House Investigates EPA Bosses using Phony Names & Secret E-mail Accounts

OK, so for us Cowboy types who need to understand things fully before we jump on someone for doing things shady, let's take a quick look at the job of the EPA.

Don't worry, it's not that long a description.

According to the EPA's own website, the mission of EPA (Environmental Protection Administration) is "to protect human health and the environment."

That's there mission, that's it. They say their "purpose is to ensure that:

•all Americans are protected from significant risks to human health and the environment where they live, learn and work;
•national efforts to reduce environmental risk are based on the best available scientific information;
•federal laws protecting human health and the environment are enforced fairly and effectively;
•environmental protection is an integral consideration in U.S. policies concerning natural resources, human health, economic growth, energy, transportation, agriculture, industry, and international trade, and these factors are similarly considered in establishing environmental policy;
•all parts of society - communities, individuals, businesses, and state, local and tribal governments - have access to accurate information sufficient to effectively participate in managing human health and environmental risks;
•environmental protection contributes to making our communities and ecosystems diverse, sustainable and economically productive; and
•the United States plays a leadership role in working with other nations to protect the global environment."

To accomplish this mission, they say the EPA is tasked to:

"Develop and Enforce Regulations - When Congress writes an environmental law, we implement it by writing regulations. Often, we set national standards that states and tribes enforce through their own regulations. If they fail to meet the national standards, we can help them. We also enforce our regulations, and help companies understand the requirements."

They say they accomplish their mission through Grants, Environmental Studies, partnership up with other groups, Educate people about who is screwing up the environment, and of course regulate everyone and everything in the United States that uses water, air, walks on the land.

Actually, they regulate our: Air, Water, Land, Pesticides, Toxic Substances, Cleanup, Emergencies, and what is termed Cross-Cutting Issues that my have more than one government agency involved.

From manufacturing to agriculture to building America's infrastructure, the EPA has their hand in it.

Yes, they regulate many - if not all - sectors of the American Economy. From what I've learned over the years, the EPA regulates almost everything.

In Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, they regulate:

• Agriculture Crop Production (NAICS 111)
• Animal Production (NAICS 112), and
• Forestry and Logging (NAICS 113). 

The EPA regulates:

• Construction (NAICS 23),
• Educational Services (NAICS 61), 
• Healthcare and Social Assistance (NAICS 62), 
• Manufacturing (NAICS 31-33),
• Aerospace (NAICS 332 and 336),
• Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS 325),
• Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing (NAICS 334),
• Food Processing (NAICS 311),
• Furniture Manufacturing (NAICS 337), 
• Primary Metal Manufacturing (NAICS 331) and
• Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing (NAICS 332),
• Mineral Processing (Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing) (NAICS 327),
• Petroleum (NAICS 324),
• Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing (NAICS 3254),
• Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing (NAICS 326),
• Printing and Related Support Activities (NAICS 323),
• Shipbuilding (Transportation Equipment Manufacturing) (NAICS 336),
• Textile Manufacturing (NAICS 313),
• Wood Product Manufacturing (NAICS 321), and
• Paper Manufacturing (Paper, Pulp, and Lumber) (NAICS 322),
• Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction Sectors (NAICS 21),
• Mining (except Oil and Gas) (NAICS 212),
• Oil and Gas Extraction (NAICS 211),
• Public Administration (NAICS 92),
• American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Governments (NAICS 921150),
• Federal Facilities (Executive Offices) (NAICS 921110),
• International Affairs (NAICS 928120),
• Local Governments (Executive Offices) (NAICS 921110),
• Other Services (except Public Administration) (NAICS 81),
• Automotive Repair and Maintenance (NAICS 8111),
• Dry Cleaning (NAICS 8123), and
• Retail Trade (NAICS 44). 

But wait, they also regulate the Retail Industry Portal:

• Transportation (NAICS 48-49),
• Utilities (NAICS 22), and
• Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution (NAICS 2211).

Fact is, no matter how they spin it - they understand their power. And yes, for good reason, they have more power to stifle economic progress than any other department in the United States Government.

Some are asking if it is too much power concentrated in one department. Laws written by Congress provide the authority for EPA to write regulations. And yes, some are asking if it's not time to reign in the EPA and it's powerful hold on American lives and businesses.

Ask yourself this, why are their regulations based on mainly subjective data instead of objective scientific data? Why are they so willing to impose recommended practices yet quickly withdraw those recommendations after Congress started questioning their own practice?

This was the case earlier this year when they tried to stop young people from working on their own family farms? A huge outcry arose and the EPA withdrew it's new regulation regarding that issue?

Where did their decision to evoke their authority come from? And if it was so easily recalled, why was it that important an issue that they would push it?

Was it just a situation of some bureaucrat making the call just to justify his or her position? How much more so-called "critical regulation" is just made up by some joker in government just to justify his position and maybe get a lift up the government ladder?

And yes, it is a fact that the EPA goes above and beyond standards and recommended practices to create artificially high extremely unrealistic guidelines.

Besides studies, I know that for fact because I was told that that's the case after sitting in on a lecture given by an EPA representative back when I was studying Inspection Technology for my degree before going into the Inspection field in the Energy Industry.

And ask yourself, where does the EPA get their research data when creating the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, or the Toxic Substances Control Act?

Fact is, more of their research data from radical Environmentalist Groups who would rather see our economy suffer and subsequently people be deprived of employment - then from non-biased groups that don't have an political agenda.

Their own website says, "Regulations explain the technical, operational, and legal details necessary to implement laws." But where do they get the data to create the regulations?

It sure isn't from business friendly groups. Most business friendly groups see capitalism as a friend and provider to people and society as a whole, in contrast radical environmentalist groups see capitalism as the enemy of the earth.

The EPA says they are, "Helping government, business and the public meet federal environmental requirements."

They say they are  doing this through a system of "Self-disclosure/ compliance audit; Enforcement holding people and companies legally accountable for violations of laws and regulations; Report a possible violation;" through policy awareness and guidance; and a system of indoctrinating people as to their way of thinking.

As they state, "Protecting the environment is everyone's responsibility, and starts with understanding the issues. The basics include reducing how much energy and materials you use, reusing what you can and recycling the rest. There's a lot more about that to learn!"

And yes, they are willing to "teach" people how they should think about their responsibility. Yes, it's called propaganda, and the EPA is all for it. Don't believe me, just look in our elementary schools where the youngest and easiest to indoctrinate are being forced fed extreme environmental views such as Global Warming  - which has not been proven..

Their site says, "We don't protect the environment on our own, we work with businesses, non-profit organizations, and state and local governments through dozens of partnerships. A few examples include conserving water and energy, minimizing greenhouse gases, re-using solid waste, and getting a handle on pesticide risks. In return, we share information and publicly recognize our partners."

But if that's the case, then why the secret e-mail accounts and phony names?

That's the question that House Republicans are asking while investigating EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and other high-ranking agency officials.

Have they been conducting official business with email aliases or secret accounts to avoid scrutiny from agency watchdogs and the public? And why? Why is a regulator hiding their actions?

Is there internal corruption and graft involved at the EPA? Are there people being manipulated for criminal reasons?

These are legitimate questions when you look at the areas that they alone regulate. They alone can do whatever they want and circumvent policies and procedures to accomplish all sorts of nefarious dealings.

And yes, who those this gigantic regulatory agency answer to? No one really. Unless of course they are could doing something that appears shady like this thing with Secret e-mails and using aliases.

Why do that if you are above board? Why do that if you don't have something to hide?

The House Science, Space and Technology Committee is leading the investigation and has asked Jackson to turn over information connected to the email account “Richard Windsor” – one of the alleged alias accounts.

The committee has sent letters to White House lawyers and the EPA inspector general asking them in to investigate the allegations and report on their findings by the end of the month.

The Daily Caller reported first that Jackson was using an email alias, based on research by Competitive Enterprise Institute fellow Christopher Horner.

He says the agency’s use of secret email accounts dates back to the Clinton administration and then-Administrator Carol Browner.

“You remember Ms. Browner, the lady who suddenly ordered her computer hard drive reformatted and backup tapes erased, hours after a federal court issued a ‘preserve’ order … that her lawyers at the Clinton Justice Department insisted they hadn’t yet told her about?” Horner said in the Daily Caller story.

Horner and the institute filed a lawsuit in September claiming EPA employees are using the private Gmail-type accounts to send official emails.

The House committee says federal law requires agencies to preserve all internal records associated with official activities and prohibits the use of private email accounts for government business, unless there are procedures in place to track and store such messages.

An EPA spokesman said Monday the agency has for roughly a decade assigned internal and public email addresses to administrators and that they use the internal one to communicate with staff because of the massive amount of traffic on the public accounts.

The spokesman also said both accounts are reviewed and made available when a Freedom of Information Act request is made.

The committee also said the email allegations follow "similarly secretive and highly questionable methods of communication by senior officials at science agencies within the White House, Commerce Department and Energy Department."

Secret e-mails and phony names? I can't help but wonder if there are bank accounts for bribes? Maybe there are accounts where heads of the EPA are stealing money?

Of course, maybe the crooks in the EPA that found it necessary to cover their tracks by using secret e-mail and phony names wanted to disguise a money trail of some sort?

Since it is well known that Obama administration heads violated Federal Law by campaigning for the President as the election approached, maybe someone should ask if the email account "Richard Windsor" – one of the alleged alias accounts - made a huge campaign contribution with agency funds?

Anything is possible, especially when the agency is ripe for corruption. And if not some sort of criminal act, then why do they find the need to hide their actions through the use of fake names and secret e-mail accounts?

This is not what honest people do.

Story by Tom Correa

Kool-Aid Drinking Unions Kill Hostess

The first time I walked in there, I instantly noticed the hum of people mumbling. It was actually more sort of a low groan then actual conversations.

I didn't know if I was in a retirement home because of the old timers sitting around shooting the breeze with a few others who were playing cards. Yes, it was my first time to my Union hall since being laid off - and I have to admit that I expected something different.

By different, I mean busier. I expected phones ringing and people grabbing address slips heading out the door. But no, there was none of that. None at all.

The old timers were there waiting to be "called out" like pitchers needed in some game somewhere - but no they never really ever got called. And yes, later I wondered if they were still there.

When I walked up to the desk, the gal behind the counter slid open the glass window partition. Then without saying a hello, she asked me for my card and if I were current on my monthly dues.

After giving her my card, she opened the books and said I still owed for that month by a day or two and asked for the money.

As I was about to ask about work, she cut me off and said "that will be $39.00!" I paid her knowing that that was about the last money that I had left to eat on for the week.

Times were hard and a lot of people were out of work. I had only been out of the military for a year and the sporadic work had me broke and looking into moving back in with my folks.

She took the money and signed me into the book, handed me a receipt and started to close the window between us when I grabbed it and asked, "What about work?"

With as stern a look as I ever got from my 3rd grade teacher, she simply said, "Check back tomorrow" and closed the window.

So for the next few weeks, I checked back the next day and the next and the next, until I too knew everyone there in the Union Hall by first name. I checked back until I knew the stories of everyone of those guys whose companies had closed.

Most days, I showed up and checked in, then put a dime in the cup for a cup of coffee. Like many there, I'd bring a paper and sit there as that old clock just ticked away the hours.

I remember thinking how the numbers of guys coming in to put their names down on the books as being out of work grew steadily, and with every new guy coming in - I was pushed lower and lower on the list because I didn't have the seniority that they had.

You see, because of a deal with the union, the company that wanted me made a dead with the union for me to come in through the "backdoor" and work a shortened apprenticeship. The company and the union agreed because no one at the hall wanted to go to work on the roughneck crews that built buildings for that company. It was hard work and many in the hall were used to softer jobs.

Once work slowed down to a stop, I was laid off. I was new to the union game and I did what I was told to do. So every day, most days broke and hungry, I went to the hall and waited for my name to get called.

I did that everyday until one of the guys there asked me if I wanted me sit in on the card game. It was about that time that one old guy said, "Don't worry, you'll know your name when they call you." And yes, although I didn't, they enjoyed the laugh!

When I stopped going to the hall, I got a letter of Union warning me that I would be in big trouble of being tossed out of the union if they get one more report of me by-passing the hall and "soliciting" work on my own. That's right, they had rules against looking for a job on my own.

That was 1978, and I was new to a union in the Bay Area that made me promises and took my dues but never helped me find a job.

I left that union and went into a whole different line of work for a while. Then 7 years later, I had a chance to get back into the trades - but again I was faced with the fact that I had join the same Union.

After spending 7 years in the security industry, working 60 plus hours a week dealing with nasty sometimes extremely violent strikes all over the Bay Area, and after holding a full time schedule in school to get a degree in Criminal Justice, I noticed a lot about my own union that I was pretty blind to my first time around.

More and more I noticed that the unions were nothing but organized extortionists. Yes, organized extortionist - and as legal as the day is long. And yes, it seemed that my own union was really no different than the rest.

At first I thought nothing had changed in the union, except that the dues were higher. But then I started noticing how our Local's "Business Agents" looked to be even more crooked than before, it became obvious that they did not represent the guys who they supposedly represented. Instead, it was very obvious that they were just out for themselves.

It didn't matter if a member was laid off because work was slow, or if job sites weren't ready because of bad weather. As far as the union was concerned, you better pay your dues or else. And yes, while in the trades, I still kept my hand in the security industry as a "consultant" just to supplement what I wasn't making in the trades.

I did what I did so I'd be able to pay my bills and put food on my table.

Did my Local give a damn that work was slow or that our company couldn't compete with other companies? Did my union care that other companies may have been paying their workers less an hour but making more money a year because they were working all year around?

No they didn't. What mattered to them was their getting our dues in on times.

And when the company that I worked for closed, partially because of the greed and abuse of the five or six different unions involved with that company, did my union care enough to help me find another job? No they didn't.

What mattered to them was that, out of work or not, my dues better not be late. Yes, because my classification was a "specialty" within the union, after the company closed its door, my union brothers told me to take a hike. That happened, even though I was paid 6 months in advance on my dues. 

So now, Hostess closes its doors because of a union strike. And yes, Hostess now has had to lay off 18,500 workers.

Laid off after what is being called a "crippling" union fight. A fight that I can't help but wonder if it's more union greed?

When I heard the news, you'd be right if you thought that I immediately recalled my dealings with unions both as a member and in security.

Sure I thought of my own union troubles. But I also thought about the unions that I dealt with when I was supervising security guards during strike actions back in '79 and into the 1980s.

Time and time again, I saw labor unions of all different types take their people out on strike after strike only to see those companies close up. Completely out of work, no, the laid off strikers got no help afterwards from their unions.

Now an American Icon, Hostess, is gone.

Many believe that thanks to a labor union feeling emboldened by Mr Obama's re-election, that union's stubbornness in contract talks is to blamed for the shutdown of one of America's snack food icons.

And yes, let's not forget the loss of 18,500 jobs.

And really, it doesn't matter if it's the holidays. Some make a point of saying that this is a bad situation just before the holiday season. I say that this is a bad situation anytime, no matter when. And the horrible part of this, fact is is that these union members brought it on themselves.

The union representing bakery workers refused to agree to concessions, that's the bottom line of what it took to prompt the mass layoffs and closing down of hundreds of plants, yes hundreds of plants, bakeries and delivery routes.

"We deeply regret the necessity of today's decision, but we do not have the financial resources to weather an extended nationwide strike," Chief Executive Gregory Rayburn said in a statement. "Hostess Brands will move promptly to lay off most of its 18,500-member workforce and focus on selling its assets to the highest bidders."

The company said it will continue to ship out its well-known products until inventory runs out. Then like so many other things that greed kills, Hostess will be no more.

The national strike by members of the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union (BCTGM) that began last week decimated the 82-year-old company’s ability to produce and deliver products at roughly 12 of its 33 plants.

The company announced earlier in the week that the ax would fall on Friday if the strikers didn’t get back to work, but the union either didn’t believe them or care.

BCTGM President Frank Hurt said Thursday that the crisis was the "result of nearly a decade of financial and operational mismanagement" and charged management was scapegoating workers to allow the Wall Street investors who own Hostess to sell.

Though it worked for Obama in his re-election bid, attacking Wall Street isn't a great idea during a strike - after all, it may be those Wall Street investors who are keeping you working.

But hey, in these days of making business the villain and bankers the criminals, it's no wonder that a union would ultimately be responsible for the loss of 18,500 jobs but blame it on Wall Street.

BCTGM President Frank Hurt sounds like an idiot to me. What did he expect when a company says come back to work or we have to close the doors. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to see it happening all over the country.

And honestly, I don't know how old this guy Hurt really is, but I have a feeling that like many today - he probably has not had to live through hard times until these last 4 years.

His ignorance is in his remark, "Hostess failed because its six management teams over the last eight years were unable to make it a profitable successful business enterprise."

OK, let's for a moment take what Hurt said as the truth. Then that makes him a bigger jerkweed than I thought he was. Why? Well, it has everything to do with Labor Negotiations 101: the basics of getting what you want and need in a new contract.

The first rule: Never ask for more from a company that you know is "unable to make it a profitable successful business enterprise."

Whether it's 33 years ago, or today, it never ceases to amaze me that unions have horrible timing. Instead of going to a company when the company is doing well and asking for more when the company can afford to give it - and maybe agreeing to make things work when times get bad - no, that's not what unions historically do.

They always go after a company for more about the time a company is at its lowest point. Wrong time to get anything. Let's face it, when the cow goes dry is a hell of time to demand more milk.

And listen to the frustration by Marty Zimmerman, secretary-treasurer for BCTGM Local 85, who told Fox40 from a Sacramento picket line on Friday that workers had been at “wits end” with Hostess brass.

“Well, the mindset is we’re standing strong, absolutely,” Zimmerman told the station. “I mean, they’ve taken our pensions away, we’ve had seven CEOs in the last 10 years; this company has been so mismanaged. Really, we’re at our wits end and enough is enough"

And yes, according to the BCTGM Union website, they all knew that the company wasn't doing well.

Their website states: "In 2011, Hostess earned profits of more than $2.5 billion but ended the year with a loss of $341 million as it struggled to pay the interest on $1 billion in debt. This year, the company sought bankruptcy protection, the second time in eight years."

So really, if that's the case, and you know that jobs are hard to come by in a dismal economy, then why strike?  I've seen it before, but I've never had the opportunity to ask, why?

Why wouldn't you wait and maybe even help the company come out of trouble before asking for more? Why go on strike if you know that there is a chance that you will kill the cow and that not one of the 18,500 workers there will get milk?

To me, it seems suicidal!

In a letter to employees posted on the company’s website, Hostess Chief Executive Gregory Rayburn said that all employees would eventually lose their jobs - some sooner than others.

"Many people have worked incredibly long and hard to keep this from happening, but now Hostess Brands has no other alternative than to begin the process of winding down and preparing for the sale of our iconic brands," Rayburn’s letter read.

“As you know, for many months the Company has been working with our unions, lenders and other stakeholders to reach a consensual resolution to legacy costs and labor contracts. Despite everyone’s considerable efforts to move Hostess out of its restructuring, when we began implementing the Company’s last, best and final offer, the Bakers Union chose to stage a crippling strike.”

The liberal agenda has helped kill Hostess and put these folks out of work. Fact is that Hostess has struggled for several years now. Some blame the liberal agenda and their desire to control our lives to the closing of this company. Some compare the closing to a stabbing - and liberal and Obama administration and especially the First Lady are the knife wielding assailants who for 4 years have demonized snack foods.

The company sought concessions from employees, but instead got a costly strike that just killed the company's ability to function. Sad actually, but usually mass suicide is sad.

According to officials, who told a federal bankruptcy court, Hostess would lose up to $9.5 million from Nov. 9 to Nov. 19 in lost sales and increased costs. The company has cancelled all orders in process and said any baked goods currently in transit would be returned to shippers.

“These losses and other factors, including increased vendor payment terms contraction, have resulted in a significant weakening of the debtors’ cash position and, if continued, would soon result in the debtors completely running out of cash,” the filing read.

Hostess will now sell its popular brands like Ding Dongs, Ho Ho’s and Sno Balls, along with the closure of 565 distribution centers, 570 bakery outlet stores and roughly 5,550 delivery routes.

Lenders have agreed to allow Hostess to continue to access $75 million in financing put in place at the start of the bankruptcy cases to fund the sale and wind-down process, subject to U.S. Bankruptcy Court approval.

So now, let's talk about a group of hard-heads who were all apparent drinking the same Kool-Aid. 

According to the BCTGM website, "The Bakery and Confectionery Workers International Union of America, one of the pioneers of the North American labor movement, was organized in 1886. In 1957, the American Bakery and Confectionery Workers’ International Union was formed. In 1969, the two organizations united.

The Tobacco Workers International Union was founded in 1895 and was also in the forefront of the labor movement. As it and the Bakery and Confectionery Workers’ International Union of America shared many common goals, both organizations came to realize that those goals could best be achieved through a merger. That merger, creating the BC&T, took place in 1978.

... In 1936, the National Council of Grain Processors was formed when federal grain milling unions agreed to unite as a national union under the AFL. In 1941, the council was renamed the American Federation of Grain Processors and in 1948 was granted an international charter as the AFGM.

Shared goals and industries caused the January 1, 1999 merger between the BC&T and AFGM, resulting in the BCTGM."

So friends, this is not a new union. These guys have been around a while. They understood what can take place in a strike against a company that is having financial troubles.

Those strikers knew that their livelihood was in definite trouble if they went out on strike, yet they still went on strike. And yes, to a guy like me who always worried about finding work, that's a big deal because it goes to the heart of why 18.500 workers are out of work right now.

Fact is that the trust the union members had in their union bosses, and the lack of trust in their company, tells a lot about where their heads were at. It tells a lot about the whole feeling of power that unions are feeling these days- in especially since Obama was re-elected.  

So now, now that the BCTGM has successfully killed Hostess, where do 18,500 Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union (BCTGM) members and Teamsters find jobs?

Does their Union have positions for them in case this would take place? No they don't!

Is the Union going to suspend their monthly dues so that those out of work don't have to pay their monthly dues? No way!  And as a word of advise, those dues better be paid on time - or else.

Is either Frank Hurt or Marty Zimmerman out of jobs? Probably not. After all, they are paid by the Unions. And yes, that's why they will demand that those out of work members still pay their dues.

BCTGM Union President Frank Hurt said, “Throughout this long and difficult process, BCTGM members showed tremendous courage,solidarity and devotion to principle. They were well aware of the potential consequences of their actions but stood strong for dignity, justice and respect.”

Imagine that! There are 18,500 Americans out of work because they wouldn't work with their employer a little more than they would have wanted to - and now their Union President is telling them that they can feel good about being out of work.

Many years ago, through my own experiences both as a union member and working to make sure that strikers didn't harm people or destroy too much property, I learned that labor unions are all about money and power.

I can't help but wonder how much money the Teamsters and the BCTGM Union gave Obama his re-election? I can't help but wonder just how emboldened Unions have become since his re-election victory?

"Drinking the Kool-Aid” is a phrase commonly used in America to refer to a person or group’s blind, uncritical belief in an ideology, argument, or philosophy.

It is a metaphor that is a direct reference to the November 1978 Jonestown Massacre, where 913 members of the Peoples Temple cult were said to have committed suicide by drinking a cyanide-laced, “Kool-Aid“- like drink.


Blind faith and the deaths of members of the People’s Temple was a fact. Peoples Temple leader Jim Jones had staged many rehearsals for the event in which the drink contained no poison, which made many cult members believe that the drink would be harmless.

This is very similar to easy strikes versus tough strikes. Easy strike are sort of a practice session for the tough ones. And yes, some strikes are relatively painless - almost feeling harmless - while other are company killers.

And that can go also for the union talk, that some take unquestionably as the truth. Their rhetoric is designed to motivate and incite blind loyalty from those who want to follow what the unions are pushing. Yes, unions and the Peoples Temple cult have a lot in common.

After reading some of the rhetoric that has come out of the unions, I can't help but think that the members really believed that they could cripple Hostess ability to operate - and yet still get what they want in their contract. Yes, both at the same time.

I know it makes no sense, but those drinking that Kool-Aid that most unions hand out aren't using a lot of logic in their thinking.

It's all emotion driven. It must be, because there is not a whole lot of logic in demanding more from a company that simply doesn't have any more to give.

It appears that the unions were after blood, after that cow went dry of milk.

Story by Tom Correa

RANDOM SHOTS - Obama's Gone Mad Wants $1.6 Trillion New Taxes, and Much More!

Obama Has Gone Crazy - He wants $1.6 Trillion in New Taxes!

Was there a coordinated effort made between the Obama campaign and the liberal mainstream media to avoid answering any question about what Obama planned to do in the next 4 years - if he were to be elected?

You bet there was! If not, then why is it only now we hear that Obama wants to raise taxes on just about every household for the next 10 years?

Did we miss that somehow? No. fact is that no one from CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, David Lettermen, or the those angry liberal broads on The View, asked Obama what his plans were.

Only now, after the election, is Obama coming clean with how he wants to screw America! His spending has gotten us in this predicament and this is what he thinks we need to do to get out of it?

Has he gone crazy?

On November 14th, President Obama stated his position on averting the "Fiscal Cliff" that's to take effect on January 1st, 2013. 

Obama may be insane with power, but he wants $1.6 Trillion in new taxes. 

Forget scraping the implementation of ObamaCare which is going to cost American Trillions of taxpayer dollars.

No, instead his plan includes $1.6 trillion in new tax revenue by raising taxes on households making more than $250,000 - but maybe even lower to households making $120,000.

Is he trying to kill the nation's economy by raising taxes to such astronomical levels? Yes, it appears he doesn't know what he is doing - and more of what he has done for the last 4 years will only put us deeper in debt.

Republicans are adamantly opposed to raising tax rates, despite a willingness to close loopholes and deductions.

Supposedly Obama would consider cuts to entitlements and other domestic programs, but it's unclear if he would cut programs to those who voted for him. Although, he might because he doesn't need them as he did before they voted.

If Obama and the Republicans controlling the House of Representatives cannot reach a compromise before January 1st, the country will drive off the so-called "fiscal cliff" which means that a combination of spending cuts and tax hikes set to take effect in January will take place.

Negotiations are set to launch on Friday during a meeting with congressional leaders and the president.

Republicans are unlikely to agree to anywhere near $1.6 trillion in tax rate hikes over the next decade.

"The president says he wants a 'balanced' approach, and that's what we're offering: revenues through tax reform, and entitlement reform. The alternative is adding a small-business tax to the current broken tax code, which will cost jobs," Michael Steel, spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, said in a statement.

Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Tuesday the party is "ready to find common ground," but "we're also not about to further weaken the economy by raising tax rates and hurting jobs."

"When it comes to the great economic challenges of the moment, saying that you want a balanced approach is not a plan," he said. "The tedious repetition of poll-tested talking points is simply that and the longer the president uses them as a substitute for leadership, the more difficult it will be to solve our many problems."

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has looked at the effects of driving over the "fiscal cliff" and projected that they would send the U.S. economy back into recession and cause already stubbornly high unemployment to spike above 9 percent.

The CBO also estimates that the austerity program would reduce the deficit by nearly $700 billion by the end of 2013.

At issue is an annual U.S. budget deficit that now is routinely above One Trillion Dollars - and a national debt that has risen to above 16.5 Trillion Dollars since Obama has taken office.

If not legislative compromise is reached by January 1st, a self-imposed punishment for last year's failure to deal with the government's spiraling debt will take place. 

So Is Obama Needed To Stop Us From Driving Off The "Fiscal Cliff"? 

Politicians in Washington have just over seven weeks, including breaks for the Thanksgiving holiday next week and the Christmas holiday season, to avert the year-end fiscal cliff.

But wait, isn't Obama going on vacation during these negotiations? I believe he is.

Obama is going to Asia on vacation. He will stop in Myanmar, also known as Burma, during a November 17-21 vacation away from the job he was just re-elected to do.

Oh well, so much for putting the work of the nation ahead of your own self-interest. Maybe he'll find that he likes Burma - and stays!

After all, if he does not want to be part of negotiations to avert a financial crisis in America, who needs him!

Republican Voter Commits Suicide Because Of Obama Win

It is absolutely correct to think that this past presidential election was important to the future of America.

In other articles, I've stated my case as to why I wanted Mitt Romney elected and Barack Obama defeated. I've presented what most Conservatives have presented in so far as evidence as to why he shouldn't have been re-elected.

Yes, I believe he has an agenda that goes against what Americans want or need. I believe that he will try to advance his agenda as aggressively as he can - even if that means circumventing Congressional approval by issuing Executive Orders to get what he wants.

I believe that America's best defense against a power hungry arrogant Obama is our Republican controlled House of Representatives. As long as Republicans control the House, then it will be possible for us to stop the Obama leftist agenda.

Are we becoming a Regulation Nation? Yes, and liberals are to blame for it. From what I've seen, liberals prefer more regulations in an effort to control people. It's all about power and control.

Conservatives believe that individuals should exercise personal responsibility; that it is the role of government to create laws which will hold them accountable for their actions; and yes, laws should be enacted to reflect the best interest of the society as a whole with more emphasis on personal freedoms and liberty.

Liberals believe that the people should look to the government for everything. From providing a family structure to regulating your rights, liberals believe in a government that sets itself up as our supervisor or superintendent - or worse as an overseer no different than those who oversaw slaves picking cotton or harvesting cane.

They believe laws are enacted to protect every individual in some sort of unrealistic effort to create an equal society - even at the expense of our individual freedoms.

Our knowing what the liberal left wants to do enables us to better fight them. Understanding where Obama wants to take us as a nation strengthens our resolve to fight for a free America.

We cannot lose hope!

Sure we all knew that the stakes were high. Sure some folks, like myself, viewed the outcome as depressing and were in mourning the next day. But a matter of life or death? No, no it wasn't.

Yet a Key West, Florida, Republican must have thought so because he took his own life two days after President Barack Obama won a second term in the White House.

He had previously warned loved ones of his intentions to kill himself in an Obama victory. To bad, he wasn't joking.

On November 8th, Henry Hamilton was found dead with his home littered with empty pill bottles. And according to palmbeachpost.com, a suicide note was found that said:

“"Do not revive! F*ck Obama!"

Hamilton who was a gay Republican lived with his partner Michael Cossey, who was the first to find the body after returning home from an evening out with friends.

Cossey says Hamilton told him "If Barack gets re-elected, I'm not going to be around."

Florida officials do not believe Hamilton's death to be anything other than a suicide and will not be investigating the matter further.

This is as extreme a response to Obama's re-election as it comes. No one should do such a thing over politics because by nature politics change with the wind. Higher unemployment, a worse economy, scandal, criminal activity, are all part of what can change the political landscape.

I've seen it where Democrats were called down, just as Republicans are now called down for the count. But it never lasts too long, and the reason is that We the People have a habit of shifting the landscape to our likings.

Fact is, yes, there is no telling what will take place in 2014.

My hope is that we Conservatives take the Senate and gain control of the full Congress. I believe we have to Cowboy Up, and get ready for 2014!

We should be getting ready right now to take the Senate and control Congress. We need to get tough understanding that we have to be willing to fight hard even in the dirt if need be - if we want to win. This horseshit that we are somehow above such things is getting our ass kicked.

A steadfast fighting attitude is a much better path than thinking all is lost - because frankly, it isn't.

I really agree with one political expert on television who said that Conservative Republicans being elected for the House and the Senate is a much better proposition than trying to take the White House.

His reasoning is that we should realistic about the fact that Republican candidates are branded the same every presidential election - rich, dumb, uncaring, selfish, vindictive, and so on and so on.

Yes, like it or not, getting Congressmen and women elected to the House and the Senate is a lot easier when you're not having to fight a "Democrat political machine" that has the liberal mainstream media, labor unions, and special interest in its pocket doing everything from making threats to fraud to win.

Poor Mr Hamilton should have taken a break and regroup. What he did is never the answer. My condolences to his family and partner. 

700 pound Hogs Eats Oregon Farmer

OK, so we have two 700 pound stories. 

The first is a bizarre story out of Oregon which took place in October. Authorities there say a local farmer was eaten by his 700 pound hogs.

The Register-Guard reported that Terry Vance Garner, age 70, never returned to the house after he went out to feed his animals on Wednesday September 26th.

His farm is located near the Oregon coast in Coos County.

A family member found Garner's dentures and pieces of his body in the hog enclosure several hours later, but most of his remains had been consumed, District Attorney Paul Frasier said.

A pathologist was unable to identify a cause or manner of death, the newspaper reported.

While investigators are certain that the hog consumed most of Garner’s body, they do not know how he died. Frasier said Garner may have collapsed in the hog pen after suffering a heart attack or some other type of health problem.

The Coos County Sheriff’s Office is investigating how Garner “ended up in a position where the hogs were able to consume him.” According to the Sheriff's statement:

"There are several scenarios being investigated, including that Mr. Garner had a health event, such as a heart attack, which then put him in a position where the hogs could consume him. Another scenario being investigated is that given the age and health of Mr. Garner, that one or more of the hogs knocked Mr. Garner to the ground, whereupon that hogs killed and consumed him. In addition, due to the unusual circumstances presented by this case, the Sheriff's Office is investigating to determine if foul play may have resulted in the death of Mr. Garner."

Forensic anthropologists are also investigating to determine whether foul play was involved in the man's death. And yes, several of the Garner's hogs weighed 700 pounds or more.

John Killefer, who heads the Animal and Rangeland Sciences Department at Oregon State University, said 700-pound hogs such as the ones that Garner kept at his farm for breeding purposes are abnormally large.

Most hogs are raised until they reach a market weight of between 250 and 300 pounds, while breeding female pigs rarely weigh more than 400 pounds, Killefer said.

According to Killefer, domestic hogs are not typically known to be very aggressive but can be based on the environment in which the hogs lives.

This isn’t the first time hogs have eaten their farmers.

In 2004, a Romanian woman was knocked unconscious and eaten by the pigs on her farm. The news report did not say whether the woman survived, only that the pigs had eaten the woman's ears and part of her face.

Her husband who had to be sedated, later told reporters, "I'll never breed such beasts again."

Many years ago, when I worked in Corrections, I remember a prisoner once telling another prisoner that he'd just as soon throw the other guy to the hogs as have him for a friend.  I figured he just had some mean hogs where he was from but that would be about it. I never figured they'd actually devour a whole person.

700 pounds of Marijuana found during a Traffic Stop

You might find our next 700 pound story bizarre as well.

On November 15th, it was reported that deputies in Pima County, Arizona, found over 700 pounds of marijuana in a car with two illegal aliens during a traffic stop on Wednesday.

The suspects, 24-year-old Abdul Cortes-Reyes and 31-year-old Ignacio Cienfuego-Varela were pulled over by Pima County Sheriff's deputies because of a traffic violation.

Deputies reportedly said they could smell marijuana coming from inside the sport utility vehicle and could see several bundles they thought were marijuana.

OK, let's try to imagine this picture for a moment. Two illegal aliens from Mexico are in a SUV with 700 pounds of bundled up dope. So what do they do, they smoke dope to draw even more attention to them stupidity.

The 700 pounds of weed in the bundles were out in the open and not in a van or some other enclosed vehicle, yet these two criminal masterminds really thought they were going to get away with this.

Both men admitted to being in the country illegally and that the bundles were full of marijuana. Cortes-Reyes and Cienfuego are both from Sonora, Mexico.

Cortes-Reyes and Cienfuego-Varela were booked into Pinal County Adult Detention Center and are being held without bond. They were arrested for possession of marijuana, possession of marijuana for Sale and transportation of marijuana.

The marijuana taken from the SUV weighed a total of 716 pounds with a street value of $537,000. And no, it is has not been confirmed as to whether or not they voted 187 times for Obama.

About Trying To Get My Facts Right

As most of my regular readers know, our series RANDOM SHOTS is all about me taking a shot or two at what's going on around us.

Whether it's stories that I just have a hard time believing, or some of the bullshit going on during the election in the world of politics, RANDOM SHOTS is a way of taking a look at things that might be on your mind.

And yes, many of you have written me with ideas for these articles - and other things of interest.  Because of you, I started RANDOM SHOTS after receiving all sort of e-mail asking me what I thought about different things in the news.

Now, thanks to you, RANDOM SHOTS is a pretty big hit.

So besides saying thank you for visiting our site and making us a success, I also wanted to take this time to say thank you for your help in getting my facts right.

If you've been a regular reader, then you know that I usually speak my mind. But there is something else, what you probably don't know is how much I like getting my facts right. It is very important to me.

I was told lately that the "facts" that I use all come off of FOX News or some other conservative sources - and they should not be trusted.

Imagine that? I guess that person wants me to go with some "non-biased" group like MSNBC or the New York Times. Ain't that a laugh! 

Friends, facts are facts no matter who tries to spin them to their advantage. I like FOX News because I really do believe that they are "fair and balanced" and "unafraid" to give the truth.

The big difference between FOX News versus say MSNBC is that MSNBC is not a "news" organization. MSNBC is a network devoted to liberal biased political commentary. They are all about hate.

MSNBC hates people like us. Their programs are filled with hate. They make no qualms about their disdain for folks like us - and what we believe in. 

And honestly friends, I don't need to hear their hate to know how they feel about Conservatives, Christians, gun owners, Tea Party folks, and anyone else who does not agree with their liberal agenda.

I don't need to go to a biased source when doing my research. Thank goodness for the Internet, because today we're not restricted to just what's on television or on radio. 

Sources are great because facts are important. Accuracy is very important.

So today, I'd like to thank an old friend who works for the FAA for dropping me a note to help me correct something in my article entitled Dinner With Obama Supporters.

Instead of rewording it and fixing it, I simply took out the inaccurate sentence to correct the story. Much thanks!

And honestly, I don't mind going back into an article that I've already published and making it right. Frankly, when a reader has taken the time to write and help me get my facts accurate and truthful - the least I can do is check it and make the changes as needed. 

So is this why some articles are changed later? Yes. 

This is the answer to your letters asking me why some of my articles are different the second time you read them?  

You great folks out there who read something once and than might find it changed somehow later when you go over it again are probably shaking your head asking why?

Well, the reason has everything to do with you my readers. And no, I'm not above making corrections and additions, and that's why some articles are changed later.

Fact is that some of my articles may be changed after they were first published because my readers are not bashful about writing me to let me know that I got something wrong - or that maybe there is something questionable that I really need to look into.

And honestly, I love it!

It tells me that people are actually reading my work and not just coming to my blog for the new section on COWGIRLS!

Yup, I just added a small tribute to Cowgirls for us who like Cowgirls who are not only cheerleaders for Dallas.

I owe a lot to you folks because you make me research research research to get it right. It pays off because I feel good about my readers wanting to visit our site.

I can't thank all of you enough for visiting us, and for taking the time to drop me a line and help me get it right. You are great folks. And yes, I really do appreciate your responses and your input.

Much thanks to all.

Tom Correa

RANDOM SHOTS - Philly's Black Or Brainless Vote, ObamaCare, 6.6 Million Voters Don't Show Up, And More!

Philly's Black And Brainless Vote Goes 100% To Obama

It was reported yesterday, November 12th, 2012, that Pennsylvania election officials say they are not going to investigate the obvious corruption dealing with the vote totals that President Obama got from parts of Philadelphia last Tuesday.

Folks, I've been to Philly. And from what I know about that city, what took place there on Election Day was impossible!

Even if the people who I knew there moved out, mathematically it's impossible. There should be at least one!

But still, no matter how fishy it looks - the crazy Third World country sort of election results out of Philly are just not going to be looked into at all.

What am I talking about? Well, the Philadelphia Inquirer first reported this story last week. It was strange then, but I didn't think no one would look into this.

What happened was that 59 of Philadelphia's 66 wards handed the president victory shares of 100% for Obama! Not a single vote for Romney.

The Inquirer reported that in 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch. Nada single vote out of over 19,605 votes supposedly submitted by voters.

"I don't find it hard to believe that there are neighborhoods in the United States where President Obama got 97 to 99 percent of the vote - basically all African-Americans," said Michael Barone, a Fox News contributor who is the longtime editor of The Almanac of American Politics. "There are such neighborhoods, and you can see them in central-city, black ghetto (areas)."

However, Barone noted that turnout rates in these areas was sometimes reported to have exceeded 90 percent, a level of enthusiasm that he said should arouse suspicion. "Philadelphia's been a place that's had some pretty irregular election procedures in the past," he said.

State Rep. Sam Smith, the Republican from the 66th District who serves as speaker of the Pennsylvania House, called the results "questionable." Imagine that?

"In some precincts in Philadelphia, I think you're going to see, as they finish the official count, places where there are more people voting in a precinct than actually signed in at the poll book," Smith told Fox News.

Asked what gave him that idea, Smith cited the electoral history of the city and said he thought it would be "predictive" this time around, as well.

Former U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak, a Democrat whose congressional district abutted Philadelphia, said he has seen firsthand "the machine" at work in the city's politics, but he did not question the president's vote totals.

"The polling across the nation showed that the African-American community was supporting the president by about 98, 99 percent," Sestak said. "I think the people voted the way they believe in." Not a surprising comment coming from a Democrat.

But there might be some fact to what he and others are saying. After all, racial bigotry and corruption are widespread in the cities.

In 10 of Chicago's 50 wards, for example, the Obama-Biden ticket captured 98 percent of the vote or more. In six of those wards, the figure climbed to 99 percent.

When I heard about this, my first thought was "Wow, talk about being fixed! But you would think they'd make it look better then that."

I have to tell you folks about the time my grandfather wanted to put in a contract to do some work for the City & County of Honolulu. Two days before the bids were to be put in, my grandfather got a phone call telling him that the jobs were already awarded to friends of the Mayor.

My point is that "the fix," as my grandpa once called it, can take place anywhere over anything. From contracts to elections, it's hard to buck the system when it's rigged in someone else's favor.

So OK, I can hear someone say how do I know it was rigged? Well, I don't.

But if it was indeed a straight ballot and "the machine" didn't have anything to do with the crazy results, then I have to say that I would have never thought so many people - African Ameircans or whatever - could be so stupid as to all drink the Kool-Aid that the Obama campaign was handing out.

Since some of you have written and asked, which tells me that you might be a little too young to remember, allow me to explain the "drink the Kool-aid" reference.

"Drink the Kool-aid" is a reference to the 1978 cult mass-suicide in Jonestown, Guyana.

"Drinking the Kool-Aid" refers to a person or group holding an unquestioned belief, argument, or philosophy without critical examination. It refers to people having blind loyalty while acting like brain dead Zombies.

The phrase typically carries a negative connotation when applied to an individual or group. The basis of the term is a reference to Rev. Jim Jones and the Jonestown Massacre which took place in November of 1978 when his followers who were all members of a church that Jones himself created, the Peoples Temple, committed suicide by drinking a grape-flavored Kool-Aid type drink.

The drink was laced with cyanide, but that didn't stop those fanatics from brainlessly following Rev Jim Jones. They say he had charisma and was a great speaker. And yes, he must have been hypnotic to the fools.

When Jones ordered his flock to commit suicide, all but a few did without question. The few who refused were either shot or escaped. Those few got away to tell the world what took place.

In what is now commonly called "the Jonestown Massacre", 913 "followers" drank the Kool-Aid and died.

This really does amaze me. To me, there is no justification for all African Americans in those 59 wards to vote for Obama if they did it strictly because of his race.

I've never claimed to be some sort of political expert, I'm just an American like you who reads and listens and tries to make sense out of what's going on in our nation.

If political experts, like Michael Barone, say that every African American voted for Obama because of the president's race - then I can't help but wonder what else they would do over race? What would they let others of their race get away with?

Would they follow a Judas goat to slaughter just because he were black? Maybe they would? And no, I wouldn't put it pass them.

Someone said that the absence of a voter-ID law this is what happens, but I don't think it matters, because one way or another either through corruption or racial bigotry, Obama took 100% of the vote.

The idea that not one African-American in those 59 wards, almost 20,000 people, voted for Mitt Romney is amazing. That means that the people in that area - either voted because Obama is black or because they are brainless!

Good job Philly!

Allen West  challenges results as Florida declares vote-tally over amid recounts and irregularities

Florida Republican Rep. Allen West continues to challenge election officials' tallies that show he has lost his re-election bid.

The reason for his challenge? Florida election laws being broken, improprieties during count, wild ballot swings, and a partial recount needed because of voting-machine problems.

The Tea Party-backed West demanded a recount after the swing of votes on election night, leading Democratic challenger Patrick Murphy by roughly 2,000 votes, then trailing by 2,400 votes about 35 minutes later.

Officials said Saturday a final tally in the state’s 18th Congressional District shows Murphy had won by enough votes to avoid a full recount.

But they then agreed to a partial recount of early votes in St. Lucie County after acknowledging some votes had been counted twice. That recount resulted in a minor changes in the numbers, with West still behind.

West and his campaign, though, objected to just a partial recount of votes cast Nov.1-3, arguing the irregularity calls for a full audit.

“If people are that adamant about getting rid of me, that’s fine,” West told Fox News on Monday. “But don’t do it at the expense of the integrity of our electoral process. That’s what disturbs me the most.”

The West team is singling out County Supervisor of Elections Gertrude Walker and requesting a comparison of voter signatures from all polling places with the total ballots counted because the numbers do not appear to match.

Officials have “already stated they had a 141 percent voter turnout, which I think should cause everyone alarm,” said West during an interview on Fox News.

He also said Murphy officials were allowed to observe the Sunday recount, but West’s were not.

St. Lucie County Assistant Attorney Heather Young told NBC-WPTV that the recount was related to computer memory cards that record the ballots when fed through voting machines.

Officials said Saturday that West lost by 2,442 votes. The partial recount changed the final tally by several hundred votes. But officials have not changed the final but unofficial outcome and say the new tally is not enough for a full recall election.

However, Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, a volunteer lawyer for West's campaign, thinks a full recount of early votes would give the congressman the extra votes needed to trigger an automatic recount.

"We're close, very close," said Shapiro, a member Democratic Sen. John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign team. “It would be irrational at this stage to concede without making sure that every single vote is counted and that the democratic process is preserved."

Officials also allowed for additional vote counting in Palm Beach County before issuing the tally Saturday.

West's only option now appears to be through the courts - which he has stated he will do if things are not above board.

To my way of thinking, instead of voting getting better and easier in America, 20012 proved that our election system of counting votes is perfect for those wanting to commit fraud. Fraud seems to be the game in politics these days, and conservatives only have two years to figure out how to get things legal and monitored.

Jesse Jackson Jr. Plea Deal Would Include Jail Time

Jesse Jackson Jr. is currently being treated for health issues and while some have questioned whether he could ever return to Congress, a plea deal on charges of misuse of campaign funds may guarantee he does not return to Washington.

Instead, he may go to jail for a while.

The just-re-elected congressman is negotiating a plea deal for misuse of campaign funds that would include resigning his seat in Congress, repaying the money, and spending time in jail, reported CBS Chicago.

Since June, Jackson has been on leave while receiving treatment for bi-polar disorder. He was re-elected last Tuesday despite not campaigning while taking care of his health and fighting criminal charges.

I can only guess how he didn't campaign, yet win his seat. Was it all about race? Maybe?

Illinois Congressman Danny Davis told Reuters in October that Jackson appeared frail and emotional when he saw him and there was no way to know if he would be able to return to his seat in Congress.

The plea deal, currently being negotiated, would include Jackson resigning for health reasons, pleading guilty to misuse of campaign funds and repaying campaign contributions that were allegedly used for personal items. Then, based on similar cases in the past, he will likely serve some jail time.

And for the record, yes, I think there will be many people who donated hard earned money to his campaign who will be OK with his criminal act of using those campaign funds in things not related to his campaign.

The first reason is that his constituents like him. They do.

Secondly, they won't care because he's black. And yes, I really think those who gave his campaign money will look the other way - even though he broke the law - even though he stole from them.
It just doesn't matter to them, and I don't get it!

Estimated 6.6 million fewer white voters showed up to vote in 2012

Election "demographics" is the big catch phrase that came out of this election.

So what is demographics? Since I'm not very smart, I looked it up.

Demographics are current statistical characteristics of a population. Demographics include gender, race, age, disabilities, mobility, home ownership, employment status, and even location.

The term "demographic trends" describe the historical changes in demographics in a population over time (for example, the average age of a population may increase or decrease over time). Understanding the demographics of an area is very essential when making public policy and marketing decisions.

It tells you all about the population of a region and the culture of the people there.

Demographics right now point out how white voters simply didn’t show up in 2012 as they did in 2008. It is estimated that up to 6.6 million fewer white voters showed up at the polls this year.

Why? Well some experts dismiss the idea that it was simply a matter of white evangelical Christians refusing to vote for a Mormon – pointing out substantial voters in the South with high evangelical populations.

Instead, most are looking at the lack of turn out as a result of negative advertising. Let's face it, there were a lot of out and out lies about what Romney would do if elected.

He was painted as being a tax cheat, a man who puts people out of work, that he'd cut Social Security and Medicare, do in Seniors, gut the military, and even eliminate Department of government that he saw as essential.

In the end, 56 Million Americans said they were unhappy with Obama and want change. Of course 58 Million Americans believed the negative ad campaign that relentlessly emphasized Romney’s wealth, his tenure at Bain Capital, and the lies.

Besides 6.6 Million white voters not showing up and Democrats swallowing what the Obama campaign dished out hook line and sinker, Obama’s popularity among Democrats brought out his supporters in important states where Republican governors are making life better.

And yes, there is also the point about Latinos and other demographics that really doesn't seem very important to Republicans.

As Megyn Kelly explained to Karl Rove, "Obama still won – thanks to a boost of non-white and young voters in important states."

It is a fact that Republicans better understand and get used to very quickly. Fact is that the Hispanic vote has steadily increased from 2% of the electorate in 1980, to 7% in 2000, to 10% in 2012.

Like or not, whether that are all legal or not and subsequently aren't supposed to be voting, they are by large numbers.

I honestly don't understand how jerkweed judges can say it's not OK to ask for an picture-identification to determine citizenship, but that doesn't matter when Unions back Democrat candidates by running around town and pickup illegals to vote on election day anyways.

As for the lack of white voters showing up to vote, well that's just demographic data. As far as I'm concerned, anyone of any color who is of age and registers to vote but doesn't take the time to show up and cast a ballot - deserves everything he gets in as far as a rotten government more concerned with obtaining power than doing good for the people.

One writer said, "It is shocking to discover that when given the choice to vote for or against President Obama, a large group of white voters simply chose not to participate in the elective process.

Perhaps it serves as an additional warning to the Romney campaign and Republicans. Not only did they fail to properly defend their candidate, they were unable to make their party platform appealing enough to attract the same amount of voters as they did in 2008."

And yes, he has a great point. Something is definitely wrong when folks who are registered to vote instead opt out to stay home. Especially when their ballots could have made the difference in getting rid of some low life like Obama.

GOP should let Obama deal with ObamaCare mess

In an opinion editorial, someone came up with the idea that since the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate in President Obama's national health care law, and the mandate makes possible an expansion of Medicaid and the establishment of subsidized health insurance exchanges, let Obama deal with the mess he created.

Those two provisions will be responsible for $1.7 trillion in spending over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Together, they are expected to provide insurance to 30 million Americans and create the infrastructure that liberals hope to use to push the nation, over time, into a fully government-run health care system.

I believe it will resemble Great Britain's two-tier health care system where the poor get lousy government medical service while the rich buy their own expensive private medical.

It will turn take the store front neighborhood ghetto clinics and spread them all over the nation. And yes, all with the same quality as that found in the ghettos.

And friends, we are stuck with it!

With Obama re-elected, repeal ceases to be an option for at least the next four years. So 30 Republican governors will have to make a decision about whether they want to help the federal government implement ObamaCare, or leave the onus on the Obama administration.

One of the silver linings of the Supreme Court decision is that it lets states opt out of the Medicaid expansion. As many might be unaware of, Medicaid is one of the programs that is crushing state budgets.

If implemented as intended, ObamaCare would add 18 million beneficiaries to the program's rolls. Though the federal government lures states with a carrot saying they will cover all of the expansion in the short term through 2016.

The liberals don't say that by 2020 the states will be asked to kick in 10% of the cost of ObamaCare which will amount to billions upon billions of dollars of spending imposed on states nationwide each year.

It would be a benefit to state governors in the long term to opt out of the expansion as soon as possible.

The ObamaCare health care law was designed to coerce governors into starting exchanges on which individuals will be provided with federal subsidies to purchase insurance.

If a state doesn't establish its own exchange, the law specifies that the federal government will step in and set one up for them.

Given that Republicans typically favor more state and local control, there's a clear temptation to create the exchanges themselves. But they should resist that temptation and let the Feds do their own dirty work.
If for any other reason, it will demonstrate how useless the government is when it comes to creating a one size fits all health care plan.

Though the law creates the veneer of state flexibility on the exchanges, the reality is that all of the major decisions will be made from Washington. That includes the broad structure of the exchanges as well as the details of what kind of health care plans will be offered in them and how they will be marketed.

A careful reading of the law finds that all of the sections about state "flexibility" are filled with caveats that render them useless in practice, because Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius will be running the show.

For instance, ObamaCare specifies that, "The Secretary shall, by regulation, establish criteria for the certification of health plans as qualified health plans."

In other words, Sebelius will get to decide what type of health care plans can be offered on these state exchanges. Then, there's this:: "An Exchange may not establish rules that conflict with or prevent the application of regulations promulgated by the Secretary under this subtitle." What kind of flexibility does that offer?

Given that governors will have no real control over the exchanges in their own state anyway, they should let Obama administration officials sleep in the bed they made for themselves.

It's highly doubtful that the same administration responsible for the failed economic stimulus package will be able to operate dozens of exchanges competently. They have shown themselves to have an aversion to work.

Republican governors should allow the feds to live with the mess they created rather than clean up for them.


 

Arizona woman allegedly runs over husband with car after learning he didn't vote

A pregnant Arizona woman was arrested after allegedly running over her husband with her SUV upon discovering he did not vote in last week's election.

Police say 28-year-old Holly Solomon was enraged when she discovered her husband Daniel did not vote because she believes President Obama's re-election will bring hardship to their family.
Witnesses say Daniel Solomon attempted hiding behind a light post to escape his wife's wrath and was running away when he was struck. He is now in critical condition at a local hospital.

Holly Solomon, who is six month pregnant, reportedly told officers she was only trying to scare her husband but accidentally hit the gas instead of the break.

She was arrested for domestic violence and aggravated assault.

Sure what she did was extreme! Was it wrong? Absolutely! If I believe what she said, does it sound like a bad joke gone wrong? To me it does.

But then again, it was reported that million of registered Republicans didn't love America enough, didn't find it their duty as responsible citizens, didn't see Obama's agenda as a big enough threat to our nation, to get off their dead ass and vote!

So yes, there really is a part of me that can understand her frustration. And honestly, if I could, I'd love to be in a position to help her with her bail!


Story by Tom Correa