TOP TEN REASONS THE 2007 OBAMA VIDEO MATTERS IN 2012

Even before the Daily Caller released the video last night of President Obama's 2007 speech before a majority black audience in Virginia, our corrupt media was already declaring it "old news."Time's Mark Halperin had a full-blown meltdown and BuzzFeed Politics' Ben Smith declared the story over and dead hours before anyone had read it. What's especially pathetic about Smith is that one of his site's signatures is scouring the Internet for old videos and publishing them as … news!

Once the Daily Caller story did hit, and it became clear that Tucker Carlson had found never-before-seen video of Obama in a way voters have never seen him, none of that mattered. The desperate narrative to protect Obama had already been set and, as though the rest of us were insane, the corrupt media doubled down in its efforts to tell those of us who had never seen this video that we had.

Of course, it's all lies – blatant lies meant to control the explosion of an explosive story, meant to justify why the very same media still obsessed over Romney's "47 percent" moment will now downplay and ignore as a nothingburger Obama caught on video spewing racialist division and the kind of wild conspiracy theories a sitting U.S. Senator had to know weren't true.  

But New Media is The Media, and this video will get disseminated and voters will see it. And like Romney's "47 percent" moment, this new Obama video is a legitimate news story worth covering.

Here are ten reasons why…

1. The video released by the Daily Caller last night does include footage the media never broadcast or reported on.

Furthermore, we're supposed to believe it's just a coincidence that the footage the media ignored just happens to be the most controversial part, where Barack Obama (who at the time was running to be the Democratic nominee for president) goes off-script and tells a majority black audience that the federal government doesn't care about Hurricane Katrina victims because they're black.

Even Politico's mainstream media water-carrier Dylan Byers had to admit this is the case:

But the full footage of the speech included previously unreported remarks in which Sen. Obama suggested that the federal government helped victims of 9/11 and Hurricane Andrew (in Florida), but did not help the victims of Hurricane Katrina because it didn't care about them as much.

By any measure, new video of a sitting president sewing seeds of racial division is not only news, but big news.

If this were Allen West giving the exact same speech, you better believe it would be everywhere. And he's only a congressman.

Via Breitbart

Continue Reading...

Exclusive: President Obama Considered Putting Osama bin Laden on Trial if Taken Alive

Report: Biden The Only Obama Adviser To Oppose Bin Laden Raid…

In an adaptation from his new book, The Finish—first reported for Vanity Fair—magazine contributing editor Mark Bowden reveals that President Obama intended to put Osama bin Laden on trial in the federal court system if he had been captured, rather than killed, during the Abbottabad raid. Bowden had access to key players including top national-security officials and the president himself.

According to Bowden in the story—in November’s Vanity Fair—in the unlikely event that bin Laden surrendered, Obama saw an opportunity to resurrect the idea of a criminal trial, which Attorney General Eric Holder had planned for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. This time, the president tells Bowden, he was prepared to bring bin Laden back and put him on trial in a federal court. “We worked through the legal and political issues that would have been involved, and Congress and the desire to send him to Guantánamo, and to not try him, and Article III.” Obama continues: “I mean, we had worked through a whole bunch of those scenarios. But, frankly, my belief was if we had captured him, that I would be in a pretty strong position, politically, here, to argue that displaying due process and rule of law would be our best weapon against al-Qaeda, in preventing him from appearing as a martyr.”

President Obama tells Bowden that he was aware of the possibility that “The Pacer”—as the team called the figure captured on surveillance video regularly walking around the Abbottabad compound’s vegetable garden—“was some warlord from Afghanistan who had set up shop, the possibility that this was a drug dealer from the Gulf who valued his privacy or had a mistress or a second family.” He also understood that The Pacer might be exactly who they thought he was. Obama had never bought the line that bin Laden “was living an ascetic life somewhere, in some mountain somewhere.”

Bowden describes Situation Room meetings where the team presented the president with wildly varying odds. “People don’t have differences because they have different intel,” Morell, who had been personally involved in the flawed analysis of Saddam’s weapons capability, explains. “We are all looking at the same things. I think it depends more on your past experience.” He continues: “If we had a human source who had told us directly that bin Laden was living in that compound, I still wouldn’t be above 60 percent. And I’m telling you, the case for W.M.D. wasn’t just stronger—it was much stronger.” As Bowden reports, Obama’s conclusion was that the odds were 50-50. “This is a flip of the coin. You guys, I can’t base this decision on the notion that we have any greater certainty than that,” the president said.

Via: Vanity Fair

Continue Reading...

JetBlue Offers To Help Disgruntled Voters Flee The U.S. After 2012 Elections

Airline to help upset voters leave the U.S.

An airline says it will help voters distraught over backing the losing candidate in next month's presidential contest flee the country — for free.

JetBlue Airways' new "Election Protection" promotion allows voters the chance to win a free round-trip ticket to one of the airline's 21 international destinations if the election doesn't go their way. Contestants first must preregister at jetblue.com/electionprotection. After the Nov. 6 results are in, the airline will give away 1,006 roundtrip certificates — that's 2012 seats — to participants whose candidate lost.

"We've all heard it said before: if my candidate does not win, I'm leaving the country," said Marty St. George, senior vice president of marketing and commercial strategy for JetBlue. "Fun is one of our five founding values, and in this spirit, we decided to give people a chance to recover from the political noise and follow through on their claim to skip town if their candidate comes up short."

Via: Washington Times

Continue Reading...

CLAIM: OBAMA CAMPAIGN STAFF IMPERSONATING ELECTION OFFICIALS IN FLORIDA

This morning, I wrote about the Obama campaign spreading misinformation about early voting in Pasco County, Florida. The effort is an obvious attempt to confuse voters and potentially reduce the number of GOP voters turning up at the polls. However, a more serious allegation against the Obama campaign has surfaced. Its staffers were able to speak before high school classes by posing as officials from Pasco County's election office. This is likely illegal. 

Obama campaign's deception came to light after a local GOP official was first asked and then uninvited to speak before high school students. 

District spokeswoman Summer Robertson explained that the Democrat who spoke to the classes got into the school by claiming to represent the county elections office as part of an annual voter registration drive. Once before students, this person gave a distinctly partisan message that the teacher, Jennifer Dixon, sought to offset by calling Bunting.

Every election year, county election officials conduct voter registration drives in area high schools. Obama campaign staff allegedly posed as election officials at at least three area high schools. At at least one of these schools, the campaign staff gave a highly partisan speech to the students. 

Breitbart news as obtained an email sent by the county's top election officials to the regional director for the Obama campaign [David Pearl]. 

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

WaPo Reporter Beats FBI to Benghazi, Finds Sensitive US Documents Scattered Around

BENGHAZI, Libya — More than three weeks after attacks in this city killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans, sensitive documents remained only loosely secured in the remains of the U.S. mission here on Wednesday, offering visitors easy access to delicate details about American operations in Libya.

Documents detailing weapons collection efforts, emergency evacuation protocols, the full internal itinerary of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens’s trip and the personnel records of Libyans who were contracted to secure the mission were among the items scattered across the floors of the looted compound when a Washington Post reporter and a translator visited Wednesday.

Although the gates to the compound were locked several days after the attacks, looters and curiosity-seekers were free to roam in the initial chaotic aftermath, and many documents may already have disappeared.

No government-provided security forces are guarding the compound, and Libyan investigators have visited just once, according to a member of the family who owns the compound and who allowed the journalists to enter Wednesday.

Two private security guards paid for by the compound’s Libyan owner are the only people watching over the sprawling site, which is composed of two adjoining villa complexes and protected in some places by a wall only eight feet high.

“Securing the site has obviously been a challenge,” said Mark Toner, deputy spokesman at the State Department, in response to questions about conditions at the Benghazi compound. “We had to evacuate all U.S. government personnel the night of the attack.  After the attack, we requested help securing the site, and we continue to work with the Libyan government on this front.”

State Department officials were provided with copies of some of the documents found at the site. They did not request that the documents be withheld from publication.

None of the documents were marked classified, but this is not the first time that sensitive documents have been found by journalists in the charred wreckage of the compound. CNN discovered a copy of the ambassador’s journal last month and broadcast details from it, drawing an angry response from the State Department. Unlike the journal, all of the documents seen by The Post were official.

Via: Washington Post

Continue reading..

How Public Unions Exploit the Ruse of 'Official Time'

Imagine thousands of government employees reporting to work each morning at their government offices and then doing no government work. They use government workspace, government telephones and government computers, all while working on projects unknown and unidentified to their government employers. They receive hefty taxpayer-funded salaries, promotions, bonuses and benefits, plus generous government pensions when they retire—all without doing any work on behalf of the taxpayer. Instead, they work as paid political operatives for powerful government unions.

Welcome to the common practice of "official time." Sometimes called "release time," it's a mechanism by which the government pays union officials to work on union matters during their government workdays. This mechanism—enshrined in law and contracts—is an enormous subsidy to public-employee unions, who defend it fiercely.

The Office of Personnel Management reports that federal employees spent over three million hours on official time in 2010, costing the taxpayers about $137 million in salary and benefits costs.

At the federal level, about 77% of official time (as reported to the OPM) is spent on "general labor-management," a broad catchall for union activity other than contract negotiations or dispute resolution, which are the activities most directly related to employee representation. But when more than three-quarters of all official time is used for unspecified activities, red flags should be raised.

Via: Wall Street Union

Continue Reading...

CNN Caught Juicing Headline

CNN story shows economists favor Romney -- but headline stresses they do so 'reluctantly'

Even the good news for Mitt Romney come wrapped in a bad news ribbon. 

A recent CNNMoney story reported that the Republican presidential nominee, despite trailing in a number of swing state polls, is the overwhelming choice among economists surveyed. They picked him, according to CNNMoney, by a 3-to-1 margin. However, CNNMoney made sure to stress in the headline that they did so "reluctantly." 

The article was part of a CNNMoney survey in which nine of 17 economists picked the Republican presidential nominee when asked whose election would help the economy grow more.

Only three picked President Obama, and the remaining five made no pick, “with several suggesting neither (candidate) would provide much of a lift to the sagging economy." 

The headline, though, sounded like it was a downer for the GOP nominee: "Economists reluctantly pick Romney." 

“Would CNNMoney have reported that economists ‘reluctantly’ picked President Obama by a 3-to-1 margin?” the website NewsBusters asked in a story Tuesday pointing out the headline. 

CNN was contacted about the headline early Tuesday afternoon but has yet to respond.

The first two economists quoted in the story were less than flattering for Romney, saying “he doesn’t understand how to govern” but that his policies compared against Obama’s would be “less bad for the economy.”

The most supportive economist comment for Romney is the final quote in the story.

Allen Sinai of Decision Economics said Romney's calls for “cutting growth of government outlays, lowering tax rates and closing loopholes, less regulatory uncertainty ... smaller government and entitlement reform all must be tackled."

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading...

Obama Moving Gitmo Terrorists into Illinois?

AP File

Lawmakers claim administration opening door to Gitmo transfer with Illinois prison buy

The Obama administration plans to buy an Illinois prison that at one point was considered for housing Guantanamo prisoners, in a move Republican lawmakers claimed would open the door for ultimately carrying out that plan.

Administration officials, though, denied that they were looking for a new home for Guantanamo inmates. They insisted the decision to buy Thomson Correctional Center, an under-used state prison 150 miles west of Chicago, was a move to alleviate overcrowding and create jobs in the process.

"This is about public safety and 50 percent overcrowding in high-security prisons," one Justice Department official said.
Officials insisted Guantanamo detainees would not be coming to Illinois.

But Virginia Republican Rep. Frank Wolf, among the lawmakers who opposed the federal purchase of the prison, claimed Tuesday that the Obama administration could still carry out its plan -- perhaps by moving prisoners from another federal prison to Thomson, and then using that prison to house Guantanamo detainees.

"The president says his goal is to shut down Guantanamo Bay and move the prisoners here," Wolf told Fox News, accusing the administration of circumventing Congress. "This gives him a great opportunity to do it, particularly right after the election."

Wolf chairs a key House subcommittee overseeing the sale. He was referring to Obama's pledge immediately after taking office that he would shut down the Guantanamo Bay prison camp -- a pledge that stands as one of the president's most glaring unfulfilled promises to his base.

The move to transfer prisoners stateside, though, was met with a fierce backlash among some lawmakers who worried it would pose a security risk.

The Obama administration and Federal Bureau of Prisons is now going ahead with the $165 million purchase of the Illinois prison, though strictly as a move to ease overcrowding, they say. The move was first announced by Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin and Gov. Pat Quinn.

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading...

NFL Political Donations Favor GOP

Political donors connected to the National Football League have donated more money to Republicans than Democrats according to a recent tally from the Sunlight Foundation.

According to the report, team employees, including players, owners and staff, have donated over $1.5 million for this election cycle. But Republicans received nearly three times as much from donors associated with football teams as did Democrats.

Eleven of the NFL team owners favor Romney, according to FEC campaign records – compiled by Business Insider’s Walter Hickey in September. These donors have donated directly to Romney’s campaign or through the Republican National Committee.

Chief among the Romney supporters is Miami Dolphins owner Stephen Ross who has donated $100,000 to the pro-Romney super PAC, Restore Our Future, $20,800 to the Republican National Committee, $5,000 to Romney’s Free and Strong America PAC and $2,500 to Mitt Romney.

New York Jets owner Woody Johnson has donated $58,200 to the Republican National Committee this year, $2,500 to Mitt Romney and $5,000 to Romney’s Free and Strong America PAC. Johnson is one of the Romney campaign’s finance co-chairs.

Members of the Bidwell family, owners of the Arizona Cardinals, have donated over $154,000 to the Republican National Committee and $4,500 to Romney.

Via: The Examiner

Continue Reading...

Poll: 86 percent of Americans say government spending has not helped them

President Obama’s solutions to economic problems invariably involve more spending, but 86 percent of likely  say that government spending has not helped them, according to a new poll.

“On the question of whether federal government spending has improved the overall economy, 74 percent say it has not helped, with 52 percent responding that it has actually hurt the economy,” The Public Notice announced yesterday after questioning 1,005 likely voters.  “When asked how federal government spending has impacted personal financial situations, 86 percent of those surveyed say it has not helped, with 35 percent responding that it hurt.”

The Tarrance Group, the Republican-leaning firm that conducted the poll, added in its memo that “this pessimism over the impact of government spending is consistent throughout many key demographic groups that are frequently mentioned as ‘target’ voters in the upcoming Presidential election.”

Federal debt hit $16 trillion this year. Obama blames George W. Bush for the deficit, but The Washington Examiner’s Phil Klein argued last week that this reflects a “responsibility deficit” on the part of the president.

“[When Obama was inaugurated], the CBO projected deficits of $1.2 trillion in 2009 and $703 billion in 2010, for a total two-year deficit of about $1.9 trillion,” Klein explained. “The Obama administration went on to run deficits of $1.55 trillion in 2009 and $1.37 trillion in 2010, for a total of more than $2.9 trillion. In other words, in just his first two years, when Obama had a Democratic Congress that gave him virtually everything he wanted, deficits were $1 trillion higher than what the CBO was projecting when he was inaugurated.”

Via: Washington Examniner

Continue Reading...

Chicago Sun-Times: Emperor Obama Has No Clothes

The conventional wisdom is that Wednesday night’s presidential debate is a huge opportunity for Republican nominee Mitt Romney. The emperor-has-no-clothes reality is that the political forum would be meaningless if President Barack Obama could stand on the stage and boast his administration had ushered in an era of low unemployment, surging economic growth, reasonable gas prices and rising prosperity for the American family.

None of that is remotely plausible. The jobless rate has been north of 8 percent for 43 months. Median family income fell more during the Obama recovery than during the recession. Economic growth is slowing: The economy grew at only a 1.3 percent rate in the second quarter, raising fears the nation may be drifting back toward recession.

In addition, Obama’s big foreign-policy accomplishment, the killing of Osama bin Laden, lost some luster in the killing of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans in Libya and the assaults on U.S. embassies across the Muslim world. A scandal is brewing over revelations suggesting lax security for Stevens and over the administration’s initial, repeated denials that Stevens was killed in a terrorist attack in what increasingly looks like an effort to protect Obama’s campaign theme that he has degraded al-Qaida. Al-Qaida links to the Benghazi murders are no longer deniable; the terrorist group is a growing menace in the Middle East and North Africa, and al-Qaida in Iraq, all but wiped out by President George W. Bush’s surge, has made a deadly comeback.

Such developments may explain a new Rasmussen Reports poll finding that only 29 percent of likely voters believe the United States is stronger than it was four years ago and 49 percent say it’s weaker.

Still, the overriding issue remains the economy generally — and specifically, jobs — unrestrained government spending, the deficit, energy prices and development and the miserable state of family pocketbooks.

Obama’s defense, as proclaimed by Bill Clinton in his Democratic convention speech, is that the economic collapse was just too big for Obama or any president to handle in one term. Obama has seized this theme, claiming Washington can’t be changed from the inside.

Via: Chicago Sun-Times

Continue Reading...

Tricare Prime Fees Increase Up to 17 Percent Today

U.S. armed services retirees and their families will now pay higher annual fees for the Tricare Prime health benefits system beginning Oct. 1, 2012. The fee increases range from 3.6 percent and 17 percent (for most), reports the Navy Times:

Military retirees who enrolled in the system on or after Oct. 1, 2011, and all new beneficiaries will pay $269.28 a year for an individual, up from $260, and $538.56 for a family, up from $520.

Those who were in Prime before Oct. 1, 2011, will see their annual fees increase from to $269.28 from $230 for individuals and to $538.56 from $460 for families. [...]

The Obama administration had pressed for heftier increases in its proposed fiscal 2013 defense budget along with new enrollment fees for Tricare Standard, Extra and Tricare For Life, the health benefit for Medicare-eligible retirees and their families.

The proposal was struck down by the House and Senate Armed Services committees on a bipartisan basis.

The Obama administration originally pushed for significantly higher premiumsfor Tricare enrollees in their fiscal year 2013 budget, as reported by the Washington Free Beacon earlier this year. In July, the administration threatened to veto a defense appropriations bill, in part, because it did not include higher Tricare fees.

Via: WFB

Continue Reading...

Video surfaces of Obama in 2007 suggesting racism slowed aid to post-Katrina New Orleans

It's the Obama speech on race you probably haven't heard.

In June 2007, then-Sen. Barack Obama told a mostly black audience of ministers that the country's leaders "don't care about" New Orleans residents, suggesting the city was neglected in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina because of institutional racism, according to a an unedited video uncovered by The Daily Caller.

In the address, delivered during the upswing of the Democratic presidential primary season, candidate Obama specifically criticizes in outspoken terms the decision not to waive a federal law known as the Stafford Act that requires communities hit by disasters to match 10 percent of federal aid.

“When 9/11 happened in New York City, they waived the Stafford Act. … And that was the right thing to do,” he tells the crowd at Hampton University in Virginia. “When Hurricane Andrew struck in Florida, people said, 'Look at this devastation. We don't expect you to come up with your own money. Here, here's the money to rebuild. We're not going wait for you to scratch it together, because you're part of the American family.' "

Obama, echoing rapper Kanye West's infamous anti-Bush remarks a couple years earlier, then argues that New Orleans was treated differently, suggesting the reason was that the city is mostly black.

"What's happening down in New Orleans? Where's your dollar? Where's your Stafford Act money?" Obama says. "Makes no sense. ... Tells me that somehow the people down in New Orleans they don't care about as much."

The Obama campaign didn't response to Fox News.com's request for comment Tuesday night about the Daily Caller report and the video, but the Associated Press reported that Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt dismissed the criticism as "a transparent attempt to change the subject" at a time when Mitt Romney is down in the polls.

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading...

Heritage Expert Confounds the “Fact Checkers” on Welfare Reform

“Obama’s Palace Guard,” Mark Hemingway’s Weekly Standard cover story exposing fact-checkers for willful complicity in the gutting of welfare reform, is a must read for anyone who cares about the state of the news media—and for those who plan to watch, cover, or participate in the presidential debates.

Hemingway meticulously details the checkosphere’s studied indifference—with rare exceptions—to the plain facts. In 4,000 words, he lays bare the media fact-checkers’ almost comical avoidance of the one expert who could help them understand how the Obama Administration is dismantling “workfare”: The Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector, who helped write the work requirements in the 1996 welfare reform law and just published his latest paper on the outrage.

PolitiFact, Hemingway concludes, came off as more interested in consulting liberal critics of welfare reform and dismissing Rector, conservatives in Congress, and Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) for daring to suggest the left would want to undo the workfare program it opposed from the start:

PolitiFact said [Rector’s] concerns should be dismissed for no other reason than they are at odds with the Obama administration’s spin. PolitiFact didn’t even address the fact that Rector … was the source of the charge the Obama administration is gutting welfare reform or that he helped write the welfare reform law.

The Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler gets some credit from Hemingway for awarding Bill Clinton two out of four “Pinocchios” for stretching the truth in his speech defending Obama’s move to administratively undo welfare reform.

Via: The Foundry

Continue Reading...

FLASHBACK: JournoList plotted to kill Jeremiah Wright story in 2008

Now that The Daily Caller has uncovered and published video of President Barack Obama’s “other race speech,” liberal media figures are once again trying to quell coverage of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright story — just like in 2008.

Records obtained by TheDC in mid-2010 showed that “at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate,” after ABC News’ Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos asked then-Sen. Obama about his controversial reverend during an April 2008 debate.

“Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage,” TheDC’s Jonathan Strong reported.

Among those who were uncovered to be part of the plan to quell Wright coverage were Richard Kim of the Nation, Michael Tomasky of the Guardian, Thomas Schaller of the Baltimore Sun, Holly Yeager of the Columbia Journalism Review, Slate magazine contributor David Greenberg, columnist Joe Conason, Chris Hayes of the Nation, and Spencer Ackerman — then of the Washington Independent.

Strong reported that Ackerman even once “urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, ‘Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.’”

Before TheDC even released this new video, the Democratic Party tried to discredit it by citing JournoList members like the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein and Ben Smith — now the editor of BuzzFeed but formerly of Politico — commenting on the video before they had seen it.

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading...

Obama Grades the United States: 'Incomplete'

In a recent interview with Glamour magazine, President Barack Obama gives the United States an "incomplete" grade. Obama's grade is based on how women are treated in America. 

"I think the way I’d grade the United States right now is incomplete," says Obama. "There are more opportunities for women than ever before. I think women excelling in school is now translating into greater opportunities in their professional lives. Some of the steps that we’ve taken have helped to open up additional access, but I’m not going to be satisfied until every young person who is willing to work hard and take responsibility can fulfill their dreams. I think this campaign is going to be so important because it really presents two fundamentally different visions about how we expand opportunity for all people."

Obama was asked about this because, according to the interviewer, "Back in 2008 [he] told Glamour that your mother once said, and I’ll quote, 'the best indicator of whether a country does well is how it treats its girls and its women.'"

Obama said, "Still believe it."

"So, by your mother’s standards, give me a thumbnail sketch of how America is doing," said Glamour to the president.

Via: Weekly Standard

Continue Reading...

Poll: 'Not Falling Behind' the American Dream

Four years into the presidency of Barack Obama, a poll finds that the "American Dream" for many is now just treading water economically and not falling behind.

According to an Allstate/National Journal/Heartland Monitor Poll, “an overwhelming majority of Americans still define the U.S. as ‘the land of opportunity,’ but “nearly as many agree that getting ahead is more difficult for workers today than it was for previous generations.”

A majority of respondents said “‘because of the recent economic downturn,’ getting ahead these days in essence means not falling behind: ‘holding a job, being able to pay bills, avoid debt, and save some money for the future.” And only one-fourth of those surveyed thought they would “get ahead consistently over the next five or ten years.” 

Eighty-percent of respondents said “being free of debt” and “being able to save for a comfortable and secure retirement” were signs of getting ahead. 

The poll found 56% of respondents said they would prefer a job that “‘offers a great deal of job security but only modest pay and little opportunity for advancement’ over one that offered more opportunity ‘and the possibility of high pay but little job security.’”

In addition, 70% of those surveyed said “having a secure job that you can rely on, even through tough economic times” was a sign of getting ahead, and only 45% said they defined getting ahead as “advancing in a job and achieving greater financial success each year.”

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

The Miracle that would save America from Obama-imposed American Marxism

Falls to 77.7 million Catholics to save America from Obama imposed U.S. Marxism

There’s a promise made over an unbeknownst open mic to outgoing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on March 26, 2012, that awaits the outcome of November 6.

“This is my last election…after my election I have more flexibility,” President Barack Obama told Medvedev, indicating a chilling confidence that he would win a second term.

Prime Minister Medvedev, his replacement President Vladimir Putin, the reelection-bound Venezuelan despot Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, and Obama-propped Egyptian president Muslim Brotherhood member Mohammed Morsi await the fulfillment of that not meant to be heard promise.

They are the enemy at the gate who will goad Obama on to the continuing destruction of America should the worst happen on Tuesday, Nov. 6.

We have been in the dark before but never has the dark been so dangerous as now when Marxism and radical Islam have joined forces to deliver world populations over to the One World Order-driven United Nations.

The world thought the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall ushered in the end of communism.  Few knew back then that Communism would join radical Islam to begin in earnest smothering the freedom of the West in 2008.

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading...

Docs Suggest Gov-Subsidized Solar Company Was Selling Faulty Product

Seven months after calling themselves the “anti-Solyndra,” the Colorado-based solar panel manufacturer Abound Solar announced it was filing for chapter 7 bankruptcy liquidation, arguing that cheap Chinese solar panels flooding the market caused their demise.

“With over $30 billion in reported government subsidies, Chinese panel makers were able to sell below cost and put Abound out of business before we were big enough to pose a real competitive threat to China’s rapidly growing market share,” according to the prepared congressional testimony by Craig Witsoe, former CEO of Abound.

Abound Solar was given a $400 million loan guarantee by the Energy Department, and drew on about $70 million dollars of the guarantee before DOE cut them off in September 2011 — the same month the Solyndra scandal began.

After the massive failure of the solar panel manufacturer Solyndra, Energy Department loan guarantees came under increased media and congressional scrutiny. Other loan recipients felt the public pressure as well.

Internal documentation and testimony from sources within Abound show that the company was selling a faulty, underperforming product, and may have mislead lenders at one point in order to keep itself afloat.

“Our solar modules worked as long as you didn’t put them in the sun,” an internal source told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

The company knew its panels were faulty prior to obtaining taxpayer dollars, according to sources, but kept pushing product out the door in order to meet Department of Energy goals required for their $400 million loan guarantee.

“The DOE hurt us more than anything,” another source told The DC News Foundation, speaking of DOE production and revenue metrics.

The faulty solar panels would routinely burn up and virtually all of the panels Abound manufactured underperformed, meaning they did not put out the promised amount of power. Sources say that Abound panels would only put out between 80 and 85 percent of the promised wattage.

These problems led to tens of thousands of panels having to be replaced, especially towards the end of the company’s life.

Burning up and underperforming

In October of 2010, the company discovered that their panels were catching fire. One source said that this problem was brought to the company’s attention during a meeting in October 2010 with some company executives present and the suggestion was made to shut down the factory in order to address the problem.

“Our lead quality engineer… blew the whistle in a manager’s monthly review meeting, and he was basically told to shut up and sit down,” said another source.

Via: The Daily Caller

Continue Reading...

The Fannie and Freddie Fee Machine Federal government now collecting Fannie and Freddie profits

The federal government, in order to wind down mortgage giants, is collecting all profits generated by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—a move some say may backfire by providing the federal government a source of revenue that Congress will be hard-pressed to let go.

The Treasury announced in August that it would take all profits from the two housing giants in “a quarterly sweep of every dollar of profit that each firm earns.”

This “quarterly sweep” is an effort to recoup money that the federal government has loaned Fannie and Freddie, starting with the 2008 bailout. The federal government took over Fannie and Freddie in September of 2008, in the middle of the housing crisis that brought down the economy. Since then, the two firms have struggled to regain profitability, only recentlymaking money on their investments.

The federal government has loaned the two firms almost $200 billion, with the expectation that they would eventually repay the money. The Treasury argues that the policy shift, along with mandatory portfolio reductions, is a step toward ensuring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will “not be allowed to retain profits, rebuild capital, and return to the market in their prior form.”

However, a former Fannie Mae official pointed to a potential problem in the “quarterly sweep”: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could become a revenue source for the government, making it very difficult politically to end the two institutions.

Edward Pinto, former chief credit officer at Fannie Mae and a housing finance expert at the American Enterprise Institute, warned that because the money will be flowing into the Treasury, “If you don’t do something quickly, Congress could get used to this.”

Congress has used Fannie and Freddie’s profits to fund their legislation in the past, Pinto said. He pointed to legislation from Congress late last year that raised fees at Fannie and Freddie for 10 years in order to fund a two-month extension of the payroll tax cut.

Via: WFP

Continue Reading...