Obama's cover up collapsing!!!...Real Facts: Blacks and the Democratic Party....Se vienen los Impuestos!!!

Obama's Libya Lies Collapse: Senate Democrats Demand Answers

by John Nolte 27 Sep 2012 

 

The wheels appear to be coming off a two week attempt by the Obama Administration to cover up its fatal security failures at our consulate in Libya and to cover up the very fact that this was a successful pre-planned terrorist attack that cost four American lives, including that of our Libyan Ambassador, Christopher Stevens.

Not only has the scandal picked up steam in the mainstream press (Jake Tapper's ABC News report tonight is a must-watch), but high-ranking members of the President's own party are now demanding answers. This includes the man most often cited as a likely Secretary of State should Obama win a second term, Senator John Kerry:

Senate Democrats joined Republicans Thursday in questioning the Obama administration's handling of the fatal Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya and why the administration refused for days to acknowledge that it was a terrorist attack linked to al Qaeda.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, chaired by Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., circulated a bipartisan letter addressed to Deputy Secretary of State Thomas Nides, asking for an "accounting of the attacks against U.S. missions in Egypt, Libya and Yemen," according to a copy obtained by The Washington Examiner.

The lawmakers are also demanding to know whether the administration had any advance warnings of the Libyan attack and, if so, whether it had shared that information with U.S. personnel on the ground.

The letter marks the first time congressional Democrats have so directly expressed their dissatisfaction with the administration's response to inquiries about the attacks, which resulted in the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others and raised questions about U.S. security throughout the Middle East and Northern Africa.

A Kerry aide confirmed that the committee intended to enlist the support of Republicans and Democrats and said the letter would likely be sent Friday. Another aide told The Examiner that the panel's 10 Democrats and nine Republicans plan to sign it.

The false White House narrative blaming the murders on a protest gone bad over a YouTube video never really passed the smell test. But Obama maintained that illusion straight through to his speech before the United Nations two days ago, even as reports surfaced that our government knew al-Qaeda was behind the attack within 24 hours. Apparently, this has become too much to sweep under the rug for some of the mainstream press and Democrats.

The behavior of Obama and Secretary of State Clinton over the past 14 days is a scandal of the highest order. Lies, cover ups, and neglect for security of American intelligence and personnel that borders on criminal.

I've been skeptical that the same media, that early on conspired in this cover up by intentionally pouring all of its focus and fire on Mitt Romney's criticism of the Cairo Embassy apology, would go near this before the election. But the sins are so great and glaring, it doesn't look as though ignoring it will be possible for another 40 days.

INVEST SAFELY IN BANCO SOCIAL...up to $5,000 at 6 Mos....10% ROI!

'Exodus Now': Black Bishop Launches Brutal Attack Against Democratic Party

by John Nolte 27 Sep 2012 

You can't imagine how many videos I get sent to me. I make a point of watching some of all of them, but I couldn't stop watching this one:

Note that Bishop Jackson is not endorsing Mitt Romney or the Republican Party and never once mentions Barack Obama. His testimony is merely an indictment of the Democrat Party, not from a racial or partisan perspective, but from a Christian one.

Honestly, I would love to hear anyone attempt to argue against the points the Bishop makes about Planned Parenthood, same sex marriage, and most especially the Democratic Party's attacks against God, up to and including the booing of God last month at the Democratic convention in Charlotte (something the Bishop mentions in the video).

Bishop Jackson has turned his beliefs into a moment called S.T.A.N.D. -- which stands for Staying True to America's Destiny. Here's the website.

From the looks of it, he's just getting started. 

  

Obama y el Congreso están escogiendo provocar una recesión

Amy Payne

 

 

El presidente Obama comentó recientemente que “la lección más importante que hemos aprendido es que no se puede cambiar Washington desde dentro”. Es realmente desmoralizador oír eso cuando la recesión está presionando la economía; y eso es algo que se hecho desde dentro.

La Oficina de Presupuesto del Congreso (CBO) ha previsto que una nueva recesión nos afecte el año que viene si el “Armagedón Fiscal”, una subida de impuestos de cerca de $500,000 millones, empieza a afectar a la nación y si el Congreso y el presidente nos conducen al “desbarranque fiscal”. Hasta ahora, el presidente no ha hecho sino ignorar esta advertencia.

El analista de la Fundación Heritage J.D. Foster explica que el propio hecho de que podamos ver cómo se acerca una recesión es sorprendente. “Los analistas económicos casi nunca pronostican recesiones”, comenta. “Los pocos que pronostican recesiones lo hacen con mucha frecuencia y pertenecen a la escuela económica del pesimismo”. Aunque puede que veamos esto como algo lejano:

Lo que hace diferente y predecible a esta recesión es que la fuerza perturbadora son las normativas de Washington y, aún peor, los comportamientos de Washington; unas normativas y unos comportamientos por los que la nación puede estar agradecida al Congreso y especialmente al presidente Obama. La normativa es el “Armagedón Fiscal”. El comportamiento es la inacción intencionada e insistente. La consecuencia es la recesión. Y la respuesta debería ser y será la indignación.

El problema está extremadamente claro. El Congreso ha cerrado sus puertas y no está previsto que las reabra hasta después de las elecciones de noviembre. Con cada día que pasa, la economía se arrastra un poco más, a medida que se cierne la incertidumbre del día 1 de enero.
Los economistas hablan mucho sobre la “incertidumbre”. Pero ¿por qué es la incertidumbre una cuestión tan importante?

Porque los propietarios de las empresas ya están mirando los impuestos del próximo año y están pensando en que no se pueden permitir el realizar contrataciones. Los inversores se están conteniendo en sus expansiones y en sus nuevas aventuras económicas. Esta enorme incertidumbre está frenando todo el crecimiento y está manteniendo el desempleo de manera obstinada por encima del 8%, mientras millones de personas se han caído de la población activa debido a su gran desmotivación.

La incertidumbre también afecta a sus finanzas personales. Piense en esto: Si Ud. pertenece a una familia americana de clase media, el Armagedón Fiscal implica que sus impuestos van a subir en torno a los $4,100 el próximo año. ¿Cómo afecta eso a su idea de viajar para Acción de Gracias, dentro de un par de meses? ¿Y a la compra de los regalos de Navidad? ¿Y qué opina de poder ahorrar para la jubilación o para la educación de sus hijos?

De alguna manera esto empieza a afectar al hogar que Ud. tiene que administrar con esos $4,100. Va a tener que hacer algunas reducciones en su estilo de vida para poder pagar esta subida de impuestos.
Lo mejor que la economía tiene que ofrecer ahora mismo es un modelo de contención. Conteniendo nuestro gasto y conteniendo nuestra respiración, esperando a que el gigantesco Armagedón Fiscal nos caiga encima.
El presidente comentó que se necesitaban fuerzas externas a Washington para cambiarlo. Pero esta subida de impuestos (y la recesión que conllevará) se han creado desde dentro. Y el Congreso y el presidente son los únicos que pueden impedirla.

La Cámara de Representantes aprobó un proyecto de ley que impediría la mayor parte del Armagedón Fiscal, pero cuando el Congreso volvió a reunirse durante un breve período tras el receso de agosto, no pudo finalizar su trabajo, pues enseguida todo el mundo salió corriendo para comenzar la campaña.
Como comenta Foster, “El presidente Obama debería pedir que el Congreso se volviera a reunir para desactivar el Armagedón Fiscal y el Congreso debería atender inmediatamente su llamada. Este trabajo sólo requerirá unos cuantos días de sus actividades de campaña”.

NECESITA DINERO?....AYUDA ECONOMICA TEMPORAL DEL BANCO SOCIAL...$500 A 2 Meses

Bishop E.W. Jackson Message to Black Christians

Obamanomics: GDP Revised down to 1.3%....There are no independents on polls!...Se acabaron las cuentas bancarias gratis!

Recession Looms: GDP Revised Down to 1.3%, Durable Goods Collapse 13%

by John Nolte 27 Sep 2012, 5:52 AM PDT  

 

Because the media-narrative for the next 40 days must be, Obama can do nothing wrong and Romney can do nothing right -- the corrupt media will sure focus on the fact that today's jobless claims were lower than expected at 359,000 (which you can only celebrate on a curve). But there's potentially catastrophic news in the economy today with two leading indicators that point towards a coming recession.

Our 2nd quarter GDP has just been revised downward from an already anemic 1.7% to a shockingly weak 1.3%. Moreover, orders for durable goods went -- as Hot Air's Ed Morrissey points out --  "over a cliff," collapsing a full 13%. Morrissey also reports that this is the single largest decrease in over four years and that a subsequent increase in inventories this month means demand won't be improving any time soon.

UPDATE 1: The AP tells us things are bad and they're not going to get better:

The 1.3 percent growth in the spring followed a sluggish 2 percent growth rate in the first quarter, rates too slow to lower unemployment. The unemployment rate was 8.1 percent in August. Most expect it to stay around 8 percent for the rest of this year because they anticipate little pickup in growth.

Before Thursday's revision in the April-June figures, the consensus view was that the economy expanded in the July-September quarter at a lackluster pace of between 1.5 percent to 2 percent. They expected the final three months of the year will be about the same. For all of 2011, the economy grew 1.8 percent.

What the AP fails to highlight, though, is that our economy is slowing, from 2.0% in the first quarter of the year to 1.3% the second quarter.

Here's the GDP growth chart going back to the beginning of 2008. As you can see, in the last quarter of 2011, we hit a 3% growth rate. But ever since, the trend, like job creation, is down, down, down....

UPDATE 2: AEI's Jim Pethokoukis says we have entered into a "recession red zone."

Bottom line: Growth the past two quarters has averaged about 1.6%. Not only does this mean the economy is growing more slowly than last year’s 1.8%, it is also slow enough to signal about a 50% chance of a recession within a year. And the third quarter also looks weak.
The anemic, three-year-old U.S. recovery is already running out of steam. And if it does, it many be several more years before we see unemployment below 8%.

Yesterday, I saw a memorable bumper sticker that read: A Vote For Obama Is Like Backing Up the Titanic and Hitting the Iceberg Again.

Funny metaphor for what a vote for Obama really means: A lost decade for America.

Keep checking back. We will fill in this post as more news arrives….

INVEST SAFELY IN BANCO SOCIAL...up to $10 K at 12 Mos: 15% ROI

Media Ignore Independents' Swing Toward Romney

by Dustin Hawkins 27 Sep 2012, 3:15 AM PDT

Not long ago, Independents were the go-to demographic for determining who would win elections. How the Independents swung, so too would the election. 

In 2008, Barack Obama carried Independents in Ohio by 8 points and in Florida by 7 points. That victory among Independents contributed a great deal to his 2.8-point win in Florida and his 4.5 point win in Ohio. A victory by Romney among Independents could tilt both key states in his favor.

Curiously, Independents seem to be mostly ignored this election cycle, and their presidential vote preference is almost unanimously ignored by the MSM. Instead, “women” have replaced Independents as the key demographic. This emphasis and sudden fascination conveniently ties in nicely with the Democrats’ fictitious “War on Women” meme.  

In both Ohio and Florida, Barack Obama’s “clear leads” all come from heavy over-sampling of Democrats, not from winning the crucial Indie vote. In fact, most of the polls that show Obama with big leads also show Romney handily winning Independent voters. Yet, somehow, Obama manages to increase his performance from 2008 despite Independents now opposing him. Let's take a look at how Romney is competing among Independents in recent polls:

Ohio – Leads Among Independents
Ohio Newspaper Organization – Romney +28
CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac – Romney +1
American Research Group – Romney +16
Fox News – Romney +4
We Ask America – Romney +3
Public Policy Polling – Romney +2
Florida - Leads Among Independents
CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac – Romney +3
Gravis Marketing – Romney +4
We Ask America – Romney +2
American Research Group – Romney +1
Florida Times Union – Romney +4
Fox News – Obama +2

Remember, these are states Obama won by small margins in 2008, primarily by winning Independents by 7 and 8 points. If Barack Obama were winning with Independents in every poll, it’s clear the media would be talking about it just as they did, to the point of annoyance, four years ago.

Independents make up roughly one third of the electorate, and one would think they might get a little attention this time of year just as they do every other election year. If Romney turns the Independent vote his way like these polls suggest, his chances of winning turnout in even Florida and Ohio are excellent. But the reality is that the way Independents are now voting simply doesn’t mix with the media’s tidy narrative that Obama is running away with the election in key battleground states.

¿Ya no le dan una cuenta bancaria gratuita? Agradézcaselo a la Ley Dodd-Frank

Kaitlyn Evans

Las cuentas gratuitas, en su momento consideradas como algo común y corriente, se están volviendo cada vez más escasas a medida que los enormes costos de las nuevas regulaciones se van notando en los resultados finales de los bancos.

Según el recientemente publicado Estudio de Cuentas Gratuitas de 2012 de Bankrate, Inc., una publicación de información financiera, sólo el 39% de los bancos continúa ofreciendo cuentas gratuitas, un fuerte descenso desde el 76% de los bancos que ofrecía cuentas gratuitas en 2009, antes de la promulgación de la gigantesca ley de regulación financiera Dodd-Frank.

El estudio de Bankrate, que analizó alrededor de 500 cuentas gratuitas, también encontró que el promedio del saldo mínimo requerido para evitar pagar una cuota mensual subió un 23% el año pasado, hasta los $723.02 para las cuentas que no generan intereses.

El salto en las cuotas de servicio no resulta sorprendente, pues las nuevas regulaciones les cuestan a los bancos miles de millones de dólares cada año. La culpa la tienen las regulaciones que incluyen restricciones sobre las cuotas por descubiertos y por los controles del precio de las cuotas que los bancos tienen permitido cargar a los comercios minoristas por gestionar las transacciones con tarjetas de débito. La avalancha de cientos de regulaciones más debidas a la ley Dodd-Frank también está teniendo su costo. Y dichos costos se tienen que compensar de alguna manera.

Según Bankrate, casi todas las cuotas de las cuentas estudiadas se han incrementado, algunas con una subida del 25% o incluso más. Para las cuentas corrientes que devengan intereses, el promedio del saldo mínimo necesario para no tener que pagar cuotas se ha duplicado en los dos últimos años, hasta los $6,117.80, mientras que el promedio de la cuota de servicio mensual ha subido a los $14.75.

Las cargas por descubiertos y las cuotas aplicadas al consumidor por utilizar cajeros automáticos de una red distinta a la de su banco también se han incrementado. El uso de un cajero automático de otra red cuesta ahora un promedio de $4.07 por operación.

Aunque se ha vendido como “favorable para el consumidor”, la ley Dodd-Frank y otras regulaciones de los servicios financieros en realidad les están costando dinero a los consumidores. La pérdida de las cuentas gratuitas es sólo uno más de los muchos problemas causados por esta regulación tan mal concebida.

NECESITA AYUDA ECONOMICA TEMPORAL? BANCO SOCIAL....$500 a 2 Meses

And we keep going down...!!!

Report: Median Household Income Down 1.1% in August, More Than 8% Under Obama

 

by Tony Lee 26 Sep 2012, 9:39 AM PDT

Median household incomes fell by another 1.1% in August, according to a Sentier Research report released Tuesday.

Since Obama took office, according to the report, household incomes are down more than 8%. And since the economic recovery began in June of 2009, household incomes have fallen by 5.7%. 

"Even though we are technically in an economic recovery, real median annual household income is having a difficult time maintaining its present level, much less recovering," said Sentier co-founder and former Census Bureau official Gordon Green.

These figures come as, Business Insider notes, the Census Bureau released its annual report showing three million more people were in poverty in 2011 than 2009, and the “average inflation-adjusted income for households in the middle 20% is now lower than it's been since 1995.”

In addition, The Health Care Cost Institute released a report that found “per-capita costs jumped 4.6% last year,” and a Center for Disease Control and Prevention report found there were more than one million uninsured Americans in the first three months of 2012 compared with last year.

POLLSTERS at CBS/NYT think we are stupid!...NYT Lies and gets paid!...Contraste real Romney vs Obama

BREAKING: CBS/NYT Report Dem Turnout To Break All-Time Records

by John Nolte 26 Sep 2012, 5:15 AM PDT  

 

If you're going to believe the polls released from CBS/New York Times this morning -- you know, the polls the media's currently using to beat Romney senseless with and to depress Republican enthusiasm, you have to believe that the turnout advantage for Democrats over Republicans will blow away every previous record and common sense. 

It's that simple. Because these polls are not only telling us that Romney is losing OH, PA, and FL by insurmountable margins; these polls are also telling us that Democrat turnout is projected to blow away every modern record.   

But these media polls don't headline what they're seeing as far as the Democrat turnout advantage because no one would believe it. In fact, no one believes Obama will match the D+7 nationwide advantage he enjoyed in 2008. And no one certainly believes he will surpass it.  

Oh, except this non-stop litany of media polls being wielded like weapons by the corrupt media.  

Here are the CBS/New York Times internals.  And here's the con the CBS/NYTs is attempting to pull: 

Florida: 

In 2004 the vote was R+4. 

In 2008 the vote was D+3 

CBS/NYTs is reporting that in 2012 we will see D+9.

Ohio: 

In 2004 the vote was R+5 

In 2008 the vote was D+8 

CBS/NYTs is reporting that in 2012 we will see D+9

Pennsylvania: 

In 2010 the vote was D+3 

In 2008 the vote was D+7 

CBS/NYTs is reporting that in 2012 we will see D+9.

Again, why won't the media report the dramatic news that Democrats are expected to turnout in record numbers against Republicans?  

Because the media doesn't believe it.

And yet, that's exactly what media polls claim will happen.  

INVEST SAFELY @ BANCO SOCIAL...up to $10K at 12 Mos...15% 

Media Malpractice: NYT Poll Pushes Absurd Democratic Turnout Model

by Dustin Hawkins 26 Sep 2012, 6:23 AM PDT 

In what could be considered nothing short of media malpractice, the New York Times and CBS News published three state polls by Quinnipiac University that shows Democratic advantages in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania at levels never before seen.

The allegedly scientific poll is said to give a clear idea of how the election might turnout if it were held today. But the published turnout assumes Democrats will outnumber Republicans by 33% in Florida and Ohio, while the advantage jumps by 40% in Pennsylvania.

Not surprisingly - despite their own data showing he is losing Independents in both FL and OH (PA data not released) - Obama is "clearly ahead" of Romney in all three states. And they say it isn't even close. Yep, even though he is losing the Independents he won handily in 2008, Obama is actually winning these swing states by more than double the margin he did then. Make sense?

In 2010, Republican's had a 1 point edge in turnout in Ohio, an even advantage in Florida, and just a 3 point deficit in Pennsylvania. Over the last 8 years, Democratic turnout has averaged just 1 point higher in Ohio and 4 points higher in Pennsylvania, while Republican turnout has averaged 1 point higher than Democratic turnout.

Instead, the NYT/CBS poll has expected turnout in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania at D +9, D +9, and D +11 points, respectively. All of these results are well outside the 8 year averages of R +1 (FL), D +1 (OH), and D +4 (PA), and even show marked improvements in Democratic turnout over 2008, a historically Democratic year. The poll data show ties, but the media reports Obama blowouts in all three states.
Yesterday, Mike Flynn had this to say about about outrageous media polls acting as the newest form of  campaign ad:

Every election features something new, an evolution from past campaigns. This year's development is troubling. Polls are now being used, not simply to gauge the state of the race, but to impact the race. We're not far off from the day that the New York Times or CBS will have to file their polls as in-kind contributions to the Democrats.

The New York Times and CBS have a contribution filing to report this morning.

NECESITA AYUDA ECONOMICA TEMPORAL? BANCO SOCIAL $500 a 2 Meses

El contraste entre Romney y Obama acerca de los derechos a beneficios

Amy Payne

Los debates cara a cara oficiales comienzan la próxima semana, pero las apariciones del domingo en “60 Minutos” del presidente Barack Obama y del exgobernador Mitt Romney (R-MA) proporcionaron un contraste acerca de las ideas que ofrecen sobre los derechos a beneficios y la crisis de gasto de la nación.
Por su parte, el presidente eludió una importante pregunta acerca de la inquietud de la nación sobre el gasto culpando de todo al presidente George W. Bush. En lugar de abordar la cuestión del gasto, esperó a la siguiente pregunta sobre la deuda nacional, que ha aumentado en más del 50% desde que ocupó el cargo. Luego llegó el conocido estribillo de por qué él no es responsable del sobregasto de Washington o de la pésima situación fiscal del país:

Cuando llegué al cargo, heredé el mayor déficit de nuestra historia. Y durante los últimos cuatro años, el déficit ha aumentado, pero el 90% de este es consecuencia de dos guerras que no se habían pagado, consecuencia de rebajas fiscales que no se habían pagado, un programa de prescripción de medicamentos que no se había pagado y luego tuvo lugar la peor crisis económica desde la Gran Depresión.

Estas continuas excusas ignoran los incrementos masivos del déficit ocurridos desde que el presidente ocupó el cargo. Según la experta de la Fundación Heritage Emily Goff: En el ejercicio fiscal de 2088, el déficit había alcanzado los $458,600 millones. El déficit estaba aumentando cuando Obama llegó al cargo, principalmente impulsado por la recesión y por la primera oleada de rescates financieros del Programa de Ayuda para Activos en Problemas (TARP). Pero la factura de los estímulos masivos de su administración aceleró el gasto y lo llevaron a un déficit récord de $1.4 billones para el ejercicio fiscal de 2009. Y los déficits se han mantenido en más de $1 billón cada año desde entonces.

Los programas de derechos a beneficios de Estados Unidos son la causa principal del gasto sin control. Sin una reforma, estos llevarían el gasto federal hasta cerca del 36% de la economía en el plazo de una generación. La deuda de titularidad pública estallaría hasta cerca del 200%. Por tanto, las reformas estructurales son inevitables y se trata meramente de una cuestión sobre la forma en la que cambiamos lo que estamos haciendo.

En su entrevista en “60 Minutos”, Obama pasó por alto las reducciones que Obamacare implica para Medicare así como sus costos resultantes para las personas mayores.
Cuando a Romney se le preguntó sobre cómo cambiaría el Seguro Social, en primer lugar dejó claro que no habría cambios para los beneficios de quienes estén jubilados o cerca de estarlo.
Pero continuó diciendo que:

Digamos que lo que haría con el Seguro Social es esto: que de nuevo, la gente con mayores ingresos no alcanzará la misma tasa de alto crecimiento para sus beneficios que la gente con ingresos más bajos. Las personas que dependen de la Seguridad Social deberían tener el mismo tipo de tasa de crecimiento para sus beneficios que han tenido en el pasado. Pero aquellos con unos ingresos mayores recibirían un poco menos.

Como explica la experta de la Fundación Heritage Alison Fraser, a día de hoy el Seguro Social ya está ajustado a los ingresos. Esto es lo que se denomina el sistema “según ingresos”. Los beneficios están limitados para los que obtienen grandes ingresos y el cálculo de los beneficios iniciales que recibe un nuevo jubilado se basa en sus ingresos pasados. Los jubilados con ingresos elevados pagan un impuesto mucho más alto que aquellos con ingresos más bajos. Romney propone ampliar este ajuste según ingresos de modo que los jubilados con ingresos elevados reciban un poco menos que ahora. READ MORE

Obama...Madona...What?

On the verge of WAR Obama meets with: Whoopi!!!....ObamaCare: More lies...Comedian in Chief!

Canada PM to Meet With Netanyahu, Obama With Whoopi

by Ben Shapiro 24 Sep 2012 

Even as President Obama avoids meeting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu today to save time for hanging with the ladies on The View, Canadian Prime Minister will be meeting with Netanyahu. Sun News reports that Harper will be in New York to receive an award from the Appeal of Conscience Foundation for his work on religious freedom. Not coincidentally, Harper stands for religious freedom when he meets with Netanyahu, while President Obama will be apologizing for a Christian-produced anti-Islam film at the United Nations and ignoring Netanyahu.

Obama has cancelled his originally-planned meeting with Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, likely out of concern for the public relations snafu such a meeting would cause.


Harper has long been a strong supporter of Israel. His defense minister, Peter MacKay, said in November 2011, “A threat to Israel is a threat to Canada.” No such statement has been forthcoming from the Obama administration; the Obama administration has been too busy repeatedly leaking Israeli military secrets to prevent Israel from launching a pre-emptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

NEED TEMPORARY CASH ASSISTANCE? BANCO SOCIAL...$500 @ 2Mos. 

 

Thank You, Obamacare: Families Pay $3000 More for Insurance; Obama Promised $2500 Decrease

by Joel B. Pollak 25 Sep 2012, 5:18 AM PDT 

President Barack Obama promised that Obamacare would cut family health insurance premiums by $2,500 by the end of the first term--but instead they have risen by $3,000, according to a new Kaiser Family Foundation study cited by Investor’s Business Daily. 

The cost of health insurance today is more than 50% higher than Obama promised it would be--and the costs are expected to continue to rise as Obamacare is impemented.

John Merline of Investor's Business Daily notes the rising costs specifically contradict a campaign promise Obama reiterated several times, including in debates with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and at events along the 2008 campaign trail.
 
Furthermore, the data show that the rise in family premium costs, largely attributable to the costs of complying with Obamacare, has outpaced the rise in costs under eight years of George W. Bush.
Health insurance companies have already been required to provide additional coverage for so-called “children” up to age 26, among other changes. That coverage is described by Obama as “free,” but in fact the costs are borne by other patients.

Obamacare also does nothing to change the underlying incentives driving the rising costs of health care, and in fact makes them worse by adding mandates and reducing patients’ choices.

Over the next four years, if Obama is re-elected and Obamacare is not repealed, the federal government will have to apply cost controls, resulting in the rationing of health care by bureaucrats and/or hospitals.
That is why the Obama administration placed such a heavy emphasis on the Independent Payments Advisory Board--and why vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) has spent so much time attacking it.
Regardless, the central promise of Obamacare--that it would “bend the cost curve down,” not just overall but on a family level--has been broken, as critics said it would be. 

The question “are you better off than you were four years ago” is answered with a clear “no” for American families when it comes to health insurance prices--along with rising gas prices and declining household wealth. Four more years will likely be even worse.

NECESITA AYUDA TEMPORAL?...BANCO SOCIAL: $500 a 2 Meses

Obama: Comediante en jefe

Miryam Lindberg

¿Dónde está el presidente Obama? Pues cotorreando en la televisión y en la radio con cómicos y en tertulias. Eso cuando no está por ahí recaudando fondos para su reelección.
El pasado martes, el presidente concedió una hora completa a David Letterman, presentador de un programa nocturno de humor. El 11 de septiembre (precisamente ese día) concedió una entrevista radiofónica al presentador del programa de entrevistas “Pimp with a Limp”. Ayer, Barack y Michelle Obama aparecieron en The View, en la ABC. Pero no importa que el presidente de Estados Unidos no encuentre tiempo para imbuirse en sus sesiones informativas de inteligencia o en sus reuniones con los líderes políticos mundiales.

Y mientras tanto, las embajadas de Estados Unidos son atacadas y extremistas violentos están llenando las calles del mundo árabe mostrando su odio contra Estados Unidos.
En Naciones Unidas, los líderes de todo el mundo se congregaron el lunes para la semana de la Asamblea General anual. Obama realizará su propia alocución ante la Asamblea General el martes a las 10 de la mañana, un discurso que seguramente contendrá aún más disculpas y denuncias por el ofensivo vídeo La inocencia de los musulmanes aparecido en YouTube.

Según comenta la revista TIME, un órgano apenas crítico con la administración Obama: “Si parpadea puede que se pierda la aparición del presidente Barack Obama en la Asamblea General anual de la ONU de esta semana. El presidente planea realizar la visita más breve que se recuerde de un presidente de Estados Unidos”.

El calendario del presidente no contiene ningún encuentro bilateral, ni siquiera con los presidentes de países como Egipto, donde han sido atacadas las embajadas de Estados Unidos, o Libia, donde fue asesinado el embajador de Estados Unidos. Asimismo, la Casa Blanca desestimó por falta de tiempo una solicitud para una reunión por parte del primer ministro israelí Benjamin Netanyahu, dejando tirado ante los ojos de todos al mejor y más acosado aliado de Estados Unidos en Medio Oriente.

Una demostración de indiferencia como la del presidente Obama hacia la función más básica de su cargo (la seguridad nacional) habría sido absolutamente inimaginable, al menos hasta la llegada de esta administración. Pero incluso para un buscador de la celebridad como Obama, es increíble el contraste entre la severidad de la crisis que afronta la nación y el conjunto de prioridades del presidente.

Quizás, simplemente, la administración Obama se ha dado totalmente por vencida en cuanto a tener una política de actuación para Medio Oriente y sencillamente no tiene nada más que decir mientras esa región se halla tan convulsa. Sea cual sea la razón, ninguna de ellas es digna del gobierno de Estados Unidos de América.

Imaginary crowds for OBAMA...Egypt in Charge of US-Arab relations...Continua la Gira del Perdon

AP Reports Imaginary Crowd as 'Largest Yet of the Obama Campaign'

by Joel B. Pollak 24 Sep 2012, 4:25 AM

The mainstream media is faking every number is can get away with to save President Barack Obama. Not content with weighting poll samples with absurd Democrat margins, or spinning high unemployment rates, the media is now faking crowd numbers for Obama's events. The Associated Press is the latest offender, calling a Milwaukee, Wisconsin crowd that did not exist "the largest yet of Obama's reelection campaign."

Tom Blumer of NewsBusters caught the AP in the lie, building on an article at Breitbart News that showed that both Politico and the Wall Street Journal had reported turnout for Obama at the Sep. 21 event as 18,000--at an arena that only held 5,000 people.

Though the arena was nearly full--and local media reported that more were outside the arena--there is no evidence whatsoever that the 13,000 people needed to make up the difference actually showed up. No images of that crowd have yet been produced.

The AP's take: "The crowd of about 18,000 in a steady drizzle was the largest yet of Obama's reelection campaign." And yet the AP did not count the audience. Nor did the Wall Street Journal. Nor did Politico.
So where did the official-sounding number come from? The Obama campaign, according to Politico--which was the only one of the three that had the minimal integrity to report the source of the estimate (though not to challenge it).

When the mainstream media calls a crowd is "the largest yet," but overestimates it by a factor of three or even four, you have a pretty good idea of how far they are willing to go to re-elect their patron saint.

Egypt's Islamist President Dictates Terms for US-Arab Relations

by AWR Hawkins 23 Sep 2012 

Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi says US must show greater respect for the values of the Arab world and build a Palestinian state in order to soothe "decades of pent-up anger."

Before arriving in New York on Sunday, Morsi tried to schedule a meeting with President Obama. But when Obama didn't show interest in the two leaders spending time together, Morsi went around the White House to dictate these terms to the American media.

Morsi says the the anger in the Arab world and the geopolitical tensions between Arab nations and non-Arab nations are Washington's problem to fix. He suggests a step toward fixing those things is "respecting the Arab world's history and culture, even when it conflicts with Western values."

He also added that it's unrealistic to expect Egypt to live by US rules, saying his government would not be hostile to the West, "but would not be as compliant as [President] Mubarak had been either."

Morsi says that if Egypt is judged by the standards of "American culture," then the judgment will be of no value. He elaborated on this point by saying, "When the Egyptians decide something, probably it is not appropriate for the US. When the Americans decide something, this, of course, is not appropriate for Egypt."

INVEST SAFELY IN BANCO SOCIAL....UP TO $10K @ 12 Mos...15% Net Return

La gira para pedir perdón sigue adelante: Obama y Clinton se disculpan con las turbas pakistaníes

Helle C. Dale

El pasado día 20, la secretaria de Estado y el presidente de Estados Unidos de América aparecieron en la televisión pakistaní para pedir perdón.

En un anuncio que contenía extractos de sus conferencias de prensa en Washington, subtituladas en urdu, Barack Obama y Hillary Clinton pidieron “perdón” a las enloquecidas hordas que atacaban la embajada americana en la capital pakistaní, Islamabad, y deploraron el infame vídeo antimusulmán de 14 minutos aparecido en YouTube.

“Rechazamos absolutamente su contenido y su mensaje”, comentaba Clinton en los anuncios, que acababan con el sello de la embajada americana en Pakistán. Los contribuyentes de Estados Unidos pagaron la factura de esta disculpa oficial de alto nivel por valor de $70,000.
Esto no es diplomacia pública. Esto es una locura.

Antes que nada, Clinton y Obama ciertamente deberían emitir otra disculpa, en esta ocasión dirigida al personal de la embajada de Estados Unidos en El Cairo. Su declaración disculpándose y que se publicó el 11 de septiembre en la página web de la embajada mientras el edificio estaba siendo atacado, fue desautorizada al día siguiente tanto por la secretaria de Estado como por el presidente y posteriormente retirada.

Sin embargo, todas estas disculpas son ampliaciones de la “gira para pedir perdón” de Obama, que es el soporte moral del enfoque del presidente respecto a la política exterior y que sostiene que siempre se le puede echar la culpa a Estados Unidos cuando surjan problemas internacionales. Esta gira empezó pronto, tras su investiduracomo presidente y aún se mantiene firme. El presidente se ha disculpado por Guantánamo, por la CIA y sus técnicas, por las políticas de Estados Unidos hacia las Américas, por la esclavitud, la segregación y el tratamiento a los nativos americanos, por la guerra contra el terrorismo, por la política hacia el mundo musulmán, etc., etc., etc.

Sin embargo, en el corazón de la demostración de humildad de Obama, se encuentra su creencia en su propio poder para redimir los muchos pecados de este país. En 2009, en la cumbre de líderes mundiales del G-20, Obama afirmó: “Me gustaría pensar que con mi elección y con las primeras decisiones que hemos tomado, están Uds. empezando a ver parte del restablecimiento de la posición de Estados Unidos en el mundo”. Está claro que las turbas de alborotadores que quemaban la bandera americana e incluso la imagen del presidente, no lo ven del mismo modo.

En vez de disculpas, el mensaje de la diplomacia pública de la administración debería ser una defensa del pueblo, los valores y los intereses americanos. He aquí lo que un anuncio útil mostrando a Clinton y Obama podría haber dicho:

¡Basta ya! Estados Unidos defiende la libertad de expresión en su territorio y en el extranjero y continuará haciéndolo frente a las intimidaciones matonescas. La libertad de expresión es un principio fundamental consagrado en la Constitución de Estados Unidos así como en la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos. Nos ponemos del lado de aquellos que comparten estos valores y pedimos que cese inmediatamente toda violencia contra nuestras embajadas y nuestro personal.

Sin embargo y por desgracia, la gira pidiendo perdón continúa.

NEED CASH ASSISTANCE?...BANCO SOCIAL: $500 at 2 Mos.

Obama's loves free speech...CNN: Communist News Network...Libre Mercado o Progresistas?..

Obama to Condemn Christian Filmmaker Before United Nations

by John Nolte 22 Sep 2012 

Not only are we seeing the White House and State Department call more attention to the Mohammed-mocking "Innocence of Muslims" than any terrorist network ever could've hoped for, but the President's indefensible scapegoating of the film and filmmaker to draw attention and blame away from U.S. security failures apparently knows no bounds.

Next week, Obama will denounce the film in a speech before the United Nations General Assembly:

National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor previews the president's speech to the UN General Assembly next week:

"UNGA always provides an opportunity for the President to put the international situation in context, and to put forward a vision of US leadership. I would certainly expect the President to address the recent unrest in the Muslim world, and the broader context of the democratic transitions in the Arab World."

"As he has in recent days, the President will make it clear that we reject the views in this video, while also underscoring that violence is never acceptable[.]

My God, between the media and the Obama White House, we are finally witnessing Orwell's "1984" blossom to life.

As our economy slows, incomes shrink, unemployment creeps up, and poverty explodes -- the media assures us we're in "recovery" and that our frustrations should be taken out on "Emmanuel Goldstein," also known as "America's Successful."

As Obama's appalling policy of disengaging in the Middle East comes to fruition in the form of the region exploding and al-Qaeda's targeted assassination of an American ambassador -- the media spends two weeks savaging Mitt Romney and directing our sorrow, rage, and helplessness on "Emmanuel Goldstein," also known as "A Stupid Filmmaker."

For weeks this administration, aided and abetted by The State Media, has shamelessly lied to us about what happened in Libya. Moreover, in order to cover up and distract for unforgivable security lapses, this hapless filmmaker has been targeted for all of the blame -- certainly more blame than the Administration's failure to secure a consulate on 9/11 (of all days), but even more blame than the actual murderers.

And now, even though we know the truth about what really happened in Libya, it won't stop. It will never stop. Because Obama knows his media will never make him pay a political price for lying and scapegoating.

At all costs, the media quietly whispers amongst themselves, Obama must be reelected. READ MORE

INVEST SAFELY IN BANCO SOCIAL...$10K at 12 Mos....15% Guaranteed!!!

CNN Hid Knowledge of Libya Ambassador Diary For Days

by Ben Shapiro 22 Sep 2012 

CNN, in an effort to protect the Obama administration while still getting a scoop, hid the fact that they were in control of the diary of the Ambassador to Libya from September 15 to September 21. According to CNN, they found Ambassador Chris Stevens’ diary “four days after he was killed.” They then told Stevens’ family about the diary, and spent the next few days “corroborating” what they considered “newsworthy tips” in the diary.

This is absurd. The diary was found in a public area – according to CNN, “on the floor of the largely unsecured consulate compound where he was fatally wounded.” While sections with regard to the Ambassador’s private life surely should have been redacted, anything of relevance he had to say with regard to the security situation in Benghazi should have been published forthwith. Diaries contain the feelings of the authors; they require no corroboration.


So why did CNN wait a week?


They waited a week because they didn’t know what to do. Instead, they tried to leak out information they garnered slowly, without much notice. They buried the lede. Because they’re CNN, and this is the Obama administration, and they didn’t want to step on any toes. That’s why tonight, when they released news of the Ambassador’s diary, a week late, they headlined it this way: “CNN finds, returns journal belonging to late U.S. ambassador.”


That, of course, is not the news. The news is that the Libya ambassador’s diary contained worries about security in Benghazi. But CNN doesn’t worry about that. Instead, they worry that they’ll be perceived as having forfeited their status as Obama’s chief palace guards by releasing any details of the diary.

NECESITA ASISTENCIA TEMPORAL? $500 a 2 Meses...BANCO SOCIAL

El Gráfico de la Semana: Dos sueños antagónicos

Miryam Lindberg

En año electoral, la idea del Sueño Americano hace siempre parte de la campaña política. Los candidatos hablan incansablemente del tema y ambos ofrecen su propia receta para alcanzar ese sueño.

Pero las características y el camino para lograr el Sueño Americano son lo bastante específico como para poder definir la diferencia que tiene respecto a otros enfoques, como lo demuestra El Gráfico de la Semana.

El clásico Sueño Americano tiene que ver con libertad, oportunidad, esfuerzo personal, gobierno limitado y libre mercado. El nuevo sueño propugnado por la izquierda, en nombre de la igualdad, tiene mucho que ver con el rol del Estado. Es el conocido Estado Niñera que ominosamente se infiltra en la vida de los ciudadanos. Y para que este nuevo sueño eche raíces, hará falta cambiar por completo la idiosincracia del pueblo americano.

Estados Unidos se enfrenta a una encrucijada en las elecciones de noviembre. El presidente Obama y Mitt Romney tienen dos ideas completamente distintas de ver las cosas y de solucionar los problemas para alcanzar el Sueño Americano. Y en manos del pueblo americano estará la decisión de mantener o redefinir el Sueño Americano y la promesa de un futuro mejor.

 

Terrorist Murders in Libya....Obama Failed again...The Khalidi tape...Operacion Fast & Furious? What?

Obama Failed: The Terrorist Murders of Americans in Libya

by Larry O'Connor 21 Sep 2012 

Ambassador Christopher Stevens was assassinated on September 11th by al-Qaeda terrorists in Libya.  He and three other Americans were brutally and savagely murdered at the hands of America's enemies.  The Obama Administration and the Clinton State Department were warned about the attacks. They should have seen it coming. Ambassador Stevens did.  

The death of these Americans and the projection of weakness and humiliation of the United States to the Middle East is a direct result of President Barack Obama's fecklessness and incompetence.  The attacks happened on his watch and represent the biggest failure of his tenure as Commander-in-Chief.  
It has been ten days since the bloody attack on the United States mission in Benghazi, Libya that resulted in the assassination of Amb. Stevens, and the facts paint a bleak picture of a disengaged and aloof Commander-in-Chief and a Secretary of State more concerned about the United States' image rather than the well-being of the diplomats in her charge.

On September 10th, the eve of the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks, a new video was released by al-Qaeda spiritual leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri calling Libyans to rise up against Americans and avenge the death of Al Qaeda #2 Abu-Yahya al-Libi, who had been killed by a US drone attack in June. Contemporaneous accounts of the video make no mention of any reference to the anti-Islam YouTube video that is now being blamed for the recent Middle East violence.

The al-Qaeda video calling for revenge for the death of Abu-Yahya al-Libi is significant to the attacks in Libya because Abu-Yahya was from Libya.  Hence the suffix to his name "al-Libi."  Libyan terrorists and Islamists knew Abu-Yaha well.  He was a hero to the Islamist extremists in that country.  The announcement of his "martyrdom" would surely have a significant resonance on the "Arab Street" of Libya. Add to that the built-in significance of the anniversary of the September 11th attacks, and even an amateur observer of world events would see a security concern brewing in Libya.  READ MORE

INVEST SAFELY at BANCO SOCIAL... up to $10K at 12 Mos....15% Net return!!!

LA Times: Why We Won't Release The Khalidi Video

by Ben Shapiro 21 Sep 2012 

This week, Breitbart News offered a $100,000 reward to anyone who produced the infamous 2003 tapes of Barack Obama at an event honoring Palestinian anti-Israel radical Rashid Khalidi. And today, James Rainey of the Los Angeles Times took to his keyboard today to write a diatribe defending the Times’ refusal to make public those tapes. While Rainey gives several justifications for not releasing the tape itself – guarding the source of the tape being the most prevalent – he offers no justification for why the Times refuses to offer even a complete transcript of that evening’s events.

Rainey rips the “Khalidi video mythology … which [Breitbart News] speculates will lay bare the ugly back story of Obama’s disdain of Israel … and his effusive support of Mideast radicals. Such fantastical thinking is rife not just on Breitbart.com but across the conservative Interwebs.” There is nothing fantastical about suggesting that the reason that the Times didn’t originally report Obama’s words at the event, or the more radical words of the evening, was to protect their beloved presidential candidate. Given the Times’ track record of Obama defense, it’s the only rational conclusion to draw.



But Rainey’s condescension continues. “In what will doubtless be a vain attempt to quell the bleating from the political fringe, I offer here a review of the trust history of the ‘Khalidi tape,’” he writes. What was that history that would shed light on the Times’ non-transparency? Not much. He rehashes the original Peter Wallsten story labeling Obama a quasi-moderate, without evidence to support that view. He then states:

In the case of the Khalidi video, the unnamed source agreed to share the illuminating bit of video evidence with Wallsten, but only with the understanding that the reporter could not reproduce or rebroadcast the images. The journalist had to make a decision: Do I agree to that condition and get to see evidence that no other reporter has seen of Obama meeting with Palestinian Americans? Or do I insist on a full public release of the video, with the likely outcome that the source would share nothing?

Wallsten pushed for the release of the video but when the source would not agree, Wallsten agreed to accept more limited access to the recording. He agreed not to reveal his source nor share the video with anyone else.

The net result: The world got a story that showed Obama the political operator, sliding between two opposite and highly contentious worlds. The audience did not get to view the video, but it got far more than it had without The Times’ reporting. That's the nature of some journalistic negotiations; giving up the perfect to obtain the very good.

Well, then, where’s the transcript? Why is it that the source was comfortable divulging the video to the Times, but not to a less Obama-friendly source like Breitbart News for far more money? Asking the Times to hand over a transcript, and asking the source to hand over the tape, is far from “fringe.” It’s an attempt to vet a candidate that the Times clearly had little interest in completely vetting.


But Rainey’s condescension doesn’t end. He writes:

The ultimate irony of the Khalidi video furor: The world would not even know about the video and would certainly know much less about Obama’s political maneuvering without the dogged reporting of Peter Wallsten. The paper put the story on Page One, hiding right in plain sight, this dark, dark political secret.

Obviously, we at Breitbart News are glad for Wallsten’s original report. All we ask is for full information, free of the filter of Times reporting. Rainey’s story gives us all we need to know about where the Times stands – he says that Breitbart News released its offer to act as a “counterpunch to the devastating video, released this week, showing Mitt Romney talking disdainfully of the 47%.” Well, no. We released our offer this week largely because President Obama’s disastrous foreign policy, including his anti-Israel leanings, must be explained, and fast. The Khalidi tape will go a long way toward doing that.


But that’s the last thing that the Times wants. So they’ll continue to stand on their supposed journalistic integrity while cashing their figurative paycheck from the Obama administration.

NECESITA ASISTENCIA TEMPORAL?...Hasta $500 a 2 meses...BANCO SOCIAL

Operación Rápido y Furioso: 5 maneras en las que mancha al Departamento de Justicia de Eric Holder

Lachlan Markay

El inspector general del Departamento de Justicia (DOJ) hizo público esta semana el esperado informe sobre el escándalo del transporte de armas de la Operación Rápido y Furioso. Este señaló la culminación de los 19 meses de investigación sobre la operación, que permitió que nada menos que 2,000 armas de fuego “viajasen” a México, donde se distribuyeron a los cárteles de la droga.La operación, supervisada por la Oficina de Alcohol, Tabaco, Armas de Fuego y Explosivos (ATF), saltó al primer plano de la atención pública cuando se encontraron algunas de esas armas cerca del cuerpo del agente de la Patrulla de Fronteras de Estados Unidos Brian Terry, muerto en acto de servicio junto a la frontera de Arizona con México.

Tanto los congresistas republicanos, que de forma obstinada han llevado a cabo acusaciones de mala práctica contra los más altos niveles del Departamento de Justicia, como los responsables de la administración han afirmado que esto confirma sus distintos relatos del escándalo.
Aunque el procurador general Eric Holder ha sido casi totalmente exonerado de responsabilidad en el escándalo (el informe respalda su afirmación de que no conoció la operación hasta que había acabado), su aparente falta de conocimiento es problemática en sí misma, como observa en un nuevo informe el analista de la Fundación Heritage John Malcolm, antiguo alto cargo de la división de delitos del DOJ:

Es impactante concebir que el procurador general de Estados Unidos no fuera consciente de las tácticas empleadas en una operación que duró meses y que tuvo como resultado las muertes de un agente federal y de…aproximadamente 300 mexicanos. Como mínimo, asumiendo que eso es verdad, el procurador general estuvo mal asesorado por algunos de sus más cercanos consejeros, así como por algunos miembros de la fiscalía de Phoenix. El informe…urge a que Holder “decida si una sanción u otra medida administrativa…es necesaria”. Algunas de estas personas deberían ser sancionadas, por no decir despedidas.

El informe del inspector general tiene una longitud de cerca de 500 páginas, por lo que hemos extraído las cinco revelaciones principales que Ud. necesita saber:

1. El informe señala a los principales cargo del Departamento de Justicia por un caso de mala práctica.

“Concluimos que el subjefe de gabinete del procurador general, el subjefe interino del jefe de gabinete y los responsables de la División de Delitos no alertaron al procurador general de una información significativa o de fallas en esas investigaciones”, establece el informe.
El informe culpa a 14 altos cargos de varias infracciones, la mayoría por no investigar adecuadamente la posibilidad de que se estuvieran utilizando tácticas inapropiadas. Desde la publicación del informe, Kenneth Melson, director en funciones de la ATF y el ayudante interino del procurador general Jason Weinstein han dimitido. LEER ARTICULO COMPLETO