Author Topic: Obama: Corruption, Deception, Dishonesty, Deceit and Promises Broken  (Read 221744 times)

Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6803
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1025 on: August 24, 2011, 12:39:59 PM »
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1026 on: August 25, 2011, 05:35:34 AM »
Team Obama Regulates Goat Herders' Workplaces
by Audrey Hudson (more by this author)
Posted 08/24/2011 ET
Updated 08/24/2011 ET




The Obama administration is setting new workplace regulations to assist foreign workers who fill goat herding positions in the U.S. , including employee-paid cell phones and comfy beds.
 
These new special procedures issued by the Labor Department must be followed by employers who want to hire temporary agricultural foreign workers to perform sheep herding or goat herding activities.  It describes strict rules for sleeping quarters, lighting, food storage, bathing, laundry, cooking and new rules for the counters where food is prepared.
 
“A separate sleeping unit shall be provided for each person, except in a family arrangement,” says the rules signed by Jane Oates, assistant secretary for employment and training administration at the Labor Department.
 
“Such a unit shall include a comfortable bed, cot or bunk, with a clean mattress,” the rules state.
 
Diane Katz, a research fellow in regulatory policy at The Heritage Foundation, unearthed the policy in the "Federal Register," the massive daily journal of proposed regulations that Washington bureaucrats publish every day.

Under the Obama Administration, the nanny state has imposed 75 new major regulations with annual costs of $38 billion.


“This captures what is wrong with government,” Katz said.  “I could not have made this up.”
 
With unemployment holding steady at 9% and government regulations adding more burden to small businesses, such as those run by ranching families, Katz said, bureaucrats aren’t helping.
 
“Instead of remedying the problem, the regulations make it that much harder,” Katz insisted.  “We may need a whole set of regulations just to define what a comfortable bed is.  I imagine it’s not straw."
 
The new lighting standards say that in areas where it is not feasible to provide electrical service such as tents or mobile trailers, lanterns must be provided.  “Kerosene wick lights meet the definition of lantern,” the regulations say.
 
“When workers or their families are permitted or required to cook in their individual unit, a space shall be provided with adequate lighting and ventilation.”
 
“Wall surfaces next to all food preparation and cooking areas shall be of nonabsorbent, easy-to-clean material.  Wall surfaces next to cooking areas shall be of fire-resistant material,” the regulations say.
 
“It makes you wonder,” Katz said, “how they ever did this before the government got involved?”
 
“Who knew we needed all of this federal help for herding goats?” Katz quipped.


www.humanevents.com


dario73

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
  • Getbig!
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1027 on: August 25, 2011, 08:16:25 AM »
Carter has nothing on barry when it comes to incompetence.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1028 on: August 25, 2011, 09:09:41 AM »
4200 New Regulations in Obama Pipeline- so far
Townhall.com ^ | August 25, 2011 | Bob Beauprez




Way back in January President Obama ordered "a government-wide review of the rules already on the books to remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive."   

From that statement alone, you might conclude that Obama already knew that finding needless, burdensome regulation in the 81,000 pages of the federal register would be easy pickings. 

More than seven months later, the Administration has announced the results of that exhaustive review.  By the White House's own undoubtedly inflated estimate, the net benefit will barely be worth one-tenth of one penny of every dollar of expense caused by compliance with federal regulation. 

Cass Sunstein, the Regulation Czar, says the regulation relief he announced yesterday will save business $10 billion over five years.  But, the latest analysis by the Small Business Administration (SBA) calculates that compliance with federal regulation costs a staggering $1.75 trillion annually - and, that is a 2008 pre-Obama Administration estimate. 


That does not include the 75 new major rules generated by Obama in just his first 26 months at an additional burden of $40 billion according to a study by the Heritage Foundation. 

Worse, still to come are the impending clean air rules from the EPA, new derivative rules, net neutrality rules, the new CAFE fuel mandates, and the avalanche of rules mandated by ObamaCare and the Dodd-Frank legislation. 

The government admits there are 4200 new rules or revisions already in the pipeline.

Sunstein's announcement is like finding a man drowning under Niagara Falls and "saving" him by removing a cup of water.  It is further evidence of the complete detachment from reality by this Administration, and an insult to the intelligence of working people and employers alike to pretend that this is the sum total of outdated, duplicitous, needless regulation that in Obama's own words, "stifles job creation." 


But, then should we have expected anything different from the Administration that the Wall Street Journal says has "turned a regulatory firehose" on American business? 



Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1029 on: August 25, 2011, 02:06:00 PM »
Obama Executive Order Creates ‘Office of Diversity and Inclusion’
The Blaze ^ | August 25, 2011 | Buck Sexton




In yet another expansion of government through Executive Order, the Obama administration has created an Office of Diversity and Inclusion to boost minority participation in the federal work force.

Judicial Watch reported on this new government office Wednesday, and stated that the Obama administration’s goal is to:

“Eliminate demographic group imbalances in targeted occupations and improve workforce diversity. To attain this, special initiatives have been created targeting specific groups, including Hispanics, African Americans, American Indians, women and gays and lesbians.”

You can read the entire executive order here, but below is an excerpt that summarizes its mission:

“By this order, I am directing executive departments and agencies to develop and implement a more comprehensive, integrated, and strategic focus on diversity and inclusion as a key component of their human resources strategies.”


(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1030 on: August 25, 2011, 03:09:34 PM »
DOD Report Highlights Administration Incoherence on China
Heritage.org ^ | 8/25/11 | Dean Cheng




Whether it is the delayed release of the 2011 Department of Defense (DOD) report on Chinese military and security developments or Vice President Joe Biden’s statements regarding Chinese human rights, it is becoming clear that the Obama Administration has an utterly incoherent view of the People’s Republic of China.

Biden apparently sees his statement (“Your policy has been one which I fully understand—I’m not second-guessing—of one child per family”) as actually arguing against the Chinese policy. Similarly, even as the Administration was signaling, just before the Vice President’s trip, that it was not going to sell Taiwan badly needed F-16 C/Ds to replace obsolete F-5s in the Taiwan inventory, the interagency process was concluding that the Chinese military is still focused on a Taiwan contingency and “is likely to steadily expand its military options for Taiwan, including those to deter, delay, or deny third party intervention.”


(Excerpt) Read more at blog.heritage.org ...


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1031 on: August 26, 2011, 11:33:25 AM »
August 26, 2011
Obama's Race-Based Spoils System
By Pat Buchanan





Chester Arthur was a most unlikely reformer.

A crucial cog in the political machine of the Empire State's Sen. Roscoe Conkling, he was named by President Grant to the powerful and lucrative post of collector of customs for the Port of New York.

 
Arthur was removed in 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes, who wanted to clean up the federal patronage system. But when James Garfield of Ohio was nominated to succeed Hayes, he sought to unite his party by picking the Stalwart Arthur as running mate.

Six months into the new administration, a deranged office-seeker shot Garfield. Arthur was president. And in a dramatic turnabout, he became the president forever associated with civil service reform, converting the U.S. government into a meritocracy where individuals were hired based upon examinations and advanced based upon merit.

In our time, however, Arthur's achievement has been undone, as a racial spoils system in federal hiring and promotions has been imposed by Democratic presidents, unresisted by Republicans who rarely exhibit the courage to stand up for their principles when the subject is race.

A week ago, an item buried in The Washington Post reported that Obama had "issued an executive order requiring government agencies to develop plans for improving federal workforce diversity."

Obama, wrote Isaac Arnsdorf, is targeting "a problem that has been on the administration's radar. Whites still hold more than 81 percent of senior pay-level positions."

Now, as white folks are two-thirds of the U.S. population, and perhaps three-fourths of those in the 45 to 65 age group who would normally be at senior federal positions, why is this "a problem"?

As no one has contended otherwise, we have to assume that the men and women who hold these top positions got there because of the longevity of their service and the superiority of their skills.

Why is the color of their skin a "problem" for Barack Obama?

As reported here previously, African-Americans are hardly underrepresented in the U.S. government.

Though only 12 percent to 13 percent of the U.S. population, blacks hold 18 percent of all federal jobs. African-Americans are 25 percent of the employees at Treasury and Veterans Affairs, 31 percent of State Department employees, 37 percent of the Department of Education, 38 percent of Housing and Urban Development. They are 42 percent of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., 55 percent of the Government Printing Office, 82 percent of the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency.

According to The Washington Post, blacks hold 44 percent of the jobs at Fannie Mae and 50 percent of the jobs at Freddie Mac.

The EEOC, where African-Americans are overrepresented by 300 percent, has been asked to oversee the new "government-wide initiative to promote diversity and inclusion in the federal workforce."

I'm not making this up.

Perhaps, while he is battling for a greater diversity of sacrifice and rewards up there on Martha's Vineyard, our president might reflect on another example of the overrepresentation of white males -- in the caskets coming home to Dover.

In the first five years of the Iraq war, Asian-Americans were 1 percent of our fallen heroes, Latinos 11 percent, African-Americans 10 percent. White Americans were 75 percent of the dead, and from photos of the fallen in newspapers since, the ratios appear to hold.

Does this overrepresentation of white men in the body bags and caskets coming home bother our commander in chief, who wants fewer white men at the top level of his executive branch?

"Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?" says the Lord in Matthew's Gospel.

Has Obama taken a close look at his hypocritical party on Capitol Hill? Though African-Americans are fully 25 percent of all Democratic voters, in a Senate Democratic Caucus of 53 members, there is not a single black man or black woman.

Well, regretfully, we are told, none was elected

But if liberals believe in affirmative action, why don't Democratic senators practice as well as preach it? Why don't they lead by example rather than by exhortation?

Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer have been around for decades. Why do they not agree to flip a coin, have one resign, and have Gov. Jerry Brown appoint Rep. Barbara Lee, head of the Black Caucus, to the U.S. Senate?

Why does not Barbara Mikulski, who has been there forever, not stand down and let Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley appoint Rep. Elijah Cummings of Baltimore to the Senate? Let Chuck Schumer go forth and do likewise, show us what a heroic liberal is, and let Gov. Andrew Cuomo name an African-American to replace him in the Senate.

Senate liberals applaud affirmative action programs that deny white students and white federal workers admissions and promotions they have earned by their labors. But when, ever, has one of these liberals voluntarily made the sacrifice that he demands be imposed upon others?

www.realclearpolitics.co m


________________________ _________________


Whoever still supports this admn needs at a minimum 24 hours of waterboarding and 300 lashes. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1032 on: August 26, 2011, 11:40:51 AM »
Answering Jonathan Alter’s ChallengePeter Wehner
08.26.2011 - 12:41 PM     



“Tell me again why Barack Obama has been such a bad president?” Jonathan Alter writes in his column.

Alter tells us he’s not talking here about Obama as a tactician and communicator, and he’s not interested in hearing ad hominem attacks or about people’s generalized “disappointment.” (Neither am I.) He wants to know on a substantive basis why Obama should be judged to have failed so far.


In Alter’s words, “Your mission, Jim [or anyone else for that matter], should you decide to accept it, is to be specific and rational, not vague and visceral.”

Consider the mission accepted.

In one sense, the answer to the Alter challenge is obvious: Obama has failed by his own standards. It’s the Obama administration, not the RNC, that said if his stimulus package was passed unemployment would not exceed 8 percent. It’s Obama who joked there weren’t as many “shovel-ready” jobs as he thought.

It’s Obama who promised to cut the deficit in half. It’s Obama who said if we passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the health care cost curve would go down rather than up. It’s Obama who promised us recovery and prosperity, hope and change. What we’ve gotten instead is the opposite.

What makes Alter’s challenge particularly delicious is during the Bush years he spoke out about the importance of a “reality-based” presidency (as opposed to a “faith-based” one). “They [Republicans] could end up winning in November by distorting the argument,” Alter said in 2006. “But on credibility and the facts, they’ve lost.”

With Alter’s devotion to credibility and facts in mind, let’s take an empirical, reality-based look at economic life in America during the Age of Obama:

* Under Obama’s stewardship, we have lost 2.2 million jobs (and 900,000 full-time jobs in the last four months alone). He is now on track to have the worst jobs record of any president in the modern era.

* The unemployment rate stands at 9.1 percent v. 7.8 percent the month Obama took office.

* July marked the 30th consecutive month in which the unemployment rate was above the 8 percent level, the highest since the Great Depression.

* Since May 2009 — roughly 14 weeks into the Obama administration — the unemployment rate has been above 10 percent during three months, above 9 percent during 22 months, and above 8 percent during two months.

* Chronic unemployment is worse than during the Great Depression.

* The youth employment rate is at the lowest level since records were first kept in 1948.

* The share of the eligible population holding a job has declined to the lowest level since the early 1980s.

* The housing crisis is worse than in the Great Depression. (Home values are worth roughly one-third less than they were five years ago.)

* The rate of economic growth under Obama has been only slightly higher than the 1930s, the decade of the Great Depression. From the first quarter of 2010 through the first quarter of 2011, we experienced five consecutive quarters of slowing growth. America’s GDP for the second quarter of this year was a sickly 1.0 percent; in the first quarter, it was 0.4 percent.

* Fiscal year 2011 will mark the third straight year with deficits in excess of $1 trillion. Prior to the Obama presidency, we had never experienced a deficit in excess of $1 trillion.

* During the Obama presidency, America has increased its debt by $4 trillion.

That is to say, Obama has achieved in two-and-a-half years what it took George W. Bush two full terms in office to achieve — and Obama, when he was running for president, slammed Bush’s record as being “unpatriotic.”

* America saw its credit rating downgraded for the first time in history under the Obama presidency.

* Consumer confidence has plunged to the lowest level since the Carter presidency.

*  The number of people in the U.S. who are in poverty is on track for a record increase on President Obama’s watch, with the ranks of working-age poor approaching 1960s levels that led to the national war on poverty.

* A record number of Americans now rely on the federal government’s food stamps program. More than 44.5 million Americans received Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, a 12 percent increase from one year ago.

There is more that can be said, but you get the point.

What makes this record doubly horrifying is rapid growth is the norm after particularly deep recessions — but under Obama, our recovery has been historically weak. President Obama (and Alter) can blame his predecessor, the Tea Party, the Arab Spring, the Japanese tsunami, events in Europe, ATM machines and even athlete’s foot for his predicament. It doesn’t really matter, as even Obama conceded during the early months of his presidency, when he declared, “One nice thing about the situation I find myself in is that I will be held accountable.”

Indeed. Obama “owns” the economy, as both his senior aide David Plouffe and the chair of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, have said.

“If you lose a common ground of facts on which to move forward as a society, nobody can agree on anything, and you can’t pull together to solve problems,” Alter told Keith Olbermann during the Bush administration.

I agree. And it is on the common ground of facts that we can declare–in a calm, specific, reasonable, rational and empirical manner–Obama to be an utter failure.



http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/08/26/jonathan-alter-challenge


Deicide

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22921
  • Reapers...
I hate the State.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1034 on: August 26, 2011, 12:16:18 PM »
The real crime is in the opportunity obama squandered in the last 4 years.   

He could have been a great POTUS by connecting with the average main street guy, but instead cast his lot with the banksters, mobsters, crony capilitists, and thugs.   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1035 on: August 26, 2011, 12:28:08 PM »
Eco-zealous feds target Gibson guitars, antique piano sellers; Updated: Gibson explains
Michelle Malkin ^ | 8/25/11 | Michelle Malkin




The real endangered species?

I’ve seen a lot of enviro-nitwittery over the years, but this takes the cake.

US Fish and Wildlife officials have raided the famous Gibson Guitars. And the instrument-maker isn’t alone. Antique piano dealers are also in the crosshairs. Why? Because rare, beautiful instruments made of ecologically incorrect materials must be sacrificed at the green altar. Talk about hitting a sour note.

Eric Felten at the WSJ reports:

Federal agents swooped in on Gibson Guitar Wednesday, raiding factories and offices in Memphis and Nashville, seizing several pallets of wood, electronic files and guitars. The Feds are keeping mum, but in a statement yesterday Gibson’s chairman and CEO, Henry Juszkiewicz, defended his company’s manufacturing policies, accusing the Justice Department of bullying the company. “The wood the government seized Wednesday is from a Forest Stewardship Council certified supplier,” he said, suggesting the Feds are using the aggressive enforcement of overly broad laws to make the company cry uncle.

It isn’t the first time that agents of the Fish and Wildlife Service have come knocking at the storied maker of such iconic instruments as the Les Paul electric guitar, the J-160E acoustic-electric John Lennon played, and essential jazz-boxes such as Charlie Christian’s ES-150. In 2009 the Feds seized several guitars and pallets of wood from a Gibson factory, and both sides have been wrangling over the goods in a case with the delightful name “United States of America v. Ebony Wood in Various Forms.”


(Excerpt) Read more at michellemalkin.com ...



________________________ ________________________ ________


Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1036 on: August 26, 2011, 12:39:06 PM »
Eco-zealous feds target Gibson guitars, antique piano sellers; Updated: Gibson explains
Michelle Malkin ^ | 8/25/11 | Michelle Malkin




The real endangered species?

I’ve seen a lot of enviro-nitwittery over the years, but this takes the cake.

US Fish and Wildlife officials have raided the famous Gibson Guitars. And the instrument-maker isn’t alone. Antique piano dealers are also in the crosshairs. Why? Because rare, beautiful instruments made of ecologically incorrect materials must be sacrificed at the green altar. Talk about hitting a sour note.

Eric Felten at the WSJ reports:

Federal agents swooped in on Gibson Guitar Wednesday, raiding factories and offices in Memphis and Nashville, seizing several pallets of wood, electronic files and guitars. The Feds are keeping mum, but in a statement yesterday Gibson’s chairman and CEO, Henry Juszkiewicz, defended his company’s manufacturing policies, accusing the Justice Department of bullying the company. “The wood the government seized Wednesday is from a Forest Stewardship Council certified supplier,” he said, suggesting the Feds are using the aggressive enforcement of overly broad laws to make the company cry uncle.

It isn’t the first time that agents of the Fish and Wildlife Service have come knocking at the storied maker of such iconic instruments as the Les Paul electric guitar, the J-160E acoustic-electric John Lennon played, and essential jazz-boxes such as Charlie Christian’s ES-150. In 2009 the Feds seized several guitars and pallets of wood from a Gibson factory, and both sides have been wrangling over the goods in a case with the delightful name “United States of America v. Ebony Wood in Various Forms.”


(Excerpt) Read more at michellemalkin.com ...



________________________ ________________________ ________




lol.. obamas name dosent appear anywhere in the article

why the picture.. hahaha fail again

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1037 on: August 26, 2011, 01:01:32 PM »
Texas AG Sues EPA over Obama’s War on Energy
Townhall.com ^ | August 26, 2011 | John Ransom





In an attempt to push back the government overreach that has been killing jobs in the country since Obama’s red-tape machine arrived in DC, Texas has decided to sue the EPA over rules that threaten to shut down coal fired plants.

Texas, under Governor Rick Perry and Attorney General Greg Abbott, has been at the forefront of the 10th Amendment movement seeking to reign in the federal government’s repeated attempts to micromanage, manhandle and mismanage almost every aspect of the citizens’ personal and professional lives.     


“The Texas Attorney General’s office ‘will pursue every available legal remedy’ to prevent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from implementing the new Cross-State Air Pollution rule in the state, office spokeswoman Lauren Bean said,” according to the Fort Worth Star Telegram.

The new rules are designed as a regulatory end run around the states and Congress in order to implement policies that neither the states nor the Congress will approve. Even with a substantial liberal majority in Congress in 2010, Blue Dog Democrats and red-blooded Republicans managed to beat back attempts to impose similar policies under so-called cap-and-trade legislation.

But Obama rarely cares much for the approval of Congress. Once Congress stopped acting as a ways and means committee for him, the president started pursuing a policy of enacting legislation- or scuttling it- by regulatory action, nuisance lawsuits and prosecutorial discretion.

The EPA has re-written rules regarding emissions under the guise of health risks posed by fossil fuels. Power plants have gone from the regulatory requirement of using the “best available” emissions technology to being required to install the “most advanced” emissions technology.

Consequently many older coal fired plants will likely be shuttered because they won’t be able to afford the most advanced emissions technology. And for those power plants that already meet emissions standards, the EPA is using vague air quality rules to shut down the more advanced coal fired plants.     

Last month the Texas AG’s office announced that it would be suing the EPA over permitting rules rejected by the EPA that will prevent the construction of large industrial plants. The announcement was accompanied by blistering criticism of the EPA by Governor Rick Perry, who has since entered the presidential race.   

"The EPA’s overreach is as potentially devastating as it is unnecessary,” said Governor Rick Perry last month as reported by the Texas Tribune. “Texas has achieved greater improvements in air quality than the nation as a whole since 2000 through our use of incentives and innovation."


The Tribune also reported that Perry said that new standards by the EPA would also "likely result in significantly higher prices for energy and just about everything else, a frightening prospect during a time so many Americans are struggling to make ends meet."

The Texas Railroad Commission, which is responsible for coal mining operations in Texas, urged the attorney general to take action against the EPA.  They say that the EPA is targeting Texas and the implication is that the targeting is political.

“This rule is just another attempt by overzealous Obama appointees to stifle economic growth in Texas,” Commissioner Barry Smitherman said. “The EPA effectively shut Texas out of negotiations on this rule, and demonstrated that they have no interest in scientific evidence or facts. If this ill-considered rule is allowed to stand, it will damage the reliability of our electric grid, and thereby harm the citizens the EPA claims to be protecting.”

Texas has huge reserves of lignite coal, a softer, more moisture-rich coal, which puts out significantly less energy than anthracite or bituminous coal. Still, 40 percent of the coal used in Texas for electricity generation comes from Texas lignite, says the Railroad Commission.

Earlier this week, according to the Star Telegram, the commission sent a letter to the attorney general’s office urging the AG to sue the EPA over the rules.     

In addition to killing jobs in Texas, the new rules make it more likely that power brownouts and blackouts will happen during the hot summer months, according to the letter sent to the AG.     


“Yet again, another EPA rule targets Texas by putting jobs and energy reliability directly in the crosshairs because of radical environmental policies driven by unelected federal bureaucrats,” Railroad Commission Chairman Elizabeth Ames Jones said. “As the country's fifth largest coal producing state and the top job creating state, Americans rely on Texas energy and Texas jobs to fuel our economic recovery."

She added: "Don't mess with Texas.”

And now that Perry’s in, git used to hearin’ it.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1038 on: August 26, 2011, 01:12:27 PM »
Dem:Obama's Promise Stimulus Would Lower Unemployment "Stupidest Thing" Any Admin Has Ever Said
MRCTV (Media Research Center TV) ^ | 8/26/2011 | Joe S.



Posted on Friday, August 26, 2011 3:01:32 PM by blog.Eyeblast.tv

On August 24,2011, Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Kentucky) appeared on WFPL news and lambasted the Obama Administration over the stimulus package saying the promise it would lower the unemployment rate was probably the "stupidest thing" that any administration has ever said.

Yarmuth said:

“I think if you asked them now they will say that was the stupidest thing that basically any administration probably ever said because that’s not something they can necessarily control."


(Excerpt) Read more at mrctv.org ...


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1039 on: August 26, 2011, 01:25:51 PM »
Dave Jamieson
dave.jamieson@huffingtonpost.com
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/26/nlrb-rule-posters-workplace_n_937907.html



Rule Requiring Posters In Workplace Infuriates Business Groups
 
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is not happy about the labor board's new 'poster rule.'
First Posted: 8/26/11 12:07 PM ET Updated: 8/26/11 02:33 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- The federal labor board announced Thursday that it has finalized a rule requiring employers to post notices in the workplace informing workers of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. The poster will be a modest 11 by 17 inches, similar to the Department of Labor notices already posted in workplaces across the country, and it will be provided free by the federal government.

Business groups and their allies are furious. They say that the rule is too onerous, and that it benefits labor unions.

The National Federation of Independent Business, a powerful small-business trade group known to support Republicans, quickly pounced on the "punitive new rule" as another assault by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on independent employers.

"Just when we thought we had seen it all from the NLRB, it has reached a new low in its zeal to punish small-business owners," Karen Harned, executive director of NFIB’s Small Business Legal Center, said in a statement.

The National Labor Relations Act is a 76-year-old law that outlines workers' rights to unionize and bargain collectively in most private-sector workplaces. The fact that the board would want Americans aware of these rights is apparently seen by some as catering to labor unions.

Randel K. Johnson, senior vice president for labor policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, told The New York Times that he questioned whether the NLRB even had the authority to mandate the postings.

"This is one more initiative among those we expect to be coming out over the next month that are essentially gifts to organized labor," he said.

The conservative-leaning Boston Herald penned an editorial Friday decrying the labor board as "out of control."

"House Republicans seem intent on trying to rein in the NLRB. This just gives them more ammunition," the board wrote.

Peter Schaumber, a former NLRB chairman appointed by George W. Bush, told Bloomberg that the new rule is "arbitrary" and "capricious."

"It shows just how activist they’re prepared to be," he said.

The poster hubbub may be just another sign that the NLRB can't do much of anything these days without infuriating the business community. A high-profile complaint filed by its general counsel against the Boeing Company earlier this year has rallied Republicans and business trade groups against the NLRB as well as the White House. New rules proposed by the board that would streamline the union election process have also angered the right. Some Republican leaders have gone so far as to threaten defunding the labor board.

As for the new posters, NLRB officials don't see the requirement as all that burdensome -- and in fact, they believe the posters are long overdue.

"We've been one of the few agencies that enforce workplace laws that haven’t had some kind of posting up," agency spokeswoman Nancy Cleeland notes.

The new poster requirements will go into effect Nov. 14.

Companies will be able to download the poster off the web or stop into any NLRB regional office to pick up free copies. Cleeland said the board tried to be as accommodating as possible, tweaking the rules after a public-comment period so that employers could use black-and-white posters if they don't have color printers. And if the companies don't carry 11 by 17 inch paper, the board carved out a solution.

"They can take two different 8-by-11 pieces of paper and tape them together," Cleeland said



________________________ ________ 

And like lemmings and dupes, the 95ers and obamabots keep marching off the cliff. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1040 on: August 26, 2011, 01:49:56 PM »
An Amazing Indictment of Obamanomics: Banks That Don’t Want Deposits
Cato Institute ^ | August 26, 2011 | Daniel Mitchell




An Amazing Indictment of Obamanomics: Banks That Don’t Want Deposits

Posted by Daniel J. Mitchell

I’ve commented on the failure of Obamanomics, with special focus on how both banks and corporations are sitting on money because the investment climate is so grim. Not exactly flattering to the White House.

Using Minneapolis Federal Reserve data, I’ve compared the current recovery with the expansion of the early 1980s. Once again, not good news for the Obama administration.

And I’ve shared a couple of cartoons — here and here — that use humor to show the impact of bad public policy.

But here’s a Bloomberg story that provides what may be the most damning evidence that the President’s big government agenda is a failure:

U.S. regulators have asked some banks to take more deposits from large investors even if it’s unprofitable, and lenders in return are seeking relief on insurance premiums and leverage ratios, according to six people with knowledge of the talks.

Deposits are flooding into the biggest U.S. banks as customers seek shelter from Europe’s debt crisis and falling stock prices. That forces lenders to raise capital for a growing balance sheet and saddles them with the higher deposit insurance payments. With short-term interest rates so low, it’s hard for financial firms to reinvest the new money profitably.

…At least one firm, Bank of New York Mellon Corp., tried to recoup some of the costs by charging depositors 13 basis points, or 0.13 percent, for holding unusually high balances.

Let’s think about what this article is really saying. Banks normally make money by attracting deposits and then lending that money to people and businesses that have productive uses for the funds.

Yet the economy is so weak that banks are leery of taking more money. The story is complicated by other factors, including capital flight from Europe, taxes (or premiums) imposed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and various regulatory issues. But even with these caveats, it’s still remarkable that banks want to turn down money — or charge people for making deposits. That’s sort of like McDonald’s turning away customers because the firm loses money by selling Big Macs and french fries. Or, better yet, like McDonald’s turning away free goods from suppliers because not enough people want to buy the final product.

Daniel J. Mitchell • August 26, 2011 @ 1:09 pm Filed under: Finance, Banking & Monetary Policy; General; Government and Politics; Tax and Budget Policy Tags: big government, government intervention, Governmnet Spending, obama, obamanomics, taxation


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1041 on: August 26, 2011, 03:23:06 PM »
Demonizing Big Business is Not Going to Bring Back Jobs
Townhall.com ^ | August 26, 2011 | Donald Lambro




WASHINGTON -- When a heckler at the Iowa State Fair told Mitt Romney that raising taxes on corporations was one way to solve America's fiscal and economic problems, the former governor shot back that "Corporations are people, my friend."

The heckler and his friends groaned in disbelief. They believed, as they had no doubt been taught in school, that corporations were part of the nation's evil power structure, beholden to no one, made up of faceless, amorphous rich executives who made big money at the expense of ordinary people.

Romney, whose career as a venture capital investor has helped build up companies such as Staples, with 80,000 employees now on its payroll, knows that the people who make corporations succeed are the millions of Americans up and down the chain of production and management. Big corporations are successful because of productive and innovative employees.

Romney returned to this heckler's question at a town hall meeting in Claremont, N.H., Wednesday, to further elaborate on his answer, which had been boiled down to a sound bite on the TV nightly news shows.

"Corporations -- they're made up of people. They're just groups of people that come together for work. When you say 'tax corporations' -- the steel and the vinyl and the concrete, these things don't pay taxes. Only people do ...

"I know there are people that don't like business. I like business."

So do the tens of millions of Americans who work for businesses large and small to pay the mortgage, put food on the table, give to charities and churches, educate their kids, and of course pay their taxes.

Romney is correct when he says corporations do not pay federal income taxes because they add their taxes to the prices of their products or services. Customers pay that tax.

President Reagan was so fond of reminding Americans of this economic fact of life that he suggested we should end the corporate tax -- taxing only individual incomes and thus make U.S. businesses more competitive at home and abroad.

But what really rankled Romney was the implicit suggestion by his questioner at the Iowa fair that somehow corporations were no longer contributing their fair share to the country's economic and fiscal well-being.

Consider a few fundamental statistics on businesses large and small:

-- U.S. multinational corporations employed more than 21 million Americans here at home in 2009.

-- Nearly 48 million Americans work for businesses with 500 or more employees.

-- Fifty-two percent of all American workers are employed in businesses with fewer than 500 people, according to the U.S. Small Business Administration.

Big corporations employ millions of Americans, but the majority of Americans work for small businesses. The goal of a prosperous and thriving economy is to build an economic climate, and tax policy, that encourages growth, business expansion and more jobs.

With a national unemployment rate that is stuck at more than 9 percent and into double-digits in a number of states, and a weak growth rate hovering around 1 percent, it's clear that President Obama's policies of the past three years have been an utter failure. Only 58.1 percent of our population is working. That's the lowest percentage since the early 1980s.

The way out of this recession is not to raise taxes on corporations and other businesses, but to reform our tax code to stimulate growth.

We have a corporate tax structure today that sets the top rate at 35 percent -- the second-highest corporate tax rate in the industrial world. It's triple Ireland's tax rate, and 10 points higher than in Austria, China or Denmark. Only Japan's is higher at 39.5 percent, though it plans to lower its rate this year.

It is no secret that few corporations pay the top rate because of a maze of tax breaks, loopholes and other ways to write off various expenses, losses and even offset foreign tax bills. They have been written into the tax code by Congress over many decades. But now the tax system is in need of a thorough cleansing to eliminate many of these tax breaks and significantly broaden the tax revenue base, while at the same time lowering the overall tax rates.

President Obama's bipartisan deficit commission proposed doing just this in a plan last December that would effectively bring in more revenue by plugging or shrinking tax loopholes, while lowering the top tax rates to 28 percent or less.

Unfortunately, Obama did not embrace his own commission's recommendations, preferring to demagogue against "millionaires and billionaires" and big corporations whom he claims are not paying their "fair share."

That may appeal to Obama's narrowing base of anti-business supporters and lead to heckling Republican presidential candidates, but it doesn't offer any pro-growth, pro-employment solutions to get the battered U.S. economy back on track.



Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1042 on: August 26, 2011, 04:49:28 PM »
ExxonMobil Sues Obama Administration for Canceling Deepwater Well Worth ‘Billions of Barrels
Cybercast News Service ^ | 8/26/11 | Matt Cover




ExxonMobil, the world’s largest energy company, filed a lawsuit against the federal government for canceling an oil-drilling lease in the Gulf of Mexico that held “billions of barrels of oil,” according to the company. In the suit, filed Aug. 12 in federal court in Louisiana against Interior Department Secretary Ken Salazar and related parties, Exxon alleges that the Interior Department made an “arbitrary, capricious” decision in canceling the deepwater leases, arguing that the government’s action “deprives ExxonMobil of property without due process of law.” ExxonMobil lawsuit


(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...


tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1043 on: August 27, 2011, 10:07:12 AM »
I gotta admit, any lawsuit by Exxon-Mobile is pretty much bullshit.

This is a company that is making record profits and has huge tax exemptions... They need to shut the hell up.
what does their profit have to do with them being wronged?

they should not seek retribution for wrong doing b/c they make alot of money?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1044 on: August 27, 2011, 10:18:12 AM »
I have no problem exxon making profits.  They produce and deliver a product I need and use.   They make less per gallon than the govt charges in taxes. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1045 on: August 27, 2011, 04:43:40 PM »
When will the Obama administration sell GM?

By Editorial, Saturday, August 27, 4:23 PM

THIS IS an editorial page, not a stock tip sheet. Still, maybe the Obama administration should have paid attention when we urged it to start selling off the Treasury Department’s stake in General Motors. That was on April 25, when GM’s stock sold at about $30 per share. The administration didn’t sell then, and it’s still not selling — with GM down to about $23.

So much for all those reports that Treasury wanted to exit GM by summer’s end, just as it exited its much smaller stake in Chrysler this year amid much fanfare. The government continues to hold 500 million shares, about 26.2 percent of GM; its hesitation has cost the taxpayers $3.5 billion in paper losses since our editorial.

To be sure, market timing is a mug’s game. The goal of sinking $51.3 billion into a restructured GM was not to make a profit for the Treasury; it was to rescue a major part of the U.S. manufacturing base.

In fact, the likeliest outcome all along has been that the government — i.e., the taxpayers — would lose money. History will judge the GM rescue based on the totality of its results, which include not only the dollar cost to taxpayers but also the broader benefits of avoiding an industrial meltdown at the height of the 2009 recession.

However, the administration’s policy creates the appearance of playing politics with its GM stake. Hanging on to the stock, even as it drops, protects President Obama from the hit he will take when the government’s loss changes from hypothetical to real. But a buy-and-hold strategy isn’t without cost to the Treasury — i.e., the taxpayers. Like any other investor who keeps his money tied up in an underperforming asset, the Treasury forfeits the benefits it might reap by cutting its losses and redeploying its funds, perhaps to reduce the deficit. And, of course, it runs the risk that the stock will go down even more.

No one is saying the government should hold a fire sale. But it could announce a plan to sell its shares in GM at regular intervals over the coming months, regardless of price, so as to minimize market distortions. There will be losses. The benefits, though, would include reassuring the business community that this president really does have an exit strategy for federal ownership of industry — and relieving GM of the “Government Motors” stigma, which still hampers its efforts to woo car buyers and prospective executives.

As we said in April, selling GM creates financial risk for taxpayers and political risk for Mr. Obama no matter when the government does it. So Treasury might as well get on with the job. Maybe this time it’ll take our advice.



Www.Washingtonpost.com


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1046 on: August 28, 2011, 04:27:09 AM »
Report: Gibson Competitor is Dem Donor; Uses Same Wood, Experienced No Federal Raids
by John Nolte

Via Andrew Lawton at Landmark Report:

One of Gibson’s leading competitors is C.F. Martin & Company. The C.E.O., Chris Martin IV, is a long-time Democratic supporter, with $35,400 in contributions to Democratic candidates and the DNC over the past couple of elections (though, to be fair, he did donate a whopping $750 to Republican Congressmen in the 90s.) According to C.F. Martin’s catalog, several of their guitars contain “East Indian Rosewood.” In case you were wondering, that is the exact same wood in at least ten of Gibson’s guitars.
If true, it add another piece to an increasingly disturbing puzzle.

You can listen to Gibson CEO (and Republican supporter) Henry E. Juszkiewicz’s interview with Dana Loesch here.

You can listen to the collective music world’s outcry over this seemingly partisan witch hunt being conducted by The Man here.

Cowards all.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39467
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1048 on: August 28, 2011, 04:30:45 AM »
Gibson Guitar CEO: We're Under Attack By Obama Administration
CEO says Obama Justice Dept. Wants Them to Close Their Doors. by  Jim Hoft 08/27/2011
23
Comments
Henry Juszkiewicz, the CEO of Gibson Guitars, Inc. was on The Dana Loesch Show on Friday. Gibson is under attack by the the Obama Justice Department for accusations that the company broke American Indian laws.

Juszkiewiz said the government suggested that the company's use of unfinished wood from India is illegal, not because of U.S. law, but because of the Justice Department's interpretation of a law in India. The Holder Justice Department raided at least two Gibson manufacturing plants this week forcing hundreds of workers off their jobs. Juszkiewiz says the company lost a million dollars this week.

Finally, Henry Juszkiewicz told Dana, "The Obama Justice Department wants us to just shut our doors and go away." He says he will continue to fight for the Gibson company and its workers.

Juszkiewicz held a press conference yesterday in front of the Gibson headquarters.  The Obama Justice Department confiscated over $500,000 in materials back in 2009. Gibson is going to court on Monday to discuss a previous request for the government to return the property.

More... Gibson Guitar CEO: "We're Being Targeted."

Still More... Tom W. added this:

Gibson is the only guitar company targeted by the Obama DOJ under the Lacey Act. Tennessee is a right-to-work state. Fender, Taylor, Rickenbacker, Danelectro, Carvin, MusicMan, and ESP are in California; Spector is in New York; Martin is in Pennsylvania; Guild, Ovation, and Hamer are in Connecticut; Alvarez is in Missouri; B.C. Rich is in Kentucky; Heritage is in Michigan; Washburn is in Illinois. All are forced-union states.
Peavey is another guitar and electronics company, located in the right-to-work state of Mississippi. Since 2009, Peavey has been the target of multiple lawsuits filed by a competitor, MUSIC Group, which alleges that Peavy products fail to meet federal safety and emissions standards.

Jim Hoft is the proprietor of Gateway Pundit Blog from the heart of America-- St. Louis, Missouri.  He is also a guest-blogger for HUMAN EVENTS.com.

 http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45796


George Whorewell

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7365
  • TND
Re: Obama Admn: The worst Presidency this nation has ever had to endure.
« Reply #1049 on: August 28, 2011, 05:01:53 AM »
Obama Executive Order Creates ‘Office of Diversity and Inclusion’
The Blaze ^ | August 25, 2011 | Buck Sexton




In yet another expansion of government through Executive Order, the Obama administration has created an Office of Diversity and Inclusion to boost minority participation in the federal work force.

Judicial Watch reported on this new government office Wednesday, and stated that the Obama administration’s goal is to:

“Eliminate demographic group imbalances in targeted occupations and improve workforce diversity. To attain this, special initiatives have been created targeting specific groups, including Hispanics, African Americans, American Indians, women and gays and lesbians.”

You can read the entire executive order here, but below is an excerpt that summarizes its mission:

“By this order, I am directing executive departments and agencies to develop and implement a more comprehensive, integrated, and strategic focus on diversity and inclusion as a key component of their human resources strategies.”


(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...



An office of diversity when the majority of government workers are black. Great plan for job creation.  ::)