Donald Trump Obama offer for college and passport records brilliant, $ 5 million offer to Obama charity, Obama college records tell all, Show me the student loans

Donald Trump Obama offer for college and passport records brilliant, $ 5 million offer to Obama charity, Obama college records tell all, Show me the student loans

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Khalid Al-Mansour was “raising money” for Obama.”

“Khalid Al-Mansour was trying to help Obama get into Harvard Law School.”…Percy Sutton

“Barack Obama, show me the college loans.”…Citizen Wells

Donald Trump has stated that he had excellent teachers.

I had excellent teachers as well.

I understand the significance of Trump’s offer of $ 5 million dollars to Obama to release his college and passport records.

I have never discounted the importance of Obama’s birth certificate and natural born citizen deficiencies. However, several years ago I decided to highlight his college records as well. This and other records from his past are all part of a puzzle picture. Every piece is important.

With this one simple move, Donald Trump will bring to the attention of millions more Americans, why Obama is hiding his college and passport records. After all, why wouldn’t Obama just release his college records anyway, especially when  his favorite charity will receive $ 5 million.

• Most American are unaware of Obama hiding his college records and his efforts to do so.
• Donations to Obama for America in 2008 were used to pay private attorneys to help Obama keep his records hidden.
• Since taking the White House in January of 2009, Obama has used numerous Justice Dept. attorneys, at taxpayer expense, to help Obama keep his hidden.
• Obama has constantly talked about his student loans. Show me the loans!
• Did Obama register as a foreign student to take advantage of loans?
• Obama attended Occidental College, after a dismal high school performance, on a full scholarship.
• Khalid Al-Mansour helped Obama get into Harvard and provided financing. Mansour was a advisor to Saudi prince Alwaleed bin Talal.
•  How did Obama get into Harvard after a dismal performance in high school and Occidental?

For more background.

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/09/24/obama-college-costs-paid-by-saudis-arabs-khalid-al-mansour-requested-arab-money-vernon-jarrett-percy-suttton-confirm-obama-bow-to-saudi-king-proves-loyalty/

Press release.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=26987232&l=9c7529f686&id=153080620724

Rush Limbaugh declares Romney winner of debate, Facts not lies win presidential debates, Barack Obama and Candy Crowley lies being discussed

Rush Limbaugh declares Romney winner of debate, Facts not lies win presidential debates, Barack Obama and Candy Crowley lies being discussed

“It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. … He did call it an act of terror.”…Candy Crowley

“But Crowley and Obama had it wrong. the Post’s Glenn Kessler explained:

What did Obama say in the Rose Garden a day after the attack in Libya? ”No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this nation,” he said.
But he did not say “terrorism”—and it took the administration days to concede that that it an “act of terrorism” that appears unrelated to initial reports of anger at a video that defamed the prophet Muhammad.”…Washington Post Oct. 17, 2012

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”…Joseph Goebbels

From Rush Limbaugh October 17, 2012.

RUSH:  I’m seriously amazed.  I really am, ladies and gentlemen, seriously amazed at the uniformity of thought and opinion across the spectrum on the debate last night.  I must tell you, in all honesty, my view of what happened last night is not even close to what I’m hearing on Fox News, on MSNBC, on CNN, in the New York Times and the Washington Post.  Well, actually, you know, some of the newspaper editorials are closer to the way I saw this last night than some of the people on television.

Let me start out by stating something patently obvious.  Maybe put it to you in the form of a question.  Addressing one of the things that I have detected that people on our side are most concerned about, outside of Candy Crowley, which we’ll deal with here in just a second.  Libya.  Romney had a big opening.  He didn’t close it.  He didn’t secure it.  He could have said, “What are you talking about, terror attack?  You blamed a video for two weeks.”  He didn’t say that.

Are any of you not going to vote for Mitt Romney because he didn’t have something to say at a crucial moment that you wanted him to say?  Is somebody gonna vote for Barack Obama that wasn’t going to because Mitt Romney didn’t say, “You were talking about a video for two weeks.”  No, of course not.  There weren’t any votes lost by Romney last night, and there weren’t any votes gained by Obama.  Seriously.  So the whole notion I’m hearing of scoring this thing on points, this isn’t a college debate where you lose for technique according to some scoring system.  This was an entirely different dynamic, and it’s one that Obama came nowhere near overcoming.  The problem that he had going in is not one that he got anywhere near solving.

My friends, I want you to know something here.  I’m not speaking with preferences guiding my comments, and I’m not speaking with hope or false promises.  I’m shooting you straight as best I can.  I watched this debate last night and I saw another halting, choppy, staccato-speaking Barack Obama, wandering aimlessly, speaking in theory, speaking in faculty lounge lizard theoretical non-reality.  I saw cliche after cliche.  I heard liberal cliche after cliche.

The first question was some college kid who wants to know about a job and Obama talks to him about manufacturing jobs?  This kid isn’t going to college to learn how to weld.  He’s not going to college to find a manufacturing job. And Obama answers his question that way?  Through most of this debate I was thinking, here’s Romney, Mr. Smooth, he is in total command of the facts.  He is once again totally decimating Obama’s economic performance.  Obama, in his closing remarks, was reduced to sounding like me, when everybody knows he doesn’t believe a word of what he said.  He doesn’t believe in rugged individualism.  He doesn’t believe in self-reliance.  He doesn’t believe in any of those things.

Why doesn’t that matter when people start scoring these debates?  They look at these debates and they score some system that’s foreign to me.  Style points or any number of odd things that are irrelevant in a presidential campaign.  But I didn’t see Barack Obama dazzling anybody with a defense of his record.  I didn’t hear Barack Obama talk about his great plans for the future.  I heard Barack Obama even at one point say “when I was president” as though it’s in the past tense.  I saw a nervous, staccato speaking, choppy. In fact, everybody talks about how Romney got a raw deal from Candy Crowley, and he did, but it is what it is.

There was a point in that debate last night — Kathryn and I are sitting there watching it — and I was so stunned by what I saw that I hit the pause on the DVR.  And I said, “Do you realize what we just saw here?”  And what it was was a full-fledged destruction of the Obama record by Mitt Romney.  Every stat you could want.  Household income falling, unemployment up, the number of people out of the workforce, the number of jobs lost since Obama took office, the number of people totally out of work, 23 million.  Every economic statistic that detailed the crumbling aspects of this regime.  And Candy Crowley — on second thought, maybe she did him a favor — did not let Obama respond.  She didn’t make Romney stop prematurely, he finished, and then she went on to the next question.

Now that I think about it now, and now that we know what we know, there’s no question she was trying to save Obama by making sure he didn’t have to deal with that.  But the bottom line is, for everybody who thinks that Romney had a minor screw up here because he didn’t point out that Obama had been saying it’s a video for two weeks, Obama did not have a syllable to say in refutation, in disagreement with Romney’s sterling recitation of his failures.  There wasn’t one retort. There wasn’t one reply to it. There wasn’t one accusation that Romney had said anything that wasn’t true.

In fact, today, the day after, the only people who are accused of saying things that are not true are Barack Obama and Candy Crowley, not Mitt Romney.  I kid you not.  That’s the debate I saw.  I once again saw an Obama who looked uncomfortable and unprepared and full of, “Eh, uh, eh, uh.”  I didn’t see Mr. Smooth. I didn’t see Mr. In Command of Facts. I didn’t see anybody who was eager to defend his performance and his record.  Folks, I’m gonna apologize to you because I simply do not have a recollection or an analysis of what I saw last night that is anywhere close to what I’ve seen — and I haven’t seen it all — to what I saw on television last night. “

Read more:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/10/17/my_debate_analysis_defies_the_uniformity_of_thought_that_pervades_virtually_all_media

Candy Crowley bias aids Obama lies, Romney succeeds despite Crowley’s efforts to select questions fact check Libya terror statement and cut off Romney, Crowley awarded 5 Orwells

Candy Crowley bias aids Obama lies, Romney succeeds despite Crowley’s efforts to select questions fact check Libya terror statement and cut off Romney, Crowley awarded 5 Orwells

“It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. … He did call it an act of terror.”…Candy Crowley

“But Crowley and Obama had it wrong. the Post’s Glenn Kessler explained:

What did Obama say in the Rose Garden a day after the attack in Libya? ”No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this nation,” he said.
But he did not say “terrorism”—and it took the administration days to concede that that it an “act of terrorism” that appears unrelated to initial reports of anger at a video that defamed the prophet Muhammad.”…Washington Post Oct. 17, 2012

“the Times of the nineteenth of December had published the official forecasts of the output of various classes of consumption goods in the fourth quarter of 1983, which was also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. Today’s issue contained a statement of the actual output, from which it appeared that the forecasts were in every instance grossly wrong. Winston’s job was to rectify the original figures by making them agree with the later ones.”…George Orwell, “1984″

This is a teachable moment. Candy Crowley’s performance in the Obama Romney debate last night was predictable. She has a history of liberal slant, she is a member of the mainstream media and she works for CNN.

Are there enough intelligent, informed and concerned Americans left out there to discern the truth? Obama lied again and Candy Crowley helped him.

From the Washington Times October 17, 2012.

“Another debate, another debacle for America’s media.

In the runup to the second presidential debate, CNN’s Candy Crowley declared that she would not just be a “fly on the wall” as she played the tiny role of moderator, that she would step in whenever she chose to say, “Hey, wait a second, what about X, Y, Z?”

And boy did she, cutting off Republican Mitt Romney repeatedly and often throwing the floor to President Obama with an open “let me give the president a chance here.”

More, she alone decided the topics for the debate, picking questions from the 80 so-called “undecided” voters chosen by the Gallup polling organization. Her selections were tailor-made for Mr. Obama — Mitt Romney’s tax plan, women’s rights and contraception, outsourcing, immigration, the Libya debacle (which gave Mr. Obama to finally say that the buck stops with him, not, as Hillary Clinton said, with her).

She even chose this question, directed to both men: “I do attribute much of America’s economic and international problems to the failings and missteps of the Bush administration. Since both of you are Republicans, I fear the return to the policies of those years should you win this election. What is the biggest difference between you and George W. Bush, and how do you differentiate yourself from George W. Bush?”

Ms. Crowley, who called Mr. Romney’s selection of Rep. Paul Ryan as running mate a “ticket death wish,” asserted her unilateral power at the outset, telling the audience before the cameras went on that she planned to “give the debate direction and ensure the candidates give answers to the questions.”

After both candidates answered Question One, she blurted: “Let me get a more immediate answer” — whatever that means. But when Mr. Romney sought to correct falsehoods told by the president, she cut him off: “We have all these folks here.” In the end, Mr. Obama would get 9 percent more time.

At Question Two, Mr. Obama, asked by Mr. Romney how much he had cut federal oil permits, took over the floor — with Ms. Crowley’s silent approval. “Here’s what happened,” he said as he filibustered for a full minute. Mr. Romney sought to get the last word — as the president had the question before — but the moderator shut him down: “It’ doesn’t quite work like that.”

When Mr. Romney sought to counter Mr. Obama’s assertion after Question Three, Ms. Crowley again cut him off: “Before we get into a vast array….” she said before asking a completely different question.

The next question was pure Obama — workplace inequality (the president mention at every stop his Lily Ledbetter legislation). But the query gave him the platform to demand Americans pay for contraception for all women, saying the governor “feels comfortable having politicians in Washington decide the health care choices that women are making.”

For the record, Mr. Obama spoke for two minutes, then Mr. Romney, then Mr. Obama again. Ms. Crowley then rushed into the next question.

When the immigration question came up, both candidates gave their answers. Then the moderator once again butted in, ordering Mr. Romney to “speak to the idea of self-deportation.”

By then, Mr. Romney had had enough, and talked over her demands. “No, let — let — let me go back and speak to the points the president made and — and — and let’s get them correct.”

At the next question, the moderator lost all control. “Candy,” Mr. Obama said. “Hold on.” “Mr. President,” the governor said, “I’m still speaking.” They mixed it up for a bit, then Ms. Crowley said: “Sit down, Mr. Romney.”

The most shocking exchange took place on the Benghazi attack that left the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three others dead.

Mr. Romney: “You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror? It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you’re saying.”

Mr. Obama made no defense. “Please proceed, governor.”

“I want to make sure,” Mr. Romney said. “Get the transcript,” the president said. Then Ms. Crowley jumped in to do her own fact-check, on the spot. “It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. … He did call it an act of terror.”

The truth is, he didn’t. The day after the attack, he said only this: “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.” It took another two weeks before the White House would label the attack an act of terror.

The Obama people, of course, loved it — having blamed Mr. Obama’s dismal performance in the first debate on poor moderating.

“He’s back,” said Team O spokeswoman Jen Psaki, who lauded Ms. Crowley for her fact checking.

But then she caught herself and quickly added: “He was never really gone, but he’s back.””

Read more:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/17/curl-crowley-skews-hard-obama-disastrous-debate/?page=all#pagebreak

For her Orwellian efforts to prop up Obama, Candy Crowley is awarded 5 Orwells.

Huffington Post lies on Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy comments, anti-gay stance is a lie, Cathy pro marriage and family, Huffington Post awarded 5 Orwells

Huffington Post lies on Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy comments, anti-gay stance is a lie, Cathy pro marriage and family, Huffington Post awarded 5 Orwells
“We’re not anti-anybody. Our mission is to create raving fans.”…Dan Cathy, Chick-Fil-A President

“If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world but I am sure we would be getting reports from hell before breakfast.”… William Tecumseh Sherman

“‘You haven’t a real appreciation of Newspeak, Winston,’ he said almost sadly. ‘Even when you write it you’re still thinking in Oldspeak. I’ve read some of those pieces that you write in The Times occasionally. They’re good enough, but they’re translations. In your heart you’d prefer to stick to Oldspeak, with all its vagueness and its useless shades of meaning. You don’t grasp the beauty of the destruction of words. Do you know that Newspeak is the only language in the world whose vocabulary gets smaller every year?’

Winston did know that, of course. He smiled, sympathetically he hoped, not trusting himself to speak. Syme bit off another fragment of the dark-coloured bread, chewed it briefly, and went on:

‘Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten. Already, in the Eleventh Edition, we’re not far from that point. But the process will still be continuing long after you and I are dead. Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller. Even now, of course, there’s no reason or excuse for committing thoughtcrime. It’s merely a question of self-discipline, reality-control. But in the end there won’t be any need even for that. The Revolution will be complete when the language is perfect. Newspeak is Ingsoc and Ingsoc is Newspeak,’ he added with a sort of mystical satisfaction. ‘Has it ever occurred to you, Winston, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now?’”…George Orwell, “1984″

I am not anti gay or anti anyone else. I am anti thuggery, anti lies and anti destruction of the English Language and Law.

From the Cornell University Legal Information Institute.

“In the English common law tradition from which our legal doctrines and concepts have developed, a marriage was a contract based upon a voluntary private agreement by a man and a woman to become husband and wife. Marriage was viewed as the basis of the family unit and vital to the preservation of morals and civilization.”

“In 1996, President Clinton signed into law the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which, for federal purposes, defined marriage as “only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife” (1 U.S.C. § 7).”

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/marriage/

From One News Now August 16, 2012.

“Report: Chick-fil-A controversy ‘manufactured’ by gay activism”

“A report from a Christian activist group in North Carolina says the alleged “anti-gay statements” by Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy last month not only were taken out of context, but also were used by homosexual activists to “manufacture” the ensuing controversy.

The journalist who initially interviewed the Chick-fil-A executive in early July was K. Allan Blume, editor of the Biblical Recorder — the journal of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. That interview was subsequently picked up by Baptist Press, which gave the story greater exposure and provided the spark for the controversy in the mainstream media.

Blume now says that during his interview with Cathy, the restaurateur “said nothing offensive, nothing putting down anyone” and that “the whole thing was distorted … an invented, manufactured story.” Never once during the interview, notes the editor, were the words “gay marriage,” “lesbian,” or “homosexual” spoken.

In its “story about the story,” the Christian Action League of North Carolina quotes Blume on the reaction of the homosexual activist community:

“It is obvious the gay community was looking to twist this because they don’t like the fact that Chick-fil-A invests some of their money in groups like Focus on the Family and Fellowship of Christian Athletes. They stirred this up, literally invented it.”

Also according to Blume, the businessman’s “guilty as charged” comment was in response to a question about Chick-fil-A’s commitment to and support of family values — not a confirmation of an “anti-gay stance,” as conveyed in the headline of a Huffington Post story.”

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=1655748

Do a search on:

“Huffington Post Chick-fil-A anti-gay stance”

You will notice that the Huffington Post, in Orwellian fashion, has proliferated the phrase “anti-gay.”

Here is one example.

From the Huffington Post July 17, 2012.

“Dan Cathy, Chick-Fil-A President, On Anti-Gay Stance: ‘Guilty As Charged’”

“In a new interview with the Baptist Press, Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy — the son of company founder S. Truett Cathy — addresses what the publication describes as his franchise’s “support of the traditional family.”

Cathy’s somewhat glib response: “Well, guilty as charged.”

He went on to note, “We are very much supportive of the family — the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that…we know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles.”

Cathy then reiterated his stance during an appearance on “The Ken Coleman Show,” Good as You blogger Jeremy Hooper reported.

“I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage,’ and I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to try to redefine what marriage is about,” Cathy said in that interview, which can be heard here.

Needless to say, Cathy’s remarks quickly sparked the ire of a number of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) advocates and bloggers. “Regardless of where you stand, the placement of LGBT people within our societal picture and within our body of laws is the conversation at hand,” wrote Hooper. “That is not the same thing as ‘support for the traditional family,’ no matter how aggressively the self-appointed values movement attempts to (mis)name reality!”"

“Cathy also noted, “We’re not anti-anybody. Our mission is to create raving fans.”"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.html

Why does the Huffington Post, now owned by AOL, continue to do the bidding of the Obama Camp?

The past is usually a good predictor.

From Citizen Wells May 25, 2010.

“In 2008, the Obama Campaign used a great deal of money from undocumented donors, a legion of paid bloggers, internet thugs and a complicit press to spin their Orwellian lies. The Obama Campaign paid The Huffington Post $ 55,354 in 2008. That of course is what was reported to the FEC and is the tip of the iceberg. I have heard Obama refer to The Huffington Post on several occasions. The last time was the last straw. The Citizen Wells blog has written about The Huffington Post acting as an arm of the Obama camp to smear opposition to Obama. You can expect more.

Listen to the following Obama speech, if you can stomach it. He mentions The Huffington Post at around 1 minute 57 seconds. The speech is cleverly (in the wicked sense) written. It mixes truths, half truths and lies.”

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/tag/obama-campaign-paid-huffington-post-55354-in-2008/

For their continued efforts to represent Big Brother and spin Orwellian Lies, I award the Huffington Post 5 Orwells.

Artur Davis Obama backer leaving Democrat party, Co chairman of Obama presidential campaign, Run as Republican, Democratic Party weakened and lost faith with more and more Alabamians

Artur Davis Obama backer leaving Democrat party, Co chairman of Obama presidential campaign, Run as Republican, Democratic Party weakened and lost faith with more and more Alabamians
“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”…Abraham Lincoln

“Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light.”…George Washington 

“Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”…Winston Churchill

From Family Security Matters May 30, 2012.

“Artur Davis, former prominent Obama backer, leaves Democratic party”

“Artur Davis, one of President Obama’s earliest supporters and a former co-chairman for his presidential campaign, announced Tuesday that he was leaving the Democratic party for good.

In a post published Tuesday on his website, Davis was vague about his future political endeavors, but declared: “If I were to run, it would be as a Republican. And I am in the process of changing my voter registration from Alabama to Virginia, a development which likely does represent a closing of one chapter and perhaps the opening of another.”

Davis, who represented Alabama’s seventh congressional district from 2003 to 2011, was notably the first member of Congress outside of Illinois to endorse then-Sen. Obama’s 2008 presidential bid. And it was Davis who seconded the official nomination of Obama at the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

Along with making hints at the future, Davis reflected on his experiences as a Democrat, and condemned the path he believes the party is taking.
Renouncing the party “is no light decision on my part,” he wrote. “Cutting ties with an Alabama Democratic Party that has weakened and lost faith with more and more Alabamians every year is one thing; leaving a national party that has been the home for my political values for two decades is quite another.”
But “wearing a Democratic label no longer matches what I know about my country and its possibilities,” he said.”

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/artur-davis-former-prominent-obama-backer-leaves-democratic-party?f=must_reads

Best wishes to Artur Davis.

Obama energy policy pay to play, Reward supporters, Punish taxpayers, Commerce Department imposes new import fees on solar panels made in China

Obama energy policy pay to play, Reward supporters, Punish taxpayers, Commerce Department imposes new import fees on solar panels made in China

“If some politicians have their way, there won’t be any more public investments in solar energy,” …Barack Obama

“Obama’s energy policy is pay to play”…Citizen Wells

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer. And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right. The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true, hold on to that! The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall towards the earth’s centre. With the feeling that he was speaking to O’Brien, and also that he was setting forth an important axiom, he wrote:

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

Wasn’t the argument that we needed to become more energy independent, not reward Obama’s supporters?

Let’s face it. At this point in time, the Chinese are going to make solar cells and panels at a lower cost than we are, with or without tariffs.

A good friend of mine approached me several months ago and asked if I was concerned about the Chinese subsidizing their solar cell production. I looked and him and exclaimed. Absolutely not! Let the Chinese bring the cost down, which they have. That will lower the cost here and put more people to work installing them, fuel ancillary industries and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

Instead, Obama and his administration have rewarded his supporters such as Solyndra at the cost of taxpayer dollars. Then the American manufacturers fail and they along with Obama blame the Chinese.

It’s the Chinese stupid. This should have been factored in to manufacturing decisons and energy policies. The Chinese are a known factor. They didn’t just show up yesterday.

A smart, taxpayer friendly solution would be to work with the Chinese. If they can make the solar cells (and they can) cheaper, let them. Let them lower the price at their expense and learn from their technology like the Japanese did with us. At some point in time it may make sense for the US to manufacture solar cells. Regardless, in a reality based decision platform, “let’s make lemonade out of lemons.”

From The LA Times March 20, 2012.

“U.S. sets new tariffs on China solar panels”

“The U.S. Commerce Department has imposed new import fees on solar panels made in China, finding that the Chinese government is improperly giving subsidies to manufacturers of the panels there.

The Commerce Department said Tuesday it has found on a preliminary basis that Chinese solar panel makers have received government subsidies of 2.9 percent to 4.73 percent. Therefore the department said tariffs in the same proportions will be charged on Chinese panels imported into the U.S., depending on which company makes them.

The tariff amounts are considered small, but the decision could ratchet up trade tensions between the U.S. and China. Several U.S. solar panel makers had asked the government to impose steep tariffs on Chinese imports. They are struggling against stiff competition from China as well as weakening demand in Europe and other key markets, just as President Barack Obama is working to promote renewable energy.

“Today’s announcement affirms what U.S. manufacturers have long known: Chinese manufacturers have received unfair … subsidies,” Steve Ostrenga, CEO of Helios Solar Works in Milwaukee, Wis., said in a statement. The company is a member of a group called the Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing.

On the other side, some U.S. companies argue that low-priced Chinese imports have helped consumers and promote rapid growth of the industry.”

“The U.S. and China are two of the world’s biggest markets for solar, wind and other renewable energy technology. Both governments are promoting their own suppliers in hopes of generating higher-paid technology jobs.

The U.S. manufacturers’ complaints have been amplified by the controversy surrounding Solyndra Inc. — a California-based solar panel maker that filed for bankruptcy protection after winning a $500 million federal loan from the Obama administration.

Solyndra’s failure embarrassed the administration and prompted a lengthy review by congressional Republicans who are critical of Obama’s green energy policies. Solyndra has cited Chinese competition as a key reason for its failure.

U.S. energy officials say China spent more than $30 billion last year to subsidize its solar industry. Obama said in November that China has “questionable competitive practices” in clean energy and that his administration has fought “these kinds of dumping activities.” The administration will act to enforce trade laws where appropriate, Obama said.”

Read more:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-china-solar-20120320,0,2891514.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fbusiness+(L.A.+Times+-+Business)

 

Obama change in gas and food prices, Higher gas prices threaten economy, Jobs added?, Millions of jobs and job seekers lost, WON Whip Obama Now

Obama change in gas and food prices, Higher gas prices threaten economy, Jobs added?, Millions of jobs and job seekers lost, WON Whip Obama Now

“If you’re complaining about the price of gas and you’re only getting 8 miles a gallon, you know…you might want to think about a trade-in.”…Barack Obama
“This announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the State Department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project and protect the American people,”…Barack Obama

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

Obama Change

Gasoline and food price facts for Truth Team and interested Americans.

Pedestrians help push a motorist who ran out of gas Friday into a station in downtown Los Angeles, where prices topped $5 per gallon. / Damian Dovarganes / Associated Press

I have located several versions of an AP article on gas prices and the economy.

From the AP March 16, 2012.

“Higher gas prices threaten economy if they persist”

“Inflation remains tame throughout the U.S. economy, with one big exception: gas prices.

Those higher prices haven’t derailed a steadily improving economy. But if they surpass $4 or $5 a gallon, experts fear Americans could pull back on spending, and job growth could stall, posing a potentially serious threat to the recovery.

And the longer prices remain high, the more they could imperil President Barack Obama’s re-election hopes.

A few weeks ago, economists generally agreed that the economy was in little danger from higher gas prices as long as job growth remained strong. But fears are now mounting that gas prices could begin to weaken consumer confidence.

The average pump price nationwide is $3.83 a gallon. Energy analysts say it’s bound to climb higher in the weeks ahead.

“It’s a thorn in the side of the consumer and businesses,” said Chris Christopher, an economist at IHS Global Insight. The economy this year “would have been better and stronger if we didn’t have to deal with this.”

So far, higher prices aren’t undermining the economic recovery, which is getting a lift from strong job creation. It would take a big jump — to around $5 a gallon — before most economists would worry that growth would halt and the economy would slide into another recession.

That’s because an improving economy is somewhat insulated from any threat posed by higher prices at the pump.

The risk is that gas prices could eventually slow growth by causing some people to cut spending on other goods, from appliances and furniture to electronics and vacations. Gasoline purchases provide less benefit for the U.S. economy because about half of the revenue flows to oil-exporting nations, though U.S. oil companies and gasoline retailers also benefit.

Many American businesses suffer, too. They must pay more for fuel and shipping and for materials affected by high oil prices, such as petroleum-based plastics. Profit margins get squeezed.

Even if prices ease after the summer driving season, don’t expect gasoline to fall below $3 a gallon. The government estimates that this year’s average will be $3.79, followed by $3.72 in 2013.

Most economists accept a rough guideline that a 25-cent rise in gas prices knocks about 0.2 percentage point off economic growth.

Gas prices also have an outsize impact on consumer confidence, Christopher noted. It’s a high-frequency purchase. Consumers notice the price whether they’re filling up or driving past a gas station.

Along with the unemployment rate and stock market levels, gasoline prices heavily determine how Americans see their financial health.

That effect was evident Friday when a decline was reported in the Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan index of consumer sentiment. The result surprised some economists who had assumed that higher stock prices and lower unemployment would lift consumer sentiment.

The Michigan report showed that “gasoline worries … are outweighing stock market gains and job growth” when it comes to influencing consumer attitudes, said Michael Hanson, an economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

The price of gasoline has climbed 17 percent since the year began — to a national average of $3.83 a gallon. That’s the highest ever for this time of year. A month ago, it was $3.52.”
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jCwE51Rb2hl34tObtft80XI1pKhA?docId=8d2a58e51da64b07b23f1f6bad04b2b6

From above:

“So far, higher prices aren’t undermining the economic recovery, which is getting a lift from strong job creation. It would take a big jump — to around $5 a gallon — before most economists would worry that growth would halt and the economy would slide into another recession.”

Which country are they referring to? As evidenced recently in NC and reported here, the NC unemployment rate was adjusted upward to above 10 percent.

Also as reported here several times.

Inflation has been downplayed as well. Anyone visiting a grocery store for the past several years has watched food prices skyrocket, mostly due to rising gasoline prices.

From America’s North Shore Journal March 17, 2012.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) keeps track of the average retail price for a number of common items as a U.S. city average. Let’s take a look at a few. We used the price for the month President Obmam was inaugurated, January 2009, and the last month of data available, December 2011. The items are sorted in descending order by the percentage increase of the price during the Obama administration.

		Obama		Obama
Item	Unit	Jan 2009	Dec 2011	I/D	Perc
Gasoline, unl reg	gal	$1.787	$3.278	$1.491	83.44%
Fuel oil, #2	gal	$2.509	$3.777	$1.268	50.54%
Ground beef	lb	$2.357	$2.921	$0.564	23.93%
Sugar, white	lb	$0.569	$0.703	$0.134	23.55%
Bacon. Sliced	lb	$3.730	$4.550	$0.820	21.98%
Cookies, Choc chip	lb	$3.114	$3.682	$0.568	18.24%
Spaghetti & macaroni	lb	$1.131	$1.306	$0.175	15.47%
Eggs, A lrg	doz	$1.850	$1.874	$0.024	1.30%
Electricity	kwh	$0.126	$0.127	$0.001	0.79%
Lettuce, iceberg	lb	$0.944	$0.947	$0.003	0.32%
Milk, whole	gal	$3.575	$3.565	-$0.010	-0.28%
Potatoes, white	lb	$0.676	$0.666	-$0.010	-1.48%

CPI Food 2009-2011

http://northshorejournal.org/whip-inflation-now

WON (whip inflation now)

Whip Obama Now

CBO real Truth Team, Unemployment rate 15 percent, Obama deficits, 1.2 trillion 2012, Obamacare costs rise and causes millions to lose employer insurance

CBO real Truth Team, Unemployment rate 15 percent, Obama deficits, 1.2 trillion 2012, Obamacare costs rise and causes millions to lose employer insurance

“And so our goal on health care is, if we can get, instead of health care costs going up 6 percent a year, it’s going up at the level of inflation, maybe just slightly above inflation, we’ve made huge progress. And by the way, that is the single most important thing we could do in terms of reducing our deficit. That’s why we did it.”…Barack Obama

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I, therefore, intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt.”…Barack Obama

“the Times of the nineteenth of December had published the official forecasts of the output of various classes of consumption goods in the fourth quarter of
1983, which was also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. Today’s issue contained a statement of the actual output, from which it appeared that
the forecasts were in every instance grossly wrong. Winston’s job was to rectify the original figures by making them agree with the later ones.”…George
Orwell, “1984″

Real unemployment rate 15 percent.

From the CBO February 2012.

“The rate of unemployment in the United States has
exceeded 8 percent since February 2009, making the past
three years the longest stretch of high unemployment in
this country since the Great Depression. Moreover, the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that the
unemployment rate will remain above 8 percent until
2014. The official unemployment rate excludes those
individuals who would like to work but have not searched
for a job in the past four weeks as well as those who are
working part-time but would prefer full-time work; if
those people were counted among the unemployed, the
unemployment rate in January 2012 would have been
about 15 percent. Compounding the problem of high
unemployment, the share of unemployed people looking
for work for more than six months—referred to as the
long-term unemployed—topped 40 percent in December
2009 for the first time since 1948, when such data began
to be collected; it has remained above that level ever
since.”

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/02-16-Unemployment.pdf
Obama budget deficits

From the CBO March 2012.

“This report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) presents an analysis of the proposals contained in the President’s budget request for fiscal year 2013. The analysis is based on CBO’s economic projections and estimating techniques (rather than the Administration’s) and incorporates estimates by the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation for the President’s tax proposals.1

In conjunction with analyzing the President’s budget, CBO has updated its baseline budget projections, which were previously issued in January 2012. Unlike its estimates of the President’s budget, CBO’s baseline projections largely reflect the assumption that current tax and spending laws will remain unchanged, so as to provide a benchmark against which potential legislation can be measured. Under that assumption, CBO estimates that the deficit would total $1.2 trillion in 2012 and that cumulative deficits over the 2013–2022 period would amount to $2.9 trillion.”

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43083

Obamacare cost

From the Amrican Enterprise Institute March 15, 2012.

“CBO: Obamacare could cost $2.1 trillion through 2022″

“According to a new government report, it turns out that more people than first expected will end up getting healthcare through the subsidized insurance exchanges and Medicaid rather than through their employers:

In the original analysis of the impact of the legislation, CBO and JCT estimated that, on balance, the number of people obtaining coverage through their employer would be about 3 million lower in 2019 under the legislation than under prior law. As reflected in CBO’s latest baseline projections, the two agencies now anticipate that, because of the ACA, about 3 million to 5 million fewer people, on net, will obtain coverage through their employer each year from 2019 through 2022 than would have been the case under prior law.

The results acknowledge that if a business chooses not to offer insurance coverage under the ACA, some workers might enroll in Medicaid or CHIP or be eligible to receive subsidies through the insurance exchanges. And as a result, the cost of those programs would increase.

Right now, the updated baseline CBO forecast sees the gross cost of Obamacare through 2022 as $1.8 trillion, a number which includes this new estimate of employee coverage. When you include new taxes, the net cost is $1.3 trillion. (Back in 2010, the ten-year, gross cost was a mere $940 billion, as the bill was structured to back end spending. But now instead of six years of spending estimates, we have nine.)

But under one CBO-JCT scenario, the gross costs through 2022 could be $2.1 trillion if even more businesses than expected decide not to offer health insurance and more people need government subsidized coverage.

But no worry, say the government bean counters, $386 billion in addition taxes (for a total of $895 billion) will cover the difference. First, there would be higher penalty payments by employers and individuals. Second, since health benefits are generally not taxed but wages and salaries are, a shift in the mix of compensation would raise federal revenues.”

http://blog.american.com/2012/03/cbo-obamcare-could-cost-2-1-trillion-through-2022/

Obamacare causes millions to lose employer coverage.

From human Events March 16, 2012.

“The latest revelation, reported at The Hill, is that ObamaCare could cause up to 20 million Americans to lose their health care coverage. There is a “tremendous amount of uncertainty” in the forecast, which is just what our fragile Obamanized economy needs right now, but 20 million is the CBO’s worst-case estimate. Maybe it will only be 3 to 5 million people.

The CBO is actually being very, very conservative in its damage estimates, as industry groups think ObamaCare will nuke closer to 50 million employer-provided policies over the next decade. Amusingly, the CBO points to RomneyCare in Massachusetts as “one piece of evidence that may be relevant” to its projections, as “employment-based health insurance appears to have increased since that state’s reforms.” It will be super awesome to hear Romney debate this with Obama.

ObamaCare kills health insurance by dumping so many mandates on employers that it becomes attractive for them to escape by dropping insurance coverage altogether. Even the CBO’s worst-case projections are underestimating the effect this will have on health insurance, in years to come. What do you think will happen to insurance companies that swiftly lose millions of customers to the “public exchanges?” What will happen to the prices they charge to their diminished customer base… and how will that, in turn, influence other businesses trying to decide whether dropping coverage makes sense?

It is nevertheless significant that the Congressional Budget Office, with its typical static-analysis caution, is predicting that ObamaCare might create a number of uninsured that dwarfs the uninsured population it was ostensibly created to help. If Obama’s true agenda is to destroy private health insurance and clear the way for a socialized medicine takeover, everything is proceeding according to plan.”

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=50264

 

Truth Team unemployment facts, CNN Money Orwellian reporting, 8.3 percent unemployment, 227000 jobs added, How many jobs lost?, 476000 added to workforce?

Truth Team unemployment facts, CNN Money Orwellian reporting, 8.3 percent unemployment, 227000 jobs added, How many jobs lost?, 476000 added to workforce?

“The past is whatever the records and the memories agree upon.
And since the party is in full control of all records, and in
equally full control of the minds of it’s members, it follows
that the past is whatever the party chooses to make it. Six
means eighteen, two plus two equals five, war is peace,
freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.”…George Orwell, “1984″

“the Times of the nineteenth of December had published the official forecasts of the output of various classes of consumption goods in the fourth quarter of 1983, which was also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. Today’s issue contained a statement of the actual output, from which it appeared that the forecasts were in every instance grossly wrong. Winston’s job was to rectify the original figures by making them agree with the later ones.”…George Orwell, “1984″

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

As I promised recently, I am here to assist the Truth Team in keeping the candidates honest by reporting the facts

The Labor Department, Obama Administration, Mainstream media and Truth Team would have us believe that the alleged influx of 476,000 extra people in the labor force was the reason for the unemplyment rate not dropping. Retirement timing is affected by birth date and other more random events such as the economy and length of service and should be somewhat evenly dispersed during the year. The biggest labor entry events are graduation from high school, college or other schools. So where did the big influx of employees come from? Illegal aliens?

CNN Money gives one of it’s best theatric, Orwellian efforts to make the 8.3 percent (already manipulated by Orwell math) unemployment rate look normal and explained by population growth.

From CNN Money March 9, 2012.

“The economy added 227,000 jobs in February, but the unemployment rate didn’t change at all.
Woe is the White House — which would love to have the lowest rate possible heading into the general election.

Before Obama even took office, America had lost 4.4 million jobs. Track his progress since then.

But why didn’t the unemployment rate change if the economy added jobs?

The unemployment rate measures the percent of the labor force that is unemployed.

The unemployed are individuals who have actively looked for work over the previous four weeks. Looking for work can mean having a job interview, sending out resumes, or even something as simple as calling friends or relatives in hopes of finding a job.

The number of unemployed is then divided by the total labor force. And in February, the size of the labor force increased — possibly as discouraged workers started looking for work again.

As the labor force swelled, so did the number of new jobs necessary to drop the unemployment rate.

Behind the jobs recovery

Just take a look at the last two months for an example of how this works.

In February, 227,000 jobs were added and the unemployment rate didn’t change. Compare that to January, when the economy added 243,000 jobs and the unemployment rate dropped from 8.5% to 8.3%.

The difference?

In January, the labor force participation rate decreased by 0.3%. In February, it increased by 0.2%.

And that 0.2% increase in February translated to 476,000 extra people in the labor force, preventing a decline in the unemployment rate.

So it’s possible that an improving economy can actually cause the unemployment rate to remain static, or even rise, as more discouraged workers start mailing resumes.

Much has been made of how low — or high — the unemployment rate might be on Election Day, and whether a particular number will be enough to ensure a victory for President Obama, or sink his candidacy.

Of course, the unemployment rate is not the best measure of economic strength, but the number plays a large role in campaign trail rhetoric.”

“Assuming the labor force participation rate holds steady, and the population grows at the same rate it has over the previous year, the economy needs to add 149,288 jobs per month to get the unemployment rate to 8%.”

http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/09/news/economy/unemployment-election/

“and the population grows at the same rate it has over the previous year”

The only population event aside from aging (and that was explained above) that affects the labor force is immigration. Legal immigration is monitored and controlled. Are they implying that illegal aliens affected the workforce numbers?

Reread the CNN report and other reports you have heard lately after reading the following from the US Labor Department March 9, 2012.

“Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 227,000 in February, and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 8.3 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.
Employment rose in professional and businesses services, health care and social
assistance, leisure and hospitality, manufacturing, and mining.

Household Survey Data

The number of unemployed persons, at 12.8 million, was essentially unchanged in February. The unemployment rate held at 8.3 percent, 0.8 percentage point below the August 2011 rate.”
“Both the labor force and employment rose in February. The civilian labor force
participation rate, at 63.9 percent, and the employment-population ratio, at 58.6 percent, edged up over the month. (See table A-1.)

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was essentially unchanged at 8.1 million in February. These individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job. (See table A-8.)

In February, 2.6 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force,
essentially unchanged from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.)
These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)

Among the marginally attached, there were 1.0 million discouraged workers in
February, about the same as a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.)
Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.6 million persons marginally attached to the labor force in February had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)”

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

There is nothing in the above report that accounts for a 0.2% increase in  the labor force participation.

On February Citizen Wells presented an article on unemployment facts and used the graph from BarackObama.com

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/02/28/obama-jobs-lies-truth-team-facts-real-unemployment-picture-obama-vs-reagan-jobs-created-not-lost-touted/

I received an email recently from the Truth Team. I was pleased to see that they presented the same graph revealing the worsening employment situation since December 2007.

“Today we received some good news: Last month, American businesses added another 233,000 jobs. That means that after inheriting an economy that was shedding more than 750,000 jobs a month when the President took office, we’ve now had two straight years of job growth. While it’s certainly encouraging, we all know there’s much more that needs to be done.

If you haven’t seen it, check out this jobs chart, spread the good news, and encourage friends to stand with the President as he continues to fight for jobs:”

I am certain that the Truth Team will want the following important omission rectified:

The Democrats took control of congress in 2007. That is when the job situation began worsening.

Truth Team, no thanks necessary.

I just want to make certain that the candidates quote the correct information.

Also, I believe that CNN deserves at least 4 Orwells for their Orwellian presentation of Obama’s performance.

Glenn Beck insults Sherrif Joe Arpaio and millions of concerned Americans, Beck Religious beliefs questioned, Listen to God more O’Reilly less

Glenn Beck insults Sherrif Joe Arpaio and millions of concerned Americans, Beck Religious beliefs questioned, Listen to God more O’Reilly less

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why does Glenn Beck continue to make uninformed attacks and insults upon Sheriff Joe Arpaio and millions of concerned Americans?”…Citizen Wells

“Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall.”…Proverbs 16:18

What makes a man like Glenn Beck, who professes to have religious and conservative values, who claims to believe in the US Constitution, say the things that he says. What makes Beck praise Sheriff Joe Arpaio for doing one part of his job, protect the border, and at the same time ridicule him for doing another
part of his job.

Although I tend to like Glenn Beck and agree with him on most subjects, I have let him have it in the past for criticizing and ridiculing millions of
concerned Americans, including high ranking military officers, for questioning Obama’s past, his records and his eligibility for the presidency. I have never
had a problem with Glenn Beck not agreeing with those concerned Americans. However, he has gone to extremes in his criticism and belittling. This makes me
question, if not his patriotism, his alleged religious values.

Also disturbing about Glenn Beck’s remarks on Obama’s eligibility is his admission that he doesn’t do research and relies on his staff and sources like Bill
O’Reilly. O’Reilly finally admitted that he used the newspaper announcements in Hawaii as evidence of Obama’s birth there. Beck just used this argument as
well. Anyone doing minimal research has discovered that anyone could place an announcement in the paper and do so much after the fact. One also finds that
placing the ad in one newpaper automatically placed it in the other.

Why would Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly use the newspaper announcement as proof of Obama’s birth in Hawaii. Aside from what we know about them, they have always been at best someone announcing a birth, not a legal document and certainly not date, time location proof.

When Glenn Beck left Fox last year, he said that he was leaving with his soul.

I am not convinced that Glenn Beck left with his soul. I also have doubts about Beck’s religious beliefs just as I have with Barack Obama.

“22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.”…Galatians 5:22-23

Does someone who believes in God and who follows the teachings of Jesus behave as Beck and his lackeys do? Forgeting the difference of opinion for a moment and just focusing on the way Sheriff Joe Arpaio and concerned Americans are portrayed in this video, does this reveal fruit of a godly spirit?

Many of the comments on this blog echo my disgust about Glenn Beck’s actions. This one from SueK on March 3, 2012 resonated with me:
“I was so aggravated at Beck that I actually posted on his site last night after that wonderful slam of Sheriff Joe. You’re familiar with some of the vernacular I use. Just had to get it off my chest and call a spade a spade or, in this case, a moron a moron .

Feathers are ruffled, but powder is still dry….
*************************************************************
Cricket51

Glenn, you’re a moron.

It doesn’t matter if Barky was born on the crown of the Statue of Liberty; his father was a Kenyan and never an American citizen and that alone disqualifies him.

The 1875 Supreme Court case, Minor v. Happersett defined a Natural Born Citizen as a person born in the country to citizen parentS. PARENTS. Plural. Even you can understand that. This case has never been overturned; it is the precedent and defines the qualifications for POTUS.

I’m just glad that Sheriff Joe has the babalones to tackle the eligibility issue and I give him a ton of credit; you weenies in the lamestream media are all complicit for getting a fraud and usurper into the White House.

Thanks a lot. Hope you’re proud.

I look forward to the day when I see Barky and his wife, the Klingon War Bride, doing the perp walk out of OUR White House in orange jumpsuits with the word ‘Leavenworth’ embroidered on the back. That will happen, despite ignorant ‘entertainers’ like you.”

This response from Andrea Shea King was well put (starting around 2:45) :

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/askshow/2012/03/03/the-andrea-shea-king-show

Thanks to Andrea Shea King. Well done!

My advice to Glenn Beck:

Trust more in God less in Bill O’Reilly.

Be careful who you associate with. Your staff is suspect.

Thanks to many commenters for your help and inspiration.