FIRST SHOT!
World Less Thrilled With Obama Now
Yes, the world around us is finally recognizing what we see! Countries around the world that hailed Barack Obama when he first took office in 2009 are no longer so keen about the president, a new survey finds.
A Pew Research survey of 21 countries shows that global confidence in and attitudes toward the United States have slipped since Obama moved into the White House. The biggest drop in approval of Obama’s foreign policies occurred in China, where it plummeted from 57 percent in 2009 to 27 percent now, the Global Attitudes Project survey revealed.
The survey found Europeans still remain largely confident in Obama, albeit somewhat less so than in 2009. In Muslim countries, however, the public remains highly critical of Obama, In Japan, confidence in Oabma’s policies dropped from 77 percent in 2009 to 58 percent today,
In nearly all countries, more than half the public disapproves of the Obama administration’s use of unmanned drones to take out terror suspects. His ineptness is affecting their economies and subsequently their households. He stands for nothing other than Black rights, Socialism, and Muslim appeasement.
The rest of the world, like most Americans, sees Obama as setting Race Relations in America back 50 years. And yes, people are tired of his constant playing of the Race Card at every turn.
His nemesis the Tea Party doesn't give a shit that he's black, his policies are what they can't accept. Why can't he understand the difference between disagreeing with someone over substance? Why can't Obama stop making it into something that it is not about?
Sorry, Mr. President but no one really cares that you're half black. They care about the fact that you have shown open disdain for us, our way of life, our form of government, and our culture. You have openly embraced America's enemies and tried taking credit for what troops out in the field facing real danger are doing to keep us safe.
As for Obama's love of Socialism, most of the real world -- sans college kids who have wealthy parents -- has had about a belly full of Socialism. The system of government being our lord and master doesn't appeal to anyone with half a brain in their head. In fact, even Communist China has had to talk to Obama about the benefits of Capitalism.
As for Muslim appeasement, he's sold out all of our allies -- including the only democracy in the Middle East just so he can be "popular". He reminds me of a girl that I once knew in college that would play one person against the other just to be "liked".
Maybe we should make it mandatory that our President is secure with himself, and has no mommy/ daddy issues before they assume the office of president? Obama, the poor bastard, seems to be loaded with all sorts of conflicts - black, white, racial, religious, economic, and ideological!
SECOND SHOT!
Top Global Accounting Firm says U.S. Debt Crisis "Bigger Than You Think"
What is the real cost of the U.S. government's nearly $16 trillion debt? "The debt crisis is likely bigger than you think," a new report issued last week by Deloitte, one of the world's largest accounting firms, concluded.
That's because interest payments add a whole new level of fiscal pain to the country's debt problem. Interest payments on the national debt alone, it noted, are expected to total some $4.2 Trillion over the next decade. And that number could fluctuate depending on rates.
The lead author of the Deloitte study, director Bill Eggers, stressed the way that U.S. government debt could quickly spiral out of control if investors become less willing to lend more money. "If interest rates go up by simply 3 percent over the next decade, the additional cost to the Treasury, just for interest payments, would equal the peak combined cost of the wars in both Afghanistan in Iraq," he said.
So what can the huge amount of $4.2 Trillion Taxpayer Dollars buy instead? Deloitte, an accounting and consulting firm that often audits government finances, says it's enough to do all of the following:
Build 80,000 miles of highways; Pay tuition for every science/math/engineering college degree in the country; Triple U.S. government general R&D funding; Build six international space stations; Offset 80 percent of global warming pollution in the atmosphere as recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The report notes that the $4.2 Trillion could also be given back in the form of tax cuts. Imagine that!
What a concept! Give the money back to the people! Nope, they'll never go for it!
Not all economists are on board with the implications of the study. "The major holders of government bonds are agencies and individuals within the U.S.," Robert Stonebraker, an economics professor at Winthrop University, told Fox News. "So if you pay $1 Trillion in interest on the debt, a lot of it will go back to Americans anyway."
But Eggers noted that a lot of the interest payments do go overseas. "If you look at the interest payments going to foreign countries, soon we're going to be spending enough to essentially finance the Chinese military," he said. Currently, foreigners own some $5 Trillion in U.S. government bonds, $1 Trillion of which is owned by China.
Some criticized the report's ideas. "I think they're overhyping the need to fix the debt crisis in the short run," Stonebraker said. "If the economy recovers, a lot of the debt will go away automatically. There wouldn't be as much need for unemployment benefits, food stamps, Medicaid -- so a significant part of the spending would go away, and debt growth would slow on its own."
Stonebraker agreed with the Deloitte report that debt will eventually need to be dealt with, but said he disagreed on the timing. "It's not appropriate to cut spending during an economic slowdown -- that is exactly when you need deficit spending to stimulate the economy and get people back to work."
Other analysts say that the deficit should be brought under control quickly, and cite European countries that are cutting budgets as an example. "There are a whole set of economists who think that we need to bite the bullet and start making cuts now, essentially what the U.K. government is doing now," Eggers said. "The debt is not something that is going to go away the more time that goes by."
THIRD SHOT!
Bible-College Student Arrested In New York For Having Pocketknife
A student from a Pennsylvania Bible college was arrested and charged with a high misdemeanor for carrying a pocketknife at the subway station in Times Square during a visit to New York, The Columbus Dispatch reported. Clayton Baltzer, 19, who attends Baptist Bible College & Seminary in Clarks Summit, Pa., has paid a $125 fine and completed two days of community service for the March 27 offense.
He is becoming something of a poster child for "the prosecution of honest citizens carrying knives," Doug Ritter, chairman of the advocacy group Knife Rights, told the paper. Baltzer, a camping-ministry major who considers the arrest part of God’s plan, tells the paper that he's "never been in trouble before" and would use similar knives to whittle for children at special-needs camps.
Nevertheless, a few years ago, New York cracked down on illegal knives, the paper reported. Ohio's case law, meanwhile, leans toward not considering a common pocket knife a deadly weapon. The report said the arrest will likely drop from Baltzer’s record in a year, but that Baltzer may have soured on the Big Apple.
The paper reported, he said, "I don't plan on visiting New York unless I have to."
A student from a Pennsylvania Bible college was arrested and charged with a high misdemeanor for carrying a pocketknife at the subway station in Times Square during a visit to New York, The Columbus Dispatch reported. Clayton Baltzer, 19, who attends Baptist Bible College & Seminary in Clarks Summit, Pa., has paid a $125 fine and completed two days of community service for the March 27 offense.
He is becoming something of a poster child for "the prosecution of honest citizens carrying knives," Doug Ritter, chairman of the advocacy group Knife Rights, told the paper. Baltzer, a camping-ministry major who considers the arrest part of God’s plan, tells the paper that he's "never been in trouble before" and would use similar knives to whittle for children at special-needs camps.
Nevertheless, a few years ago, New York cracked down on illegal knives, the paper reported. Ohio's case law, meanwhile, leans toward not considering a common pocket knife a deadly weapon. The report said the arrest will likely drop from Baltzer’s record in a year, but that Baltzer may have soured on the Big Apple.
The paper reported, he said, "I don't plan on visiting New York unless I have to."
And honestly now, would you blame the guy if he never went back? I wouldn't.
FOURTH SHOT!
NYC principal bars students from singing 'God Bless the USA' at graduation
From the New York Post, on June 12th, 2012: A New York City principal has pulled the plug on patriotism by preventing students from singing "God Bless the USA" at their graduation.
The decision has sparked fireworks at a school filled with "proud immigrants."
FOURTH SHOT!
NYC principal bars students from singing 'God Bless the USA' at graduation
From the New York Post, on June 12th, 2012: A New York City principal has pulled the plug on patriotism by preventing students from singing "God Bless the USA" at their graduation.
The decision has sparked fireworks at a school filled with "proud immigrants."
What the hell are "proud immigrants"? If they are so proud of where they came from, then ask them to go back! This is a fallacy. No one leaves anywhere that they can't be away from being away from. Pride in another culture that is not our culture means that you have no desire in assimilating into American society.
Greta Hawkins, principal of PS 90, the Edna Cohen School, will not allow kindergarten students to belt out the beloved Lee Greenwood ballad, also known as "Proud to be an American," at their moving-up ceremony. Five classes spent months learning the patriotic song, which skyrocketed in popularity after the 9/11 attacks and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. It was to be the rousing finale of their musical show at the June 20 commencement. The kids, dressed up for their big day, would wave tiny American flags -- which, as the lyrics proclaim, "still stand for freedom."
But Hawkins marched in on a recent rehearsal and ordered a CD playing the anthem to be shut off, staffers said. She told the teachers to drop the song from the program.
"We don't want to offend other cultures," they quoted her as explaining.
These people are the ones screwing us up! Other cultures? Why can't these people understand assimilation? Cultural assimilation supports and promotes the assimilation of cultural and ethnic minorities into the dominant culture. In this case, the melting pot we call America.
The term assimilation is often used when referring to immigrants and various ethnic groups settling in a new land. New customs and attitudes are acquired through contact and communication. The great part about America is that it has always been the case where each group of immigrants contributes some of its own cultural traits to the new society - and that's fine as long as they have no misgivings as to where they are. Assimilation usually involves a gradual change and takes place in varying degrees - full assimilation occurs when new members of a society become indistinguishable from older members.
Why do teachers, liberals, want a divided nation? It is happening here, in Great Britain, France, Germany, and really all over Europe. This whole concept of having one nation divided into hundreds of cultures - all divided among its people - is asinine. It encourages strive and dissension and violence.
And yes, besides being completely anal, to consciously encourage division instead of seizing the moment to instill some unity, divisiveness is criminal. Why can't liberal "educators" see this? Why are liberal "educators" all so dumb? If I could answer that, I'd cure the world's problems.
Greta Hawkins, principal of PS 90, the Edna Cohen School, will not allow kindergarten students to belt out the beloved Lee Greenwood ballad, also known as "Proud to be an American," at their moving-up ceremony. Five classes spent months learning the patriotic song, which skyrocketed in popularity after the 9/11 attacks and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. It was to be the rousing finale of their musical show at the June 20 commencement. The kids, dressed up for their big day, would wave tiny American flags -- which, as the lyrics proclaim, "still stand for freedom."
But Hawkins marched in on a recent rehearsal and ordered a CD playing the anthem to be shut off, staffers said. She told the teachers to drop the song from the program.
"We don't want to offend other cultures," they quoted her as explaining.
These people are the ones screwing us up! Other cultures? Why can't these people understand assimilation? Cultural assimilation supports and promotes the assimilation of cultural and ethnic minorities into the dominant culture. In this case, the melting pot we call America.
The term assimilation is often used when referring to immigrants and various ethnic groups settling in a new land. New customs and attitudes are acquired through contact and communication. The great part about America is that it has always been the case where each group of immigrants contributes some of its own cultural traits to the new society - and that's fine as long as they have no misgivings as to where they are. Assimilation usually involves a gradual change and takes place in varying degrees - full assimilation occurs when new members of a society become indistinguishable from older members.
Why do teachers, liberals, want a divided nation? It is happening here, in Great Britain, France, Germany, and really all over Europe. This whole concept of having one nation divided into hundreds of cultures - all divided among its people - is asinine. It encourages strive and dissension and violence.
And yes, besides being completely anal, to consciously encourage division instead of seizing the moment to instill some unity, divisiveness is criminal. Why can't liberal "educators" see this? Why are liberal "educators" all so dumb? If I could answer that, I'd cure the world's problems.
FIFTH SHOT!
Obama Fraud "Biggest Potential Crime" In U.S. History
Citizenry urged not to abandon "irradiated" eligibility issue.
This is from World Net Daily, June 11th., 2012: In an hour-long radio interview on presidential eligibility, an award-winning journalist and author declared Barack Obama could be at the center of the “biggest potential crime in all of American history.”
Diana West, a columnist known for her boldness and penchant for eliciting dropped jaws, was interviewed Saturday by Frank Gaffney, founder of the Center for Security Policy, on his Secure Freedom Radio. According to the show’s promotion, "Despite the results of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Unit, which found that both Obama’s birth certificate and Selective Service Registration card had been forged, Obama’s behavior in the ’08 elections and the very words of the Constitution itself, the government has not allowed for a thorough and fair investigation into the issue of Obama’s eligibility.”
West contends Americans should be investigating exactly what is going on. The nation is "looking at a great unsolved mystery, the greatest potential crime of all of American history," she told Gaffney. “What we’re looking at is a president of the United States whose documentation has not been presented, vetted, corroborated,” she said.
Gaffney noted that the subject has become "irradiated."
The issue has been raised in dozens of lawsuits and other legal challenges. Yet the courts and media have combined to make sure “this is a subject that does not make it into America’s living rooms and parlors,” West said. "It’s not considered polite conversation."
But according to documentation in some of the legal challenges, the potentially damaging consequences are unquantifiable. The issues that would arise should Obama be declared ineligible include the status of laws he has signed and the international agreements he has made?
West said determining Obama’s eligibility isn’t complicated; it’s a matter of the definition of “natural born citizen,” which is what the Constitution requires for presidents.
"This was a specific designation that was much discussed among the Founders in order to eliminate any possibility of divided loyalties in the commander of the American armed forces," she said.
She cited a 19th century U.S. Supreme Court case that determined a “natural born citizen” is the offspring of two citizen parents. Obama’s father, Barack Obama Sr., was in the United States only as a student and never was a citizen. West discussed a pending court case in Florida that raises the issue of the parentage of natural-born citizens.
She explained that the judge in that case already has noted that while critics of Obama have cited a legal definition for natural born citizen, supporters of the president have failed to cite a single instance to back their position. "The mystery must be solved," she said.
While serving as an editorial writer for The Washington Times, West began writing a regular column in 1999. It went to syndication shortly after Sept. 11, 2001. West won second place for editorial writing in the Maryland-Delaware-D.C. Press Association Contest in 2001. She left the Times in 2002 to write her first book, "The Death of the Grown-Up: How America’s Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization," by St. Martin’s Press.
Not one to shy away from controversial commentary, along with Obama’s eligibility, West explores such topics as Islam’s claim to be "a religion of peace," and society’s efforts to "protect" children from Mother’s Day.
SIXTH SHOT!
Texas Man On Trial In Stand-Your-Ground Case Facing Life
This is one of those stories that the liberal news media wants to use to depict all gun owners as being the same. This is a story of horrible needless lose to one family.
Western Justice came to a retired Houston-area firefighter, as he now faces up to life in prison after a jury convicted him of murder after he gun down his unarmed neighbor during a dispute over a noisy house party. That's right, this guy actually shot someone over too much noise!
Raul Rodriguez, 47, argued he was within his rights under Texas' version of a "Stand-Your-Ground" law when he killed Kelly Danaher in 2010. The trial's punishment phase, which will include further testimony, was scheduled to begin Thursday. The report said that Rodriguez was angry about the noise coming from Danaher's home, where the family was having a birthday party for Danaher's wife and young daughter. Because of his anger over the noise, Rodriguez went to the home and got into an argument with Danaher, a 36-year-old elementary school teacher, and two other men who were at the party.
Actually, it was a lot worse than that. And to top it off, believe it or not, Rodriguez filmed it all!
In a 22-minute video that Rodriguez recorded the night of the shooting, Rodriguez can be heard telling a police dispatcher "my life is in danger now" and "these people are going to go try and kill me." He then said "I'm standing my ground here," and shot Danaher after somebody appeared to grab his camera. The two other men were wounded. Rodriguez's reference to standing his ground was his attempt to link his actions to the commonly known self-defense doctrine of the same name.
But can you imagine this? This is what it sounds like to me: He goes over to their house with a gun and a video camera, then proceeds to bait them outside. In this case, he wanted them to come out into the street. Then, while the camera is rolling, he says his lines - and fires. That's what it sounds like to me.
I have no idea what makes people like this tick. I have no idea what he wanted to do with the video? What if they would have said, okay and shut their door? Would he have been disappointed? What if it were a kid who grabbed for the camera, who he have done the same thing?
No, this is totally unconscionable!
The victim's wife, Mindy Danaher, said she cried tears of joy and sadness after the verdict was read. "I'm just glad that he can't hurt anybody else. That's my main thing," she said outside the courtroom. "I love my husband and I miss him so much."
Rodriguez's attorneys left the courtroom without speaking to reporters. His family, who sobbed after hearing the verdict, declined to comment. His attorneys did not present any witnesses in his defense.
Jurors deliberated for about five hours after having received the case following closing arguments earlier Wednesday. During closing arguments, prosecutor Kelli Johnson said Rodriguez started the confrontation -- when instead of calmly asking Danaher to turn down the music -- he armed himself with a handgun and a camera and proceeded to harass people at the party. Johnson said in essence Rodriguez lured and provoked Danaher and two other men to come out onto the street and threaten them by brandishing his gun.
Rodriguez did have a concealed handgun license. She said Danaher and the two other men were unarmed and that Rodriguez's life was never in any danger.
Danaher's widow had told jurors her husband was not a confrontational person. "This is not what stand your ground is," Johnson said. "Stand your ground is something the law takes very seriously. The law makes it very clear" when the law can be used.
Texas' version of the law, which is known as the Castle Doctrine, was revised in 2007 to expand the right to use deadly force. It allows people to defend themselves not only in their homes but also in their workplaces or vehicles. What some people fail to understand, or simply try to conveniently disregard, is that the law also says "a person using force cannot provoke the attacker or be involved in criminal activity at the time."
Johnson said Rodriguez can't hide behind the stand-your-ground law because he provoked the confrontation and then brandished his weapon against an unarmed individual, which is a crime.
I have no idea what makes people like this tick. I have no idea what he wanted to do with the video? What if they would have said, okay and shut their door? Would he have been disappointed? What if it were a kid who grabbed for the camera, who he have done the same thing?
No, this is totally unconscionable!
The victim's wife, Mindy Danaher, said she cried tears of joy and sadness after the verdict was read. "I'm just glad that he can't hurt anybody else. That's my main thing," she said outside the courtroom. "I love my husband and I miss him so much."
Rodriguez's attorneys left the courtroom without speaking to reporters. His family, who sobbed after hearing the verdict, declined to comment. His attorneys did not present any witnesses in his defense.
Jurors deliberated for about five hours after having received the case following closing arguments earlier Wednesday. During closing arguments, prosecutor Kelli Johnson said Rodriguez started the confrontation -- when instead of calmly asking Danaher to turn down the music -- he armed himself with a handgun and a camera and proceeded to harass people at the party. Johnson said in essence Rodriguez lured and provoked Danaher and two other men to come out onto the street and threaten them by brandishing his gun.
Rodriguez did have a concealed handgun license. She said Danaher and the two other men were unarmed and that Rodriguez's life was never in any danger.
Danaher's widow had told jurors her husband was not a confrontational person. "This is not what stand your ground is," Johnson said. "Stand your ground is something the law takes very seriously. The law makes it very clear" when the law can be used.
Texas' version of the law, which is known as the Castle Doctrine, was revised in 2007 to expand the right to use deadly force. It allows people to defend themselves not only in their homes but also in their workplaces or vehicles. What some people fail to understand, or simply try to conveniently disregard, is that the law also says "a person using force cannot provoke the attacker or be involved in criminal activity at the time."
Johnson said Rodriguez can't hide behind the stand-your-ground law because he provoked the confrontation and then brandished his weapon against an unarmed individual, which is a crime.
But defense attorney Neal Davis said he doesn't believe Rodriguez did anything illegal. He said Rodriguez went to complain and was confronted by Danaher and the two other partygoers, and that he didn't pull out his gun until he was standing in the street and Danaher approached him in a threatening manner. "He had a right to be in the street. He was not provoking anybody. He was not engaged in any criminal activity. The stand-your-ground law is not only for home invasions. That's why the law was changed," Davis said. An acquittal of Rodriguez would not "say everyone in the city of Houston is going to turn into the Wild, Wild West," Davis went on to say.
Johnson told jurors prosecutors don't have any problems with guns in Texas. "But with that comes a lot of responsibility. It has to be used as a last resort," she said.
For me, I've been around firearms for a lot of years, over 50 years really. I support "Stand-Your-Ground" laws, but it was not to be used like this. It angers me when I see something like this. People like this Rodriguez fellow foul our society. They poison the well of understanding that says self-defense has no limits when it is justified.
Human nature being what it is, it seems that there will always be some jerkweed out there who will try to skirt or abuse or parse the law for their own advantage. Besides the loss of life here, it is a real shame that a law intended for use by wise and clear thinking citizens to defend themselves when they believe that their life or the life of another is in clear mortal danger -- can be twisted and used in this way.
The law states clearly, a person using force cannot provoke the attacker or be involved in criminal activity at the time. All over folks getting too loud at a birthday party? Give me a break! Why didn't he just call the police and let them handle it if he felt threatened? To try to bait someone into a fight in the street, then bring a handgun out and actually film yourself using it? It sounds wicked. It borders evil.
LAST SHOT!
Aging Ranchers And Farmers
American has a crisis on its hands that should be addressed with extreme urgency. Besides the problem of costs going up for Ag supplies and production, urban sprawl has reduced the land available to agriculture, shifting weather patterns have left southwestern states repeatedly parched, there is also another seldom talked about the problem facing American agriculture.
The problem that Ranchers and Farmers across the nation are facing in more and more numbers is that America's ranch and farm producers are aging. And yes, to add to the crisis, fewer young people are being drawn to ranching and farming for a living.
Right now the average age of American beef and farm producers is 57, and Ranchers and Farmers are focused on finding solutions. Along with Ranchers and Farmers, the USDA has started programs aimed at developing more farmers and ranchers - as well as boosting interest in locally grown food.
There are opportunities for agriculture-related jobs because global demand is at an all-time record high, and global supplies are at all-time record lows. America still feeds the world, and American Ranchers and Farmers ensure there are products to be shipped.
They are an important weapon in America's ongoing battle to feed those who right now starve because they live under the yoke of a totalitarian government.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment.