind.

    Again, thank you for contacting me with your thoughts on this important matter. If I may be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact me.

    Sincerely,

    John Carter
    Member of Congress

    For more information on what I am doing in Congress, please visit my website at http://www.house.gov/carter. If you would like a weekly update, you may also sign up to receive my newsletter while you’re there.

  28. H4T, Thanks for posting the video, everything is a joke to this bozo. I realize he was trying to make a joke, but this one was in very bad taste.

  29. Don’t know if this has been posted yet but it’s a fun read…I wonder what other sides there are to the “private” Obama….

    “New Obama book by senior Newsweek editor Jonathan Alter airs private flares of temper”

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2010/05/08/2010-05-08_new_obama_book_by_newsweek_senior_editor_jonathan_alter_airs_private_flares_of_t.html

    BY David Saltonstall
    DAILY NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT

    Saturday, May 8th 2010, 4:00 AM

    President Obama may cultivate an image as the unflappable Mr. Cool, but he can get hot under the collar too, according to a new book.

    In “The Promise: President Obama, Year One,” by Newsweek senior editor Jonathan Alter, the author recounts a series of private blow-ups – including a particularly fiery one involving the nation’s top military brass.

    “A presidential dressing down unlike any in the United States in more than half a century,” is how Alter describes the October 2009 eruption.

    The background: Gen. Stanley McChrystal had just given a speech in London in which he publicly rejected proposals to turn the tide in Afghanistan with more drone missiles and special forces, a strategy backed mainly by Vice President Biden.

    The President viewed McChrystal’s comments as a bald attempt to back him into a Pentagon-backed plan more reliant on troop buildups – and he soon ripped into top commanders for what he considered insubordination.

    In an Oval Office showdown, Obama told Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Gen. David Petraeus that he was “exceedingly unhappy” with the Pentagon’s conduct, Alter reported, adding that its leaks to the press were “disrespectful of the process.”

    “This was a cold and bracing meeting,” an attendee said of the encounter, where Obama demanded to know “here and now” if the Pentagon would be onboard with any presidential strategy.

    It apparently worked: Petraeus later described himself as “chagrined,” and both he and Gates “swore loyalty” to the President. Obama eventually supported a troop buildup.

    “The Promise,” due out from Simon & Schuster on May 18, has other, steamier moments – including one starring French First Lady Carla Bruni, a one-time supermodel.

    Alter recounts how Bruni once bragged to First Lady Michelle Obama how she and French President Nicholas Sarkozy kept a head of state waiting while they had sex.

    “Bruni wanted to know if, like the Sarkozys, Michelle and the President had ever kept anyone waiting that way,” Alter writes, offering no source. “Michelle laughed nervously and said no.”

    But it’s often the flashes of anger, not amour, that shine through Alter’s tome, including:

    Asked during the 2008 campaign what accounted for a drop-off in his Jewish support, Obama snipped to a radio reporter off-air, “It’s the f—— Clintons.” Later, as Obama mulled appointing Hillary Clinton his Secretary of State, he cracked, “Hillary still has some anger issues with me.”

    When he found that his Justice Department lawyers were relying on Bush-era logic he disagreed with, Obama once exclaimed angrily, “What the f—? This is not the way I like to make decisions.”

    When the President learned that Massachusetts Democratic Senate candidate Martha Coakley was mocking Republican opponent – and eventual victor – Scott Brown for shaking voters’ hands in the cold outside Fenway Park, he knew his presidency would soon be in trouble.
    “No! No! You’re making that up!” he shouted at aide David Axelrod, grabbing him by the shirt. “That can’t be right.”

    dsaltonstall@nydailynews.com

  30. I think I told the blog before that I was honored by being in the motorcade for HRC, her daughter, and her mother during the Primary in Iowa. I had the honor of having HRC’s mother in the car. She went into the rally, but was brought out early, just to make sure they did not wear her out. However, someone at the rally want a signature of all three ladies on a shirt, so they brought the shirt to the car for her signature.

    That is how hard the staff of HRC worked for her. HRCs mother was delighted to sign the shirt. HRCs staff does not forget the little people.

  31. Don’t know if this has been posted yet but it’s a fun read…I wonder what other sides there are to the “private” Obama….

    “New Obama book by senior Newsweek editor Jonathan Alter airs private flares of temper”

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2010/05/08/2010-05-08_new_obama_book_by_newsweek_senior_editor_jonathan_alter_airs_private_flares_of_t.html

    BY David Saltonstall
    DAILY NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT

    Saturday, May 8th 2010, 4:00 AM

    President Obama may cultivate an image as the unflappable Mr. Cool, but he can get hot under the collar too, according to a new book.

    In “The Promise: President Obama, Year One,” by Newsweek senior editor Jonathan Alter, the author recounts a series of private blow-ups – including a particularly fiery one involving the nation’s top military brass.

    “A presidential dressing down unlike any in the United States in more than half a century,” is how Alter describes the October 2009 eruption.

    The background: Gen. Stanley McChrystal had just given a speech in London in which he publicly rejected proposals to turn the tide in Afghanistan with more drone missiles and special forces, a strategy backed mainly by Vice President Biden.

    The President viewed McChrystal’s comments as a bald attempt to back him into a Pentagon-backed plan more reliant on troop buildups – and he soon ripped into top commanders for what he considered insubordination.

    In an Oval Office showdown, Obama told Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Gen. David Petraeus that he was “exceedingly unhappy” with the Pentagon’s conduct, Alter reported, adding that its leaks to the press were “disrespectful of the process.”

    “This was a cold and bracing meeting,” an attendee said of the encounter, where Obama demanded to know “here and now” if the Pentagon would be onboard with any presidential strategy.

    It apparently worked: Petraeus later described himself as “chagrined,” and both he and Gates “swore loyalty” to the President. Obama eventually supported a troop buildup.

    “The Promise,” due out from Simon & Schuster on May 18, has other, steamier moments – including one starring French First Lady Carla Bruni, a one-time supermodel.

    Alter recounts how Bruni once bragged to First Lady Michelle Obama how she and French President Nicholas Sarkozy kept a head of state waiting while they had sex.

    “Bruni wanted to know if, like the Sarkozys, Michelle and the President had ever kept anyone waiting that way,” Alter writes, offering no source. “Michelle laughed nervously and said no.”

    But it’s often the flashes of anger, not amour, that shine through Alter’s tome, including:

    Asked during the 2008 campaign what accounted for a drop-off in his Jewish support, Obama snipped to a radio reporter off-air, “It’s the f—— Clintons.” Later, as Obama mulled appointing Hillary Clinton his Secretary of State, he cracked, “Hillary still has some anger issues with me.”

    When he found that his Justice Department lawyers were relying on Bush-era logic he disagreed with, Obama once exclaimed angrily, “What the f—? This is not the way I like to make decisions.”

    When the President learned that Massachusetts Democratic Senate candidate Martha Coakley was mocking Republican opponent – and eventual victor – Scott Brown for shaking voters’ hands in the cold outside Fenway Park, he knew his presidency would soon be in trouble.
    “No! No! You’re making that up!” he shouted at aide David Axelrod, grabbing him by the shirt. “That can’t be right.”

  32. A request to volunteer to help defeat Alan Grayson came in this morning. What a pleasure that will be!!!!

  33. NewMexicoFan
    May 8th, 2010 at 9:38 am
    ___________________________

    Great, NMF. When I voted the number of votes was, I believe, at 699. Hillary was already at #1.
    _________________

    You were fortnate, NMF. Iowa does not hold enduring happy memories for most of us. (Bill Clinton blowing up at the status and bereft presence of Hillaryness in Iowa) However, theres always a little good that comes out of something bad- You are living proof of that axiom. Thanks for sharing-

  34. Video of Barney Frank in 2006:

    Today, his pants should burst into flames everytime he opens his mouth.

    Please post this video admin- pour yorself a cocktail or take a pill for your BP before viewing.

  35. confloyd

    May 8th, 2010 at 2:48 am

    This looks rather fishy…I bet the trial doesn’t start til after November election…I bet they find a way to postpone it.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-ap-il–blagojevich-corruptioncase,0,7570538.story

    ———–

    Former Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s lawyers have gone to a federal appeals court in a last-ditch effort to delay his corruption trial.

    Blagojevich’s lawyers asked the appeals court to order trial Judge James Zagel to postpone the start of trial until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on challenges to the federal law barring officials from denying taxpayers their honest services.

    ——
    The highlighted paragraph is rather convoluted in the way it is written…

    Does it mean that Blago wants his trial postponed until they appeal the ruling by the judge, with the Supremes, because Blago’s judge said Obama and sitting public officials don’t have to testify in his case???????????????

  36. Admin: superb analysis. It is the lack of fairness.

    Little things that we were brought up to believe in like respect for the law; that high position like Nobel prizes should be granted to those who earned them; that a president should love of country instead of trashing it; that he should support our allies rather than rogue nations; that dims and big media should not label peaceful protesters terrorists and terrorists freedom fighters; that big media ought to report the news rather than distort the news; that government ought not to take from the politically unprotected and give to the politically connected; that public monies should be spent for the public good, rather than as a political slush funds; that jobs for unemployed Americans are a priority, and the real test of economic recovery; that quadrupling the deficit is problematic because a trillion here and a trillion there and pretty soon you are talking real money; that we should not put ourselves in a position where we are subservient to China economically and politically; that taxpayers should not be the guarantor for speculators; that if big business ships American jobs overseas then it ought to be held accountable; that Senators we once respected ought not to take bribes and ought not to ignore their constituents in order to ingratiate themselves to a tyrant; and that our Constitution and traditions as a nation should be preserved rather than perverted . .

    –all this and more subsumed in one little word: fairness.

    The difficulty we face is getting the word out to people who are strictly brand buyers, and are easily influenced by celebrity culture. (The joinder of a uber corrupt big media and Hollywood presents a real problem in that respect). Many of them are love lorn young women who lust for Obama. Some are idealists who want to believe that there are simple solutions to our problems, believe in messiahs, and are what PT Barnum noted are born every minute-suckers. And, some are what we used to call geeks. Look at that Talk Left fool, and I defy you to come up with any other word in Websters Dictionary that better describes him. And the same can be said of Markos, Joan, Sullivan, Alter and the list goes on and on and on and on.

    For us it comes back to first principles. To them it is pure emotion. And emotion blinds them to what is being stolen right from under their noses, while they are conveniently distracted. Somehow, we need to get through and they need to wake up.

  37. Did Palin really say this, as claimed at

    http://www.theatlanticwire.com/features/view/feature/Critics-Blast-Palins-Bible-Based-Legal-Plan-1205
    In an appearance on Thursday’s “The O’Reilly Factor,” Sarah Palin doubled down on her comments that America is “a Christian nation.” When pressed by O’Reilly about the role of religion in crafting government, Palin asserted: “Go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant. They’re quite clear that we would create law based on the God of the Bible and the 10 commandments, it’s pretty simple.”

  38. I will say one other thing on that subject. If you look at everything Obama does from coddling terrorist states to bailing out Deutsche Bank with taxpayer dollars from an American perspective, which is to say a the perspective of the nation state, then his actions border on treason, because these actions cannot be reconciled with the interests of the American People.

    But if you look at them through the eyes of a global capitalist, they make perfect sense. Capitalism has always pushed to extend itself beyond national borders, because there is always a bigger market out there and because borders are sources of friction to the free movement of goods and people between lowest cost venues where goods are produced and highest revenue venues where they can be sold through supply chain modelling. Now, we see the same forces in play on the service side. Open borders give capitalists access to the cheapest labor for economic activities that cannot be relocated.

  39. Okay, one more point: the minute you forsake the national perspective for the globalist one you lose your culture, your identity and you become part of a global labor force of 2 billion people competing for scare jobs–a global migrant labor force differentiated only by who you know, and what skills you have that cannot be automated or shipped to a lower cost venue. Obama was a sipher who was installed by global capitalists to pursue their agenda. They needed someone who could bamboozle the masses. For a time they had that with Bush, but his brand went stale. We now have Brand Obama. But like Bush he is a controlled beast, because it does the puppet masters no good to let the world know that he is just an actor/

  40. Frank to White House: Fight the GOP

    By: Eamon Javers
    May 5, 2010

    House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank is worried that the GOP is scoring points with its attacks on housing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he’s urging the White House to fight back.

    Frank (D-Mass.) sent a two-page memo Tuesday evening to Obama administration officials urging them to return fire to defend the Wall Street reform bill.

    In the memo, a copy of which was obtained by POLITICO, Frank made the case that Freddie and Fannie are being managed responsibly, and aren’t doing further economic damage to themselves now that they’ve been taken over by the government.

    But events late Wednesday made it politically difficult for Frank to make that case – Freddie Mac reported that it had lost $8 billion for the quarter and would likely need more than $10 billion in additional aid from the government. Frank staffers say that’s because Freddie is still suffering from bad decisions it made in the past, even though it is making wiser choices now.

    “The point of Chairman Frank is making in his memo is that they are not losing money on operations since being taken into conservatorship by [President] Bush,” said Frank spokesman Steve Adamske late Wednesday, after the Freddie results were made public. “The losses, as we understand it, were from business decisions before the takeover.”

    Still, Republicans were quick to pounce, saying the losses reported by Freddie Mac prove that something needs to be done about the housing giants.

    “As the old saw goes, everyone is entitled their opinion, but no one is entitled to their own set of facts,” said Michael Steel, the spokesman for House Republican Leader John Boehner (Ohio).

    In the overall messaging wars, Frank wrote in his memo, Republicans have decided to fight Wall Street reform by arguing that the bill is not complete because it doesn’t reform Fannie and Freddie, whose failures were at the heart of the financial meltdown.

    “They have gained a lot of traction with that argument,” Frank wrote of his Republican critics, “in part because we did not fight back against the misrepresentations early enough. I want to be sure that we do not repeat this pattern.”

    Frank’s missive was addressed to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, and Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.).

    Freddie and Fannie have become a central rallying cry for Republicans who have said over and over again in recent weeks that the bill now on the Senate floor fails to cover the housing sector. Now Sen. John McCain and others are poised to offer an amendment that would force the United States to give up its control over the beleaguered financial firms, which collapsed into government conservatorship in 2008.

    In an April 23 letter to Senate Republicans, for example, Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) urged them to oppose the bill because it sidesteps Fannie and Freddie. “Perhaps the most glaring shortcoming in this legislation is what is not included,” Hensarling wrote, “fundamental reform of the two largest recipients of taxpayer bailouts, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”

    A White House official said of Frank’s letter, “We’re grateful to Chairman Frank’s leadership on financial reform that led to the passage of a strong reform bill in the House, and we always appreciate his input on this issue.” Geithner has argued that Freddie and Fannie are enormously complicated to unwind and therefore the Obama administration will address them in a separate legislative effort.

    But Frank argues that Democrats have the facts on their side, and then need to do a better job of communicating them.

    Freddie and Fannie have already been reformed, to some extent, by virtue of being placed into conservatorship.

    “So the argument that we have ignored the need to change the operation of Fannie and Freddie in our rush to do financial reform is of course exactly backwards,” Frank wrote. “We did Fannie and Freddie first.”

    Frank also wrote that the Republican proposal to abolish Freddie and Fannie would remove an important government prop to the housing market. “It is the unanimous view of every profit and nonprofit entity concerned with the housing market in the United States that simply to abolish Fannie and Freddie, as the Republicans are proposing in the House bill, and not do anything to replace the functions they are now performing with a conservatorship, would be a disaster for housing, and therefore for the economy as a whole,” Frank said.

    Finally, Frank said that Freddie and Fannie are not losing money as they are currently operated – which means they aren’t making the deficit any worse.

    “This is an important point that has to be repeated – as Fannie and Freddie operate today, going forward, there is no loss,” Frank wrote. “The losses are the losses that occurred before we took the first step towards reforming them – we the Democrats – and nothing we could do today will diminish those losses.”

    In Wednesday’s earnings report, however, Freddie Mac said is lost $6.7 billion and was obliged to pay $1.3 billion in dividends on senior preferred stock held by the US Treasury.

    “Our first quarter 2010 financial results were driven significantly by the required adoption of new accounting standards, along with continued weakness in the housing market,” said Ross J. Kari, Freddie Mac’s chief financial officer.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36823.html

  41. I don’t think Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac are on the 2010 list for baby names, Barney. Come to think of it, neither are Barney or Dodd since your names are MUDD!

  42. turndownobama
    May 8th, 2010 at 12:49 pm

    No she did not. I watched that interview 2 times, this is another POS lying article by those lying lunatics.

  43. let me rephrase, like always, they took one phrase from an incomplete sentence and that’s all they did. That is not what Sarah said, I had recorded that interview and just watched it for the third time.

    Same shit they did to Hillary, tooks one phrase from an incomplete sentence and then went after her.

  44. House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank is worried that the GOP is scoring points with its attacks on housing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
    ———————————–
    Worried? Why should Barney of all people be worried? Worried about what? Worried for whom? Himself? His inamorato?

    If you look at these out takes from the Christmas Party at Fanny Mae Barney does not look very worried to me. He looks more like a man staring at stars, hearing guitars, who has totally forgotten the oath he took as a Congressman.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFoOHkLRDFI

    (Oh well, close enough–for government work, and much more accurate than the tripe we get from big media)

  45. I’m seeing comments like this one all over the place:

    I live in Phoenix and all the legal Hispanics I know are in full support of this bill. One of them told me last night he was at the capital protesting the protesters. The media wanted nothing to do with him.

    Of course, because Hispanic Americans who are all in favor of strong borders, and are sick to death of illegals and crime trashing THEIR neighborhoods and hurting THEIR employment do not fit the media’s carefully crafted “racist” narrative. So, no camera time for them!

  46. RCP has OBama at 48.2 %. I am concerned that with the mid terms coming, he will get a bump as the economy is slowly turning around and jobs report was postive.

  47. Labour majority ends with hung parliament

    ——————————————————————————–

    Top news: The Labour Party’s 13 years of majority in the British Parliament came to an end last night with Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s party losing at least 86 seats to David Cameron’s Conservatives. But with no party holding an outright majority, the country is facing its first “hung parliament” since the 1970s. Brown has signalled that he will not immediately step down, saying the results show “no clear majority for any single party.” Both leaders are expected to make statements about their plans shortly.

    Results are still coming in, but at this time, the Conservatives hold 298 seats. Labour came in second with 253 seats. The BBC is projecting that when the final votes are tallied, the Conservatives will hold 305 seats, still short of the 326 needed for a majority. The Liberal Democrats, who had seen a surge in their poll numbers after leader Nick Clegg’s impressive performance in televised debates, came in a distant third with 54 seats so far.

    Clegg admitted it was a “disappointing night” for the Lib Dems, but his party will now likely play a key role in the post-election wrangling for power. A Liberal-Conservative coalition government would put Cameron over the top.Cameron is also likely to win the support of around 10 Ulster Unions elected in Northern Ireland.

    Labour is also reportedly seeking a deal with the Liberal Democrats, though such a deal would still leave Brown short of a majority. Clegg told the BBC that as the party with the highest number of votes, the Conservatives had the right to attempt to form a government first. Labour’s Chief Strategist Peter Mandelson disagreed saying that the ruling party had the right to attempt to form a government if no other party gained a majority. Britain’s uncodified constitutional system offers little in the way of clarity

  48. jbstonesfan: you are right to be concerned, but to me the fundamentals look pretty good at this point. Obviously, the races will tighten as we get closer to November. However, the job situation will not be much better, and Obama Reid and Pelosi have proven themselves to be arrogant, condescending and contemptuous of the concerns of ordinary people. They have given the Republicans a lot of material to work with, and have left themselves with many points to defend. The Republicans have alot of money to work with now, as illustrated by the British article Admin posted a couple days ago.

    Here is Ramussen’s take on the current situation, he thinks the strongly against vs stongly in favor number is the key metric, and it shows a 14% spread. Also, the approval rating graphs are very telling. The highlights are set forth below. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

    Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
    Saturday, May 08, 2010 Email to a Friend ShareThis
    Advertisement

    The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows that 27% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -14 (see trends).

    After reaching a two-year high on Thursday, consumer and investor confidence has fallen over the past two days. A plurality of investors once again believe the economy is getting worse.

    On eight of ten key issues tracked by Rasmussen Reports, voters trust Republicans more than Democrats.

    Scott’s recent Wall Street Journal columns include “Why Obama Can’t Move the Health Care Numbers” and how Obama won the White House by campaigning like Ronald Reagan. He has also written an overview of the health care reform debate, a look at how President Obama is losing independent voters, and was the first to note the decline in the president’s approval ratings.
    You can also learn about Scott’s favorite place on earth and his time working with hockey legend Gordie Howe.
    It is important to remember that the Rasmussen Reports job approval ratings are based upon a sample of likely voters. Some other firms base their approval ratings on samples of all adults. President Obama’s numbers are always several points higher in a poll of adults rather than likely voters. That’s because some of the president’s most enthusiastic supporters, such as young adults, are less likely to turn out to vote. It is also important to check the details of question wording when comparing approval ratings from different firms.

    The Rasmussen Reports Media Meter shows that coverage of the President has turned more negative over the past week
    (More Below)

    On reviewing the state polling results from 2009, Mickey Kaus offered this assessment, “If you have a choice between Rasmussen and, say, the prestigious N.Y. Times, go with Rasmussen!”

  49. President Barack Obama The Fraud has not ruled out sabotage in the near-panic on Wall Street Thursday afternoon.
    ———————————–
    Nor have we ruled out sabotage by global capitalists which caused Wall Street to lose half its value as the critical factor that drove the country to vote for him over McCain when McCain was leading before that occurred. From the Soros inspired Dean Plan, to the untraceable dollars coming in from overseas, to the secret and public meetings with Soros, and other global financial interests, to the temptations of the man who broke the bank of England and precipitated the Asian crisis, all of this a matter of record, its is no quantum leap that the big Wall Street crash was a manufactured one. But we have no proof so we do not say it.

    But when Obama turns around and suggests that unidentified forces engaged in sabotage over a thousand point drop, I say this: first, the man has no honor, decency or sense of proportion. Second, and I would say this to Barack personally: “honi soit qui mal y pense”. Evil be to him who thinks evil.

  50. She is at 990 and only ten more votes put HRC at 1,000. If you have not voted, please vote, and put HRC Over to help wish her a happy Mothers Day.

  51. When Hillary was at 994, MO was tied for third in both the best mom and the worst mom category. Interesting.

  52. admin
    May 7th, 2010 at 1:16 pm
    Wbboei, good to see DailyHowler comments on the “prom”. DailyHowler is absolutely correct about the Politico preening over the White House Correspondents Dinner.
    ———————————-
    Admin: three times in my life I have been so sick I would much rather be dead. The first time was undercooked shellfish. The second time was–you guessed it undercooked shellfish. Now I am alergic to shellfish. The third time was when the legions of big media held a long wake a canonizing the late Tim Russert. And so, for three straight days they celebrated the life of a man who lied, obfuscated and practiced gotcha journalism. It made me sick to death.

    To us he was a hostile blubbering pumpkin head. To them however he was King Zeus in their Pantheon of Heroes. At that point it became obvious that Big Media had degenerated into nothing more than a celebrity culture, journalism is just one long cocktail line, and truth is a casualty of war. This was never the way it was in the days of Murrow, Cronkite and Sevaraid. The public needs to tune them out completely. They are not worth listening to.

  53. Anderson Cooper Slams ‘Birther’ Army Officer For Hiding Behind His Lawyer During Interview

    Nicholas Graham
    05- 8-10

    On his show last night Anderson Cooper tried to grill the now infamous Terry Lakin, a U.S. Army officer who refuses to follow President Obama’s orders because he doesn’t believe Obama was born in America, but Lakin appeared with his lawyer, who interrupted to answer most of the questions.

    A visibly frustrated Cooper accused Lakin of hiding behind his lawyer. “Can the Colonel not talk for himself? The guy’s an adult.” He also challenged Lakin’s assertion that there is “significant evidence” that Obama was born outside the U.S., calling it “just false.”

    The Army is set to court-martial Lakin for his refusal to deploy to Afghanistan.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/08/anderson-cooper-slams-bir_n_568976.html

  54. Tocqueville: “A man’s admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him”. (johnt at RSB). Which brings to mind today’s statement by Tim Kaine, head of the DNC.

    First, Kaine called Obama Bennett one of the most conservative members of the Republican Party. Conservatives who know him better than Kaine does call him what he is– a RINO.

    Second, Kaine then made an even more ridiculous statement: “If there was any question before, there should now be no doubt that the Republican leadership has handed the reigns to the Tea Party.”

    Put differently, Kaine’s logic is unassailable: Tea Parties are terrorists, Tea Parties control the Republican Party, therefore Republicans are terrorist, ordinary Americans are not as enlightened as we are, and suicide bombers should be treated with respect and read their Miranda Rights to ensure they do not give us any information that would be useful in thwarting future attacks. We are the world.

    Moe Lane, a Republican blogger said this about Kaine’s much flawed analysis:It was precisely this keen attention to detail and level of preparation on the DNC’s part that caused such dramatic results in NJ and VA last year, and promises to do the same in HI-01 and PA-12 later this month.

  55. Cooper is still hung over from drinking the Koolaid. He hasn’t the stones (his ancestors, the Vanderbilts had) to stand up to an immitation president allowing these disasters to happen.

    Barney Frank is a sociopath. He should never be allowed near an decision making process involving money.

  56. Anderson Cooper Slams ‘Birther’ Army Officer For Hiding Behind His Lawyer During Interview
    —————————-
    Better than hiding behind his mother’s skirt, like mamas boy Anderson does. Among friends he is known as Gloria Vanderbilt’s precious baby boy. And no relation to Cornelius.

  57. Would you believe, HRC is at 1053, and she is leaving the rest of them in the dust. I did wonder about MO being 3 on both list, and I think Jolie is like 5 or 6 on the other list. Where as HRC on the other list is much lower.

    Thank you all for voting for HRC. To me it makes a statement in another silent way.

  58. HELP PLEASE.

    Re Palin and “Christian nation”

    tim said:
    like always, they took one phrase from an incomplete sentence and that’s all they did. That is not what Sarah said, I had recorded that interview and just watched it for the third time.

    Same shit they did to Hillary, tooks one phrase from an incomplete sentence and then went after her.

    =====================

    Thanks! Now, does anyone have a link to Palin’s more complete statement? I’m in a discussion about this elsewhere.

  59. Tim,

    On Palin’s ‘Christian nation’ statements, here’s what I’ve found.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,592422,00.html
    This is Fox transcribing O’Reilly’s interview, which was friendly to Palin.

    http://action.afa.net/Blogs/BlogPost.aspx?id=2147494131
    This is a video posted at a rightwing site.

    Do you think this transcript and/or video distorted her comments? Are there other souces I should be looking at? I didn’t see anything on her Facebook about it.

  60. Okay, here’s what I’ve found so far, which does seem good evidence for the Palin ‘Christian nation’ quote. Transcript and long video, both at rightwing sites, so unlikely to be biased against her.

    In this case a rightwing source is what the lawyers would call ‘hostile witness.’ O’Reilly is friendly to Palin, therefore hostile to the prosecution. If it were Obama or Gore being quoted with something embarassing, I’d disregard rightwing sites but consider a leftwing site as good evidence.

    On Palin’s ‘Christian nation’ statements, here’s what I’ve found.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,592422,00.html
    This is Fox transcribing O’Reilly’s interview, which was friendly to Palin.

    action.afa.net/Blogs/BlogPost.aspx?id=2147494131
    This is a video posted at a rightwing site.

    I don’t know what is being implied elsewhere about her context, but her actual context here is defending something called iirc ‘National Day of Prayer’ — she’s not trying to attack the non-Christians or anything like that.

  61. The New York Times catches up with us regarding the ubiquity and uselessness of cameras for security:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/09/nyregion/09critic.html?hpw

    There’s one, over by the Walgreens entrance, and there’s another, just below the King Tut banner — video cameras, installed by private companies to survey the public spectacle of Times Square. I would not have seen the countless electronic eyes had Christopher Falkenberg, the president of a firm called Insite Security, not pointed them out. But I felt pretty sure those cameras had a clear view of me.

    Start looking for them and they really are everywhere: the New York Police Department cameras, which announce themselves with bright insignia; a cluster of three orbs, hanging like fruit outside Blue Fin on West 47th Street and Broadway; a pair of glass spheres stacked outside the Starbucks across the street. Staring into one, I was startled to see something staring back: a lens swiveling toward me for a better view.

    In Times Square, perhaps more than any other place in the city, our movements are being recorded a hundred different ways: from a few stories up the side of the Bertelsmann building, from inside the plate glass of the Bank of America branch, as we pass through the turnstiles of a subway station, at the point of purchase in seemingly every store. While the search was still on for the driver of that smoking Nissan Pathfinder, one of the Police Department’s first moves was to review footage from cameras between 51st and 34th Streets — all 82 of them. And those are just the cameras the city owns.[snip]

    Staring into that shiny oculus outside the Starbucks a few days after the bombing attempt, I figured I was being watched by a sharp-eyed security guard in the building’s basement. Or perhaps an F.B.I. agent was monitoring me — and half the rest of the city — on some master console in a secret Midtown office.

    More likely, said Mr. Falkenberg, a former Secret Service agent, no one was paying attention at all. Many closed-circuit cameras are set up just to record, for review as needed. Others are actively monitored, he said, but by people who have been staring at the screen so long they have lost focus — what you might call the airport baggage screener problem.

    And forget about collecting all those video streams in one central place, like they do in the Bourne movies. “For the government to tap into multiple proprietary databases — it’s not actually possible without a subpoena,” Mr. Falkenberg said. “Even if you took away all the liability concerns and all the privacy concerns, the video’s not in the same format.”

    So much for the ring of steel. [snip]

    The city’s new plan for increased video surveillance will cost millions, and however helpful it may be in solving crimes, there is no guarantee that it will prevent even one.

  62. Wbboei, Your allergic to shellfish…if you ever need a cat scan with contrast…make sure they pre medicate you. They usually give steroids for 24 hrs before hand…that is a dangerous allergy.

  63. Ad: Spill Here, Spill Now
    ————————-
    Jan–I have got to tell you the lady who runs firedoglake better be careful because I am on the verge of labeling her an honest and courageous liberal–someone who stands up for their values regardless of who assails them. I was with a couple of the other kind tonight pooping their pants over this Arizona law. This law does not represent what we are as a people, being forced to produce proof of citizenship is right out of Nazi Germany and this is a veiled attempt to suppress minority vote in November. Have you read the bill? No. Then how do you know what it says? Oh, I listen to Tom Hartman. Well now there is an unimpeachable source for you. Can we agree there is a security problem? Yes. Can we agree that employers are circumventing the law to get workers at slave labor rates. Yes. Then how do we solve those problems when the Federal Government fails to act? . . . This law does not represent what we are as a people, being forced to produce proof of citizenship is right out of Nazi Germany and this is a veiled attempt to suppress minority vote in November

  64. Question: If It Is Not Racism Then What Is It That Drives Those Tea Party Members–All 40 Million of Them? Here is Somerby’s reply which says to the dims: “there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in your philosophy.”
    ———————————————-
    JUST ASK ROBERT BENNETT (permalink): Is the Tea Party movement driven by racial animus?

    Presumably yes, to some extent. According to that recent New York Times poll, 18 percent of adults will say, when asked, that they support the Tea Party movement. On a national basis, this would represent perhaps 40 million people. Presumably, some number of those people are driven by some sort of racism, bigotry or “racial resentment.”

    We’ll spend next week reviewing a recent academic study which pretended to measure this problem, to widespread acclaim from us noble “liberals.”

    But then, the tea-baggers (as we “liberals” like to call them) seem to hate white people too! Just consider the sad situation of Senator Robert Bennett.

    A few weeks ago, we said that Charlie Crist was the whitest politican in America. Let’s admit it—we lied. Senator Bennett quite plainly is whiter. Just how white is Senator Bennett? Please consider these facts:

    Bennett isn’t simply white—he’s white, and he’s from Utah. He’s white, and he’s a Mormon. (Bennett’s father was also a senator—and he too was white!) And Bennett isn’t simply a Mormon; his grandfather, Herbert J. Grant, was seventh president of the LDS church! For Bennett’s full story, click here.

    Senator Bennett is exceptionally white. And the Tea Party pretty much hates him.

    Bennett isn’t struggling to get re-elected to his senate seat. He isn’t struggling to get re-nominated by Utah’s Republican party. Things are much worse than that for Bennett: At present, he is struggling just to get his name on the GOP primary ballot! That’s right! Bennett is so strongly opposed in his home state, the three-term senator may not even win a spot on the primary ballot!

    Last Saturday, the Washington Post described the problems facing Bennett as he tries to win a fourth term. In the following passage, Amy Gardner describes why Bennett is struggling hard just to get on the primary ballot:

    GARDNER (5/1/10): According to a poll published Sunday by local news outlets, 41 percent of [GOP] convention delegates say they will not vote for Bennett; Lee holds the lead by a wide margin.

    Bennett’s detractors point to his support for then-President George W. Bush’s immigration amnesty proposal and the financial bailouts of banks and auto companies, as well as Bennett’s authorship, with Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.), of a health-care proposal that included an individual mandate. Critics are also upset with Bennett for having pledged, during his first campaign in 1992, to serve only two terms (he is seeking his fourth).

    “The whole reason I started the Tea Party of Utah was because of Bob Bennett,” said David Kirkham of Provo, a convention delegate who said he is torn between voting for Lee or Bridgewater.

    Kirkham’s group, and the tea-party-affiliated Utah Rising and 9.12 movements, have been particularly active in opposing Bennett. All seven of his opponents are courting these groups heavily.

    “There’s a lot of frustration among Republicans who feel that the party lost the moral high ground on fiscal issues during the Bush years,” said Utah Gov. Gary R. Herbert (R), who is officially neutral in the race. “He gets the broad brush because he was there. This is a perfect storm against him that’s kind of unique to our times.”

    Might we offer a simple note? With minor adjustments, these are the reasons Tea Party folk cite when asked why they hate Obama.

    Without any question, the talented hacks of the “career liberal” world will be able to tease the racism and bigotry out of this state-wide reaction to Bennett. But if you are less beholden to tired old political hustles, please remember: This is the way the Tea Party is currently treating the whitest pol in the whole land.

    Here at THE HOWLER, we don’t share the Tea Party’s politics. We aren’t upset with Senator Bennett because he supported the bank bailouts. We aren’t upset with Senator Bennett because he supported the GM rescue. As far as we know, we aren’t upset with his stands on immigration. We aren’t in a fury because of the Wyden-Bennett health care proposal.

    We would only suggest that you read Gardner’s article to ponder a basic fact: Many in the Tea Party movement are furious with Bennett because of these stands. And no, they aren’t going after Bennett because they hate him for his race. As is abundantly clear, Robert Bennett is the whitest pol in the whole land.

    Robert Bennett is very white—but career liberal leaders are very blinkered. In truth, they aren’t especially smart or honest—and they adore yelling race. Next week, we’ll look at the groaning “social science” which recently emerged from the University of Washington —and we’ll look at the groaning work done at Salon as the journal’s fiery liberals announced their vast love for this bungled, embarrassing work.

    This morning, a second report, in the New York Times, discusses another racial aspect of the current conservative surge. According to Jennifer Steinhauer, an unusual number of black Republicans are seeking office this fall. (Steinhauer: “At least 32 African-Americans are running for Congress this year as Republicans, the biggest surge since Reconstruction, according to party officials.”)

    Steinhauer includes grumbling nay-says from two black liberals; they suggest that few of these candidates will win. Do you mind if we offer a slightly different thought?

    Our thought: An increase in wins by black Republicans would be the best thing for the liberal world. Only when our crutch is ripped away will our bankrupt “intellectual leaders” stop peddling standard cries about race and (perhaps) start to develop a winning progressive politics. At present, our “intellectual leaders” sleepwalk through life, kissing the keister of mainstream hacks and broadcasting their own racial greatness.

    You couldn’t make them address the lives of black kids if you promised the moon. Confronted with wide support for Arizona’s new law, they know how to do one thing—yell race.

    Our fiery “liberal” “intellectual leaders” tend a bit toward the morally bankrupt. Beyond that, they simply aren’t very smart, as is typically the case among people who have no particular need to be smart. They have gotten away with feeding you race for a very long time—when they were around at all. (They sat out the Clinton-Gore years.)

    Your fiery, morally pure liberal leaders feed you comfort food about race. The actual world is a bit more complex. If you doubt that, just ask Robert Bennett—the whitest pol in the whole land.

  65. I understand the cap on the well did not work?? I have been gone all day as I actually saw all five of my grandchildren today…had to drive about 400 miles, but got to see all of them.

  66. According to our friend Larry Johnson the military does not trust Obama.

    1. first, Obama has recinded secret orders which Bush signed off on. Therefore, they are refusing to undertake certain types of missions, because of a legitimate concern that he will back down at a later time. And that will impede our ability to defend against terrorism.

    2. second, Obama has dressed down military leaders in public, and as the saying goes one bad turn deserves another. As brown nosed screeds like Jonathan Alter cast Obama as the reincarnation of Seigfreid, contrary evidence will be leaked to the press and an entirely different picture of Obama will emerge.

    To which I say only this: “ex malo bonum” (out of bad comes good).
    ————————————————————————————————

    Under George W. Bush a number of Top Secret orders were signed that gave the military permission to do a variety of things. I can’t go into the specifics because it would compromise classified info. During Barack’s first year in office most of those authorities remained in place and, as I noted in previous postings, the number of capture/kill operations actually increased under Obama.

    That was then. Two things have happened over the last five months. First, many of those original authorities have been rescinded. So our military forces will not be acting against targets that they had permission to hit even one year ago. Second, and more troubling, the military commanders are forcing Obama to sign off on every operation. Why?

    They don’t trust him. Evidence of this comes, surprisingly, from an Obama worshipper, Jonathan Alter:

    “A presidential dressing down unlike any in the United States in more than half a century,” is how Alter describes the October 2009 eruption.

    The background: Gen. Stanley McChrystal had just given a speech in London in which he publicly rejected proposals to turn the tide in Afghanistan with more drone missiles and special forces, a strategy backed mainly by Vice President Biden.

    The President viewed McChrystal’s comments as a bald attempt to back him into a Pentagon-backed plan more reliant on troop buildups – and he soon ripped into top commanders for what he considered insubordination.

    In an Oval Office showdown, Obama told Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Gen. David Petraeus that he was “exceedingly unhappy” with the Pentagon’s conduct, Alter reported, adding that its leaks to the press were “disrespectful of the process.”

    “This was a cold and bracing meeting,” an attendee said of the encounter, where Obama demanded to know “here and now” if the Pentagon would be onboard with any presidential strategy.

    It apparently worked: Petraeus later described himself as “chagrined,” and both he and Gates “swore loyalty” to the President. Obama eventually supported a troop buildup.

    Since then the military will not carry out certain types of sensitive operations unless Barack Obama signs off on them personally. They have seen how this arrogant ass operates and understand that he is loyal only to himself. Accordingly, no one will take any risk or pursue any objective unless Barack puts his name to it. I do not blame them. These guys, like McChrystal, are no fools and understand that they can go from hero to goat in a heartbeat.

    Unfortunately, with this super cautious mentality comes a dramatic slowdown in the counter terrorism operations. The men and women who are on the frontlines now understand that their so-called commander-in-chief is a coward and a self-serving toady. He is no Harry Truman. The buck does not stop with him. He is a buck passer.

    I was planning to write this even before I saw the leak of the Jonathan Alter book. The White House decision to use the military as a foil to portray their smiling boy as a tough guy telling the military to fuck off convinces me even more that we have reached a watershed moment. The military is not going to take this lying down and, I suspect, will start leaking unsavory material that will cast Obama in the harsh light of reality.

    What a shame. Barack had a chance to actually act like a leader and build on the early success of going after terrorists overseas. Not now. Key military leaders realize they can’t trust him and will take no action and no initiative unless Barack signs up first. No officer worth their salt are willing to become a sacrificial lamb for this clown in the White House.

  67. Happy Mothers’ Day to moms and all who celebrate them.

    In the meantime, the travesties march on…
    KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks (Update1)
    (Updates with General Casey’s comment in 10th and 11th paragraphs, McCaskill comment in third paragraph from end.)
    By Tony Capaccio
    May 6 (Bloomberg) — KBR Inc. was selected for a no-bid contract worth as much as $568 million through 2011 for military support services in Iraq, the Army said. The Army announced its decision yesterday only hours after the Justice Department said it will pursue a lawsuit accusing the Houston-based company of taking kickbacks from two subcontractors on Iraq-related work. The Army also awarded the work to KBR over objections from members of Congress, who have pushed the Pentagon to seek bids for further logistics contracts.
    www dot businessweek.com/news/2010-05-06/kbr-to-get-no-bid-army-work-as-u-s-alleges-kickbacks-update1-.html

  68. Happy Mother’s Day to ALL and to the Grand Mothers and Great-Grand Mothers struggling to hold their families together during this time of austerity inflicted upon us by the bamboozler president residing with his family at 1600 Pennsey Ave.

    The Cover-up: BP’s Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster

    WMR has been informed by sources in the US Army Corps of Engineers, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and Florida Department of Environmental Protection that the Obama White House and British Petroleum (BP), which pumped $71,000 into Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign — more than John McCain or Hillary Clinton, are covering up the magnitude of the volcanic-level oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico and working together to limit BP’s liability for damage caused by what can be called a “mega-disaster.”

    Obama and his senior White House staff, as well as Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, are working with BP’s chief executive officer Tony Hayward on legislation that would raise the cap on liability for damage claims from those affected by the oil disaster from $75 million to $10 billion. However, WMR’s federal and Gulf state sources are reporting the disaster has the real potential cost of at least $1 trillion. Critics of the deal being worked out between Obama and Hayward point out that $10 billion is a mere drop in the bucket for a trillion dollar disaster but also note that BP, if its assets were nationalized, could fetch almost a trillion dollars for compensation purposes. There is talk in some government circles, including FEMA, of the need to nationalize BP in order to compensate those who will ultimately be affected by the worst oil disaster in the history of the world.

    Plans by BP to sink a 4-story containment dome over the oil gushing from a gaping chasm one kilometer below the surface of the Gulf, where the oil rig Deepwater Horizon exploded and killed 11 workers on April 20, and reports that one of the leaks has been contained is pure public relations disinformation designed to avoid panic and demands for greater action by the Obama administration, according to FEMA and Corps of Engineers sources. Sources within these agencies say the White House has been resisting releasing any “damaging information” about the oil disaster. They add that if the ocean oil geyser is not stopped within 90 days, there will be irreversible damage to the marine eco-systems of the Gulf of Mexico, north Atlantic Ocean, and beyond. At best, some Corps of Engineers experts say it could take two years to cement the chasm on the floor of the Gulf.

    Only after the magnitude of the disaster became evident did Obama order Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to declare the oil disaster a “national security issue.” Although the Coast Guard and FEMA are part of her department, Napolitano’s actual reasoning for invoking national security was to block media coverage of the immensity of the disaster that is unfolding for the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean and their coastlines.

    From the Corps of Engineers, FEMA, the Environmental Protection Agency, Coast Guard, and Gulf state environmental protection agencies, the message is the same: “we’ve never dealt with anything like this before.”

    The Obama administration also conspired with BP to fudge the extent of the oil leak, according to our federal and state sources. After the oil rig exploded and sank, the government stated that 42,000 gallons per day was gushing from the seabed chasm. Five days later, the federal government upped the leakage to 210,000 gallons a day.

    However, WMR has been informed that submersibles that are monitoring the escaping oil from the Gulf seabed are viewing television pictures of what is a “volcanic-like” eruption of oil. Moreover, when the Army Corps of Engineers first attempted to obtain NASA imagery of the Gulf oil slick — which is larger than that being reported by the media — it was turned down. However, National Geographic managed to obtain the satellite imagery shots of the extent of the disaster and posted them on their web site.

    There is other satellite imagery being withheld by the Obama administration that shows what lies under the gaping chasm spewing oil at an ever-alarming rate is a cavern estimated to be around the size of Mount Everest. This information has been given an almost national security-level classification to keep it from the public, according to our sources.

    http://oilprice.com/Environment/Oil-Spills/The-Cover-up-BP-s-Crude-Politics-and-the-Looming-Environmental-Mega-Disaster.html

  69. That’s a very interesting article by Larry Johnson. The military are no fools. and know that unless they have all orders in writing, Obama will throw them under the bus in a skinny second if the wind changes, casting all blame on them for his own feckless policies.

    Some have postulated that there are good, patriotic, professional americans in the military, in the FBI, in the CIA, in the state dept, etc who are lifetime civil servants, and who will, in the end, be the ones who bring down this boob. They are right not to trust him.

  70. More from the Wayne Madsen “Cover-UP” article posted above:

    The Corps and Engineers and FEMA are quietly critical of the lack of support for quick action after the oil disaster by the Obama White House and the US Coast Guard. Only recently, has the Coast Guard understood the magnitude of the disaster, dispatching nearly 70 vessels to the affected area. WMR has also learned that inspections of off-shore rigs’ shut-off valves by the Minerals Management Service during the Bush administration were merely rubber-stamp operations, resulting from criminal collusion between Halliburton and the Interior Department’s service, and that the potential for similar disasters exists with the other 30,000 off-shore rigs that use the same shut-off valves.

    The impact of the disaster became known to the Corps of Engineers and FEMA even before the White House began to take the magnitude of the impending catastrophe seriously. The first casualty of the disaster is the seafood industy, with not just fishermen, oystermen, crabbers, and shrimpers losing their jobs, but all those involved in the restaurant industry, from truckers to waitresses, facing lay-offs.

    The invasion of crude oil into estuaries like the oyster-rich Apalachicola Bay in Florida spell disaster for the seafood industry. However, the biggest threat is to Florida’s Everglades, which federal and state experts fear will be turned into a “dead zone” if the oil continues to gush forth from the Gulf chasm. There are also expectations that the oil slick will be caught up in the Gulf stream off the eastern seaboard of the United States, fouling beaches and estuaries like the Chesapeake Bay, and ultimately target the rich fishing grounds of the Grand Banks off Newfoundland.

    WMR has also learned that 36 urban areas on the Gulf of Mexico are expecting to be confronted with a major disaster from the oil volcano in the next few days. Although protective water surface boons are being laid to protect such sensitive areas as Alabama’s Dauphin Island, the mouth of the Mississippi River, and Florida’s Apalachicola Bay, Florida, there is only 16 miles of boons available for the protection of 2,276 miles of tidal shoreline in the state of Florida.

    Emergency preparations in dealing with the expanding oil menace are now being made for cities and towns from Corpus Christi, Texas, to Houston, New Orleans, Gulfport, Mobile, Pensacola, Tampa-St.Petersburg-Clearwater, Sarasota-Bradenton, Naples, and Key West. Some 36 FEMA-funded contracts between cities, towns, and counties and emergency workers are due to be invoked within days, if not hours, according to WMR’s FEMA sources.

    There are plans to evacuate people with respiratory problems, especially those among the retired senior population along the west coast of Florida, before officials begin burning surface oil as it begins to near the coastline.

    There is another major threat looming for inland towns and cities. With hurricane season in effect, there is a potential for ocean oil to be picked up by hurricane-driven rains and dropped into fresh water lakes and rivers, far from the ocean, thus adding to the pollution of water supplies and eco-systems.

    This story contributed by the Wayne Madsen Report for Oilprice.com
    __________________________

    Sad to say- to those of you wondering, as am I- referring to the chapters in the Book of Revelations stating: “the earth’s oceans and marine life will be dead ” It appears that prophecy is upon us and should be front page news 24/7.

    Never in the history of the world have we ever faced such an insurmountable problem. We need all the help we can get from all corners of the world to safeguard our oceans and marine life before this catastrophe becomes irreversable.

  71. Happy Mother’s Day to all mothers and all who hold them dear.

    In Hillary’s Mother’s Day video she says “…children live up to their God given talents…” Our Founding Fathers believed and placed in our structure of laws, ie Consitution, that RIGHTS come from God [and not from GOVERNMENT]. This is evident in everything they did, said, and wrote in public documents and private correspondence.
    So, Palin was not wrong in her assessment that our nation was based on divine providence.
    I have been seeking out original texts from the Founding Fathers. http://wallbuilders.come is a great resource. David Barton is one of my new favorite heroes. He has collected over the years innumerable ‘original’ documents, correspondence and books from the Founding Fathers and the process of the American Revolution. It gives me goosebumps to read what they actually said as opposed third hand info.
    Interestingly, on FaceBook, I often debate with a current history instructor at the Community College level; and he professes that Samuel Adams was an aethist and an anarchist. The original documents and texts show the opposite. Perhaps he has bought into the revisionist history that he and others teach our children.

  72. Somehow, I don’t see our Founding Fathers in Benjaman Franklin’s basement or wherever it was, turning away ANYONE who had brains and/or money for the cause, whether that person was atheist or deist or theist.

    I can imagine this mixed group agreeing to start a nation that would be religion-neutral, with separation of church and state, so as not to repel the atheists (however few) in the group.

Comments are closed.