No 397 5/28/13 “En mi opinión” Lázaro R González Miño Editor ‘IN GOD WE TRUST’

No 397 5/28/13 “En mi opiniónLázaro R González Miño Editor ‘IN GOD WE TRUST’


My question isn’t about who’s going to resign.

My question is who is going to jail…?”                                     

–House Speaker John Boehner


A Government Against Liberty

May 25, 2013 by Ralph R. Reiland

Let’s say you’re like most people and believe the federal government has become too large, too wasteful, too crooked, and too intrusive. Now imagine the morning mail arrives from the money-bleeding U.S. Postal Service ($16 billion in the hole last year) and there’s a letter from the Internal Revenue Service with a stern warning about “penalties for perjury” and a long list of questions and probes about your friends, associates, ideas, and political activities.

Here’s an example, directed from the IRS to the Linchpins of Liberty in Franklin, Tennessee:

“Provide details regarding all training you have provided or will provide. Indicate who has received or will receive the training and submit copies of the training material.”

“Liberty,” it seems, unless it’s a 19th century gift from France standing quietly in New York Harbor, has become a concept that’s now viewed by D.C.’s central planners and tax collectors as a bit too messy, subversive, uncontrolled and individualistic.

Following its review of IRS letters to 11 tea party groups and conservative organizations applying for tax-exempt status, Politico reported that the agency “wanted to know everything — in some cases, it even seemed curious about what members were thinking.”

In fact, it went beyond what people were thinking with the IRS summoning a pro-life group in Iowa to reveal detailed information regarding the content of their prayers.

“Please detail the content of the members of your organization’s prayers,” the IRS asked the Coalition for Life in Iowa. Additionally, the IRS office in Cincinnati asked all board members of the Iowa group to sign a sworn declaration promising not to picket Planned Parenthood.

And from ABC News, listed below is a sample of the questions and requests that ABC News found in roughly half a dozen IRS questionnaires sent to tea party groups” from 2010 to 2012:

“Provide copies of the agendas and minutes of your Board meetings and, if applicable, membership meetings, including a description of legislative and electoral issues discussed, and whether candidates for political office were invited to address the meeting.”

“Submit the following information relating to your past and present directors, officers and key employees: (a) Provide a resume for each.”

“The names of donors, contributors and grantors. The amount of each of the donations, contributions, and grants and the dates you received them.”

“Fully describe your youth outreach program with the local school.”

“Provide a list of all issues that are important to your organization. Indicate your position regarding each issue.”

“Please explain in detail your organization’s involvement with the Tea Party.”

“Provide copies of handbills you distributed at your monthly meetings.”

“The names of persons from your organization and the amount of time they spent on the event or program, or events.” The IRS also asked for “copies of all your current web pages, including blog posts” and “copies of all your newsletters, bulletins, flyers or any other media or literature you have disseminated to your members or others,” plus copies of related information on “Facebook and other social networking sites,” and “copies of stories or articles that have been published about you.”

And this: “Do you have a close relationship with any candidate for political office or political party? If so, describe fully the nature of that relationship.”

On June 29, 2011, IRS staffers told senior agency official Lois Lerner that they were giving special scrutiny to “statements in the case file” by groups that “criticize how the country is being run.” Also targeted were groups that focused on government spending, deficits, government debt, and educating people on ways to “make America a better place to live.”

On Jan. 15, 2012, the IRS widened its target list to include “political action type organizations” involved in education on the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

In his recent column, “In AP, Rosen investigations, government makes criminals of reporters” (May 22, 2013), Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank pointed to the fundamental threats to freedom in the Obama administration’s “broad snooping into Associated Press phone records,” along with the administration’s spying on journalist James Rosen at Fox News and the administration’s identification of Rosen in a search warrant as a “possible co-conspirator” in violation of the Espionage Act.

“To treat a reporter as a criminal for doing his job — seeking out information the government doesn’t want made public — deprives Americans of the First Amendment freedom on which all other constitutional rights are based,” warned Milbank. “Guns? Privacy? Due Process? Equal protection? If you can’t speak out, you can’t defend those rights, either.”

And while White House Press Secretary Jay Carney says that President Obama is “a fierce defender of the First Amendment” and doesn’t think “journalists should be prosecuted for doing their jobs,” Milbank points out that the Obama administration “has launched more leak prosecutions than all previous administrations combined.”

On what’s next, Milbank posted a warning: “If the administration is spying on reporters and accusing them of criminality just for asking questions — well, who knows what else this crowd is capable of doing?”

It’s “a culture of cover-ups and intimidation that is giving the administration so much trouble,” recently asserted Sen. John Cornyn, a member of the Judiciary Committee, referring to the Justice Department’s covert seizure of phone records at The Associated Press.

Charging that “our constitutional rights have been violated,” the President and Chief Executive Officer of The Associated Press, Gary Pruitt, said the government’s surreptitious monitoring of reporters has already had a chilling effect on news-gathering operations.

News sources, understandably, are more likely to be reluctant to call reporters if they think the government is on the line — and that’s especially true if the disclosure is about government transgressions.

“Under their own rules, they are required to narrow this request as narrowly as possible so as to not tread upon the First Amendment,” explained Pruitt on CBS’s Face the Nation, referring to the Obama administration’s phone monitoring.

“And yet they had a broad, sweeping collection, and they did it secretly,” explained Pruitt. “Their rules require them to come to us first, but in this case they didn’t, claiming an exception, saying that would have posed a substantial threat to their investigation. But they have not explained why it would and we can’t understand why it would.”

The end product of this increased monitoring and harassment of the press, this increased threat to reporters and to sources who come forward with information, is that the government is likely to become even more insulated from public scrutiny, more heavy-handed and inept, and more shielded from reform.

Once the government is successful in restricting the news-gathering operations of the press, warned Pruitt, “the people of the United States will only know what the government wants them to know and that’s not what the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they wrote the First Amendment.”

Pruitt has it right about the philosophy of the nation’s Founders, as demonstrated in the letters of Thomas Jefferson.

“Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost,” asserted Jefferson in a January 28, 1786, letter to James Currie (1745-1807), a Virginia physician and frequent correspondent during Jefferson’s residence in France.

“Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter,” wrote Jefferson in 1787 to Edward Carrington, a Lieutenant Colonel in the Continental Army and a Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress from 1786 to 1788.

“Where the press is free, and every man able to read, all is safe,” stated Jefferson in 1816 in a letter to Colonel Charles Yancey, a commanding officer in Virginia Militia during the War of 1812.

And regarding those who seek to restrict the freedom of the press, Jefferson wrote this in 1804 to Judge John Tyler on the U.S. Circuit Court in Richmond: “No experiment can be more interesting than that we are now trying, and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth. Our first object should therefore be, to leave open to him all avenues of truth. The most effectual hitherto found, is the freedom of the press. It is, therefore, the first shut up by those who fear the investigation of their actions.”

Nikita Khrushchev, First Secretary of the Communist Party, 1953 to 1964, also understood the importance of the press. “The press,” he proclaimed, “is our chief ideological weapon.”

More On IRS: Americans Audited After Donating To Romney

Several Republicans say their constituents have come to them with examples of Internal Revenue Service intimidation that goes beyond the agency’s targeting of conservative organizations applying for tax-exempt status.

Lawmakers in the House and Senate say they’ve been told of other examples of bullying since the IRS apologized for targeting Tea Party groups.

“Oh, there’s a slew of them,” said Rep. Patrick Tiberi (R-Ohio), a member of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee. He said several lawmakers on the panel had been given tips about over-aggressive actions by the IRS.

Tiberi is one of several lawmakers who went public this week with allegations of wider abuses by the IRS. He and the other officials acknowledged the complaints from their constituents could be true or false, and said that they intended to look into the matters.

“I’m certainly going to spend a lot of time looking into it,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, who heard complaints from constituents who claimed they were audited by the IRS after making substantial donations to Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign.

Read More at The Hill . By Daniel Strauss.

 “La Paz del Islam” amenper.

Omar Barki un Iman Británico que se encuentra en Libia hizo las siguientes declaraciones con respecto al musulmán que asesinó con un cuchillo a un soldado inglés:

El profeta dijo que un infiel y su verdugo no se encontrarán en el infierno. Este es un pensamiento bello. Que Alá recompense a Adebolajo (el asesino) por sus acciones. No veo esto como un crimen de acuerdo con el Islam

Adebolajo fue un alumno de Omar Barki hace diez años en Inglaterra.

Pero no importa lo que los imanes prediquen o digan, siempre todo se filtra en la prensa liberal con sus diferencias entre los musulmanes militantes y la religión islámicas, sin tomar en consideración cuáles fueron las enseñanzas de Mahoma.

Omar Barki es un buen musulmán, un buen religioso, un profesante del Islam, negar esto es tratar de ocultarr lo evidente.

La misma raíz del Islam está en la conquista militar, y el fruto que vemos hoy viene de esta raíz. El Islam, desde su mismo principio, fue propagado por “el filo de la espada”. La historia del Islam está repleta de violencia y guerra, desde su nacimiento hasta el día presente. Cuando los musulmanes invadieron España, se necesitaron siete siglos para sacarlos. Los turcos otomanos masacraron a un millón y medio de ármenos entre los años 1915-1916 (un hecho todavía ignorado por mucho del mundo occidental). En el Sudán, más de dos millones de cristianos han sido masacrados y muchos más vendidos como esclavos, todo bajo la dirección del General Umar Bashir (musulmán). En Indonesia, los musulmanes han matado a más de 300.000 católicos desde 1975. El genocidio y la persecución actual de los cristianos existe en Irak, Irán, Egipto, Pakistán, Nigeria…en el nombre del Islam y los musulmanes

Siempre hay personas que usan las religiones, incluyendo el cristianismo para crear instituciones para la sus propósitos, incluyendo la guerra, Pero la conquista por la espada como el modus operandi estándar del cristianismo es diferente al de Mahoma. Jesús y sus seguidores no iniciaron la propagación de su fe por la fuerza militar.La guerra no es una doctrina del cristianismo.

Cuando Benedicto XVI usó la siguiente cita del emperador bizantino Manuel II Paleólogo:

Muéstrame también aquello que Mahoma ha traído de nuevo, y encontrarás solamente cosas malvadas e inhumanas, como su directiva de difundir por medio de la espada la fe que él predicaba.

El papa tuvo que retractarse por la presión de los liberales, pero la verdad de lo que dijo queda, porque no es más que la verdad, y la verdad puede ocultarse pero no desaparece.

 Gun Companies Refuse Sales to State Governments with Strict Gun Laws

by Kerry Picket 15 Feb 2013 972 post a comment

Six gun companies have announced plans to stop selling any of their products to any government agency in states that severely limit the rights of private gun ownership.

Disappointed with New York State lawmakers and other jurisdictions around the country who have passed strict gun control legislation, the companies—composed of firearm manufacturers, gunsmiths, and sporting goods retailers—have announced these policies in the past week. 

Their various statements emphasize that such laws create a class of government employees with rights and and a class of citizens without rights. Thus, they refuse to aid the enforcement of such inequality.

The announcements read:

Effective today, in an effort to see that no legal mistakes are made by LaRue Tactical and/or its employees, we will apply all current State and Local Laws (as applied to civilians) to state and local law enforcement / government agencies. In other words, LaRue Tactical will limit all sales to what law-abiding citizens residing in their districts can purchase or possess.

Due the passing of this legislation, Olympic Arms would like to announce that the State of New York, any Law Enforcement Departments, Law Enforcement Officers, First Responders within the State of New York, or any New York State government entity or employee of such an entity – will no longer be served as customers. 

In short, Olympic Arms will no longer be doing business with the State of New York or any governmental entity or employee of such governmental entity within the State of New York – henceforth and until such legislation is repealed, and an apology made to the good people of the State of New York and the American people. 

The Federal Government and several states have enacted gun control laws that restrict the public from owning and possessing certain types of firearms. Law-enforcement agencies are typically exempt from these restrictions. EFI, LLC does not recognize law-enforcement exemptions to local, state, and federal gun control laws. If a product that we manufacture is not legal for a private citizen to own in a jurisdiction, we will not sell that product to a law-enforcement agency in that jurisdiction.

We will not sell arms to agents of the state of New York that hold themselves to be “more equal” than their citizens.

As long as the legislators of New York think they have the power to limit the rights of their citizens, in defiance of the Constitution, we at Templar will not sell them firearms to enforce their edicts.

Templar Custom is announcing that the State of New York, any Law Enforcement Departments, Law Enforcement Officers, First Responders within the State of New York, or any New York State government entity or employee will no longer be served as customers.

Based on the recent legislation in New York, we are prohibited from selling rifles and receivers to residents of New York. We have chosen to extend that prohibition to all governmental agencies associated with or located within New York. As a result we have halted sales of rifles, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, machine guns, and silencers to New York governmental agencies.

Recently, companies such as LaRue Tactical and Olympic Arms have announced that they will no longer sell prohibited items to government agencies and personnel in states that deny the right to own those items to civilians. It has been and will continue to be Cheaper Than Dirt’s policy to not to sell prohibited items to government agencies and/or agents in states, counties, cities, and municipalities that have enacted restrictive gun control laws against their citizens. We support and encourage other companies that share in this policy.

Second Amendment activist groups Guns Save Life and Grass Roots North Carolina are currently urging big gun manufacturers Sig Sauer, Smith and Wesson, and Glock to halt their sales to government agencies within states that have clamped down on their residents’ right to bear arms. 

La Inhumanidad de la Burocracia.  amenper.

La burocracia, como el socialismo, son sistemas que se crearon bajo una base teórica que no tuvo en consideración el factor humano. Son actualmente parodias de las organizaciones y gobiernos eficientes.

Tanto Max Weber, en la teoría del modelo burocrático, como Karl Marx en la teoría del sistema socialista no tuvieron en consideración la capacidad del individuo y su derecho a la legítima ambición para la búsqueda de la felicidad.

Hoy en días tanto el socialismo como la burocracia se han convertidos en dinosaurios organizacionales irremediablemente creando formas de administración indeseables desarrolladas en el seno de una organización autoritaria y legalista que es incompatible con sociedades individualistas y dinámicas.

Cuando una empresa privada crece en tamaño, puede seguir su sistema organizativo eficientemente manteniéndose dentro de los parámetros de la competencia dentro del libre mercado o puede sucumbir a las ideas teóricas y las observaciones empíricas que se asocian con la burocracia terminando en el final de la vida de una empresa, que es la bancarrota.

Pero en la administración pública, la lucha ideológica acerca de cuáles son las formas deseables de administración y de gobierno, es decir en el debate respecto al control de su tamaño y de su agenda, siempre la burocracia como parodia de la eficiencia crea un sistema ineficiente, dirigido por burócratas incapacitados. Como en el caso de una empresa privada, el final es la bancarrota. La diferencia es que no es el dinero del gobierno, pues el gobierno no produce ingresos, pero lo que se pierde es el dinero de los contribuyentes, el dinero del pueblo.

Cualquier validez que pudiera haber tenido la burocracia weberiana, ha desaparecido ante la aberración de las burocracias institucionales de los sistemas socialistas.

La actual administración del presidente Obama, refleja los resultados de la burocracia.  La burocracia imita a la eficiencia, llenando el vacío de su incapacidad con  las perversiones y  la extensión ilegítima del poder de los burócratas.

Los que vivimos en Cuba, la transición de un sistema burocrático, típico de cualquier gobierno, a la burocracia como un instrumento o como una institución,  concebida en sí como un “tipo ideal” o como aproximaciones empíricas, pudimos observar la conversión de la democracia con el uso de la burocracia a una institución socialista.

La organización burocrática puede producir múltiples y contradictorios resultados y el comportamiento basado en la autoridad pero las consecuencias siempre son desastrosas.  La burocracia es un monstruo nacido de un modelo excesivamente centralizado y vertical, organizado de tal forma que siempre se hace lo que dicen “los de arriba”, sin que nadie se atreva a cuestionar las directrices del “jefe”.

Lo que dice el “jefe” en un discurso, tiene que ser puesto en acción por los burócratas del gobierno.

Por eso aunque la orden no venga directamente del “jefe” nació y es responsabilidad del “jefe”.

Alguien hizo una definición de la burocracia que la define como un gigantesco mecanismo manejado por pigmeos. Para la creación de una organización burocrática, hacen falta burócratas. El burócrata es corrupto y no confiable, es incompetente, ineficiente,  rígido e incapaz de responder a las demandas, preocupado sólo por sí mismo e incontrolable. Los administradores hacen mal uso de su posición y del poder que ella les otorga. Las leyes no son ejecutadas de manera justa y competente, no son responsables o no responden a los valores establecidos o a la constitución.

Por eso vemos que se violan los derechos de los ciudadanos, y se cubren las violaciones bajo el manto de la semántica burocrática que imita a la democracia, con discursos llenos de frases grandilocuentes y tergiversando el sentido de la ley.

El sistema de zares y la formación de una agencia para la seguridad nacional bajo la administración de Bush, para encarar el peligro del terrorismo, ha evolucionado bajo la nueva organización burócrata-socialista, en instituciones que usan su poder para atacar a los ciudadanos, mientras se muestran complacientes con los enemigos de la nación.  Esta administración es una parodia de un sistema democrático es el modelo típico de la perversión de la burocracia. 

Ha desaparecido la antigua demanda de reducción del Estado paternalista por una “teoría más adecuada y realista sobre el rol y los límites de la intervención del gobierno” se ha enfatizado la participación más que la libertad en el proceso de toma de decisiones, su implementación y ejecución. La administración pública tiene el deber de permitir el empoderamiento de los ciudadanos y la participación social. 

Las elecciones populares y los gobiernos de mayoría no constituyen las únicas fuentes de legitimidad. Las demandas y los apoyos  se canalizan sólo por la vía de las instituciones de la democracia representativa, y la condición de ciudadano implica algo mucho más amplio que votar. Se necesita una nueva visión moral institucionalizada que sintetice los principios y estándares éticos públicos y privados, dada “la charada de responsabilidad democrática que proporciona el actual sistema electoral

El sistema caudillista en contraste con la separación de poderes siempre ha sido el modelo americano.




 Por Armando F. Valladares *

La arquidiócesis de La Habana, a través de su revista “Espacio Laical” (No. 230, mayo de 2013), asumió como pocas veces la defensa del régimen cubano y de su nefasto “modelo” comunista, en momentos en que el mundo oye horrorizado las denuncias que figuras, tanto cubanas como extranjeras, están haciendo en el exterior, consiguiendo romper el “bloqueo” de silencio sobre la trágica realidad cubana. 

El reciente editorial de “Espacio Laical” coincide con el viaje al exterior de opositores cubanos que fueron perseguidos, amordazados y humillados durante décadas por el régimen comunista. La publicación de la arquidiócesis caricaturiza a los cubanos y extranjeros que están criticando a la dictadura alegando que  ellos “insisten” en solicitar “a importantes centros de poder en el mundo” que “desestabilicen al gobierno cubano” y que tomen medidas que supuestamente, según “Espacio Laical”, podrían “dañar fundamentalmente al pueblo de la isla”. 

En lo que dice respecto a los opositores cubanos, en sus recientes viajes por países de las Américas y Europa ellos simplemente describen de una manera clara y didáctica, el panorama de injusticia, miseria y opresión que desde hace más de cincuenta años oprime a 11 millones de hermanos cubanos, ante un público que incluye a los habitantes los países visitados, entre los cuales, autoridades, líderes y medios de prensa que quieran oírlos. No obstante, esa acción pacífica de quitar escamas de los ojos, sensibilizando a naciones enteras con relación al drama cubano, según “Espacio Laical” contribuiría a “dañar” a los cubanos de la isla.  

Es increíble hasta dónde puede llegar la parcialidad de una publicación arquidiocesana. Exactamente lo contrario es lo verdadero. En efecto, las denuncias de esos opositores cubanos son un medio valiosísimo para hacer sentir a los carceleros que ya no tienen más impunidad, que están siendo observados por el mundo entero y, en consecuencia, es una manera de  proteger a los cubanos esclavizados, no de dañarlos. La tergiversación procastrista demostrada por “Espacio Laical” difícilmente podría ser mayor. 

Como si fuera poco, “Espacio Laical” (foto de una de sus portadas) llama a “cincelar el presente modelo social” (o sea, el modelo comunista de sociedad) para evitar que “otros” logren “imponer un nuevo modelo” y lleguen a “secuestrar” a Cuba.  ¡Como si los cubanos, y los católicos en particular, no estuviesen secuestrados y amordazados por el régimen comunista desde hace más de cinco décadas! Palabras censurables, si hubieran sido publicadas por el periódico comunista “Granma”. Palabras inimaginables si se considera que fueron publicadas en la propia revista de la arquidiócesis de La Habana. 

Después de atacar de esa manera a los opositores y de defender el “modelo social” comunista, “Espacio Laical”, con su pro castrismo a ultranza, llega a justificar la represión estatal, calificándola eufemísticamente como meras “inflexibilidades” del régimen castrista. Y pasa a dar un consejo de amigo “al gobierno y al Partido Comunista”, para eviten una “hipertrofia”  de “rigideces” que puedan “precipitar al país hacia el abismo”. 

¿Cuál sería el “abismo” que “Espacio Laical” quiere evitar? La revista explica a continuación que la catástrofe que debe evitarse es lo “ocurrido en muchísimos países de Europa del Este”… O sea, el “abismo” temido por la revista arquidiocesana es ni más ni menos que la liberación de la isla del yugo comunista. Sería mucha ingenuidad pensar que el cardenal Jaime Ortega y Alamino, colaboracionista arzobispo de La Habana, no haya estado al par de ese nefasto editorial de “Espacio Laical” antes de ser publicado. Delante del creciente deterioro del régimen, desde la arquidiócesis de La Habana se le lanza un salvavidas. Y, en caso de naufragio, se tratará de salvar, en la medida de lo posible, los restos del nefasto “modelo social” cubano, promoviendo, directa o indirectamente, un castrismo sin Castro. 

Según “Espacio Laical”, “todo indica” que “la generalidad de los cubanos” no desea “un cambio al estilo del ocurrido en muchísimos países de Europa del Este”. ¿En qué datos se basará “Espacio Laical” para hacer esa increíble afirmación de que los cubanos no anhelan el pronto y total naufragio del régimen comunista? Sería importante saberlo.  

Es doloroso constatar finalmente que el editorial de la revista arquidiocesana omite la más mínima alusión a Dios, a los principios de la religión católica y a la vida sobrenatural. En ese sentido, el referido editorial es un ejemplo trágico de la destrucción espiritual lograda por el comunismo en ambientes católicos cubanos, en más de medio siglo de opresión.  

En 1995 se entregó en la secretaría de Estado de la Santa Sede una histórica petición a Juan Pablo II, firmada por destacadas figuras del destierro cubano, titulada “Los cubanos desterrados apelan a Juan Pablo II: ¡Santidad, protegednos de la actuación del Cardenal Ortega!” (Diario Las Américas, Miami, 24 de octubre de 1995). En esa filial carta, se mostraba preocupación ante el colaboracionismo procomunista del cardenal Ortega y del episcopado cubano; se imploraba  la intercesión del Pontífice para que a ese juego colaboracionista no se prestase en lo sucesivo ninguna autoridad eclesiástica; y se manifestaba la esperanza de que, por el contrario, esas autoridades pasasen a denunciar ante el mundo el drama de nuestros hermanos esclavizados, mostrando a los fieles católicos la necesidad de una cruzada de oraciones, sacrificios y enérgicas denuncias para la pronta liberación del pueblo cubano de las garras de ese régimen ateo y neopagano. 18 años después, en el comienzo del pontificado de Francisco, esa histórica petición cobra enorme actualidad. 

*Armando Valladares, escritor, pintor y poeta. Pasó 22 años en las cárceles políticas de Cuba. Es autor del best-seller “Contra toda esperanza”, donde narra el horror de las prisiones castristas. Fue embajador de los Estados Unidos ante la Comisión de Derechos Humanos de la ONU bajo las administraciones Reagan y Bush. Recibió la Medalla Presidencial del Ciudadano y el Superior Award del Departamento de Estado. Ha escrito numerosos artículos sobre la colaboración eclesiástica con el comunismo cubano y sobre la “ostpolitik” vaticana hacia Cuba.

President Obama’s competitive, boastful nature and condescending advice rubs even loyal Democrats the wrong way, a new profile alleges.

The New York Times‘ Jodi Kantor airs complaints from “loyal” Obama associates — not as a buried lead but explicitly in her introduction:

He has mentioned more than once in recent weeks that he cooks “a really mean chili.” He has impressive musical pitch, he told an Iowa audience. He is “a surprisingly good pool player,” he informed an interviewer — not to mention (though he does) a doodler of unusual skill.

The article reports Obama’s associates characterize this bluster and political zeal as “cockiness.” Further, Washington Democrats say he is all too eager to offer unsolicited advice — on handshakes, writing, and parenting, among other topics.

For those activities at which he feels inadequate, Obama reportedly dedicates considerable time to practice, no matter how trivial the pastime:

He has played golf 104 times since becoming president, according to Mark Knoller of CBS News, who monitors his outings, and he asks superior players for tips that have helped lower his scores. He decompresses with card games on Air Force One, but players who do not concentrate risk a reprimand (“You’re not playing, you’re just gambling,” he once told Arun Chaudhary, his former videographer).

His idea of birthday relaxation is competing in an Olympic-style athletic tournament with friends, keeping close score. The 2009 version ended with a bowling event. Guess who won, despite his history of embarrassingly low scores? The president, it turned out, had been practicing in the White House alley.

Kantor’s piece carries a long-running theme that Obama easily — perhaps even uncontrollably — rates and ranks others around him. A 2008 debate gaffe found him flippantly calling Hillary Clinton “likable enough.” Of Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign, he asserted, “We’re the Miami Heat, and he’s Jeremy Lin.” Even his own staff are subject to criticism:

“I think that I’m a better speechwriter than my speechwriters,” Mr. Obama told Patrick Gaspard, his political director, at the start of the 2008 campaign, according to The New Yorker. “I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m going to think I’m a better political director than my political director.”

Despite a strong push to negatively define Mitt Romney, Obama finds himself neck and neck with the Republican presidential candidate two months before the election — even falling behind in some polls. As the November ballot draws nearer, he will need to rely heavily on his personal likability to draw independent voters. The New York Times and allied Democrats airing these grievances, which may reinforce Republicans’ charges against Obama as vain and out of touch, is a serious problem for the embattled incumbent.

Up to 75% of all you, Could Be Hit by Obamacare Tax

Monday, 27 May 2013 04:27 PM By Greg Richter

The so-called “Cadillac Tax” facing employers who offer premium healthcare plans to their workers already is affecting employees, even though it doesn’t kick in until 2018.

Employers say they have to get started bringing down costs now, The New York Times reports, so employees who are used to $20 co-pays at the doctor’s office and $500 deductibles are learning a new reality. Many now are looking at deductibles as high as $6,000 for families.

That’s exactly how Obamacare planners designed it, the Times story says. The intent of what is officially known as the Affordable Care Act all along was to get companies to drop plans that protect workers from the high cost of healthcare, which can lead to unnecessary tests and procedures.

“The consumer should continue to expect that their plan is going to be more expensive, and they will have less benefits,” Cynthia Weidner of the benefits consultant HighRoads told the Times.

Still, the tax is one of the most controversial parts of the healthcare law. It imposes a 40 percent tax on the portion of a health plan’s cost that exceeds $10,200 for an individual and $27,500 for a family. That cost includes what both the employer and employee pay.

Some employees are feeling the pinch already. The Times talked to a nursing assistant who had to drop out of school and get extra jobs to pay for medicine for her husband, who has cystic fibrosis.

“My husband didn’t choose to be born this way,” said Abbey Bruce.

“The reality is it is going to hit more and more people over time, at least as currently written in law, ” said Bradley Herring, a health economist at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Herring estimated that as many as 75 percent of plans could be affected by the tax over the next decade — unless employers manage to significantly rein in their costs.

Read Latest Breaking News from
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Drug-induced Murder: What Caused the Connecticut School Shootings?

The Internet is rife with details about the firearms Adam Lanza used to kill 20 children and six adults before turning a handgun on himself at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, on December 14. But information about Lanza’s medical history is scarce, feeding speculation that he may fit the profile of school shooters under the influence of psychotherapeutic medication.

“In virtually every mass school shooting during the past 15 years, the shooter has been on or in withdrawal from psychiatric drugs,” writes Lawrence Hunter of the Social Security Institute. “Yet, federal and state governments continue to ignore the connection between psychiatric drugs and murderous violence, preferring instead to exploit these tragedies in an oppressive and unconstitutional power grab to snatch guns away from innocent, law-abiding people.”

School shooters on psychotropic drugs include:

• Eric Harris, one of the assailants at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, in 1999, whose autopsy revealed he had a therapeutic level of the antidepressant Luvox in his system;

• Steve Kazmierczak, who killed six including himself at Northern Illinois University in 2008 while in withdrawal from the antidepressant Prozac;

• Jeffrey Weise, a student at Red Lake High School in Minnesota, who killed ten and wounded seven in 2005 while on Prozac;

• Kip Kinkel, an Oregon teen who murdered his parents and proceeded on a shooting spree at his high school in 1998, killing two and wounding 25, while in Prozac withdrawal;

• Toby Sincino, a 15-year-old who shot two teachers and himself in 1995 at his South Carolina school while on the antidepressant Zoloft.

The list of criminals on psychotropic drugs includes such infamous names as Ted Kaczinski, John Hinckley, Jr., and the Amish school killer Charles Carl Roberts IV. While committing their violent acts they were all taking antidepressants known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI).

“One of the things in the past that we’ve known about depression is that it very, very rarely leads to violence,” observed psychiatrist Peter Breggin in a Fox News report. “It’s only been since the advent of these new SSRI drugs that we have murderers, sometimes even mass murderers, taking antidepressant drugs.” The Physicians’ Desk Reference, an authoritative source of all FDA-approved drug-labeling information, identifies hazardous side effects of psychiatric drugs, including suicidal and homicidal ideation.

Despite the abundance of such evidence and a glut of scientific studies proving real danger, “there has yet to be a federal investigation on the link between psychiatric drugs and acts of senseless violence,” according to the Citizens Commission on Human Rights International (CCHR). In the face of the Obama administration’s knee-jerk agitation for gun control, Hunter suggests, “It is pharmaceutical makers, not law-abiding gun owners or gun manufacturers, who should be held to account for the series of ‘lone-wolf’ mass shootings that have occurred since the widespread use of psychiatric drugs began.”

Fox News reported after an initial search of Lanza’s home investigators found no indication the 20-year-old was taking prescriptions. Other evidence suggests he was. Louise Tambascio, a friend Lanza’s mother, told CBS News’ Scott Pelley on 60 Minutes, “I know he was on medication and everything.” ABC News also interviewed Tambascio, who repeated, “I knew he was on medication.”

Connecticut’s chief medical examiner is currently conducting toxicology exams to determine if Lanza was using any behavior-modifying drugs, according to CT Post. It will be several weeks before the medical examiner’s drug tests are complete.

Los que cobra el IRS a Los que NO PUEDEN PAGAR‏Ricardo Samitier


Ayer mientras buscaba una información TROPECÉ con la pagina del IRS donde explica lo que le cobran a una persona que NO TIENE  DINERO y le debe dinero al IRS y quiere pagar…  ellos ofrecen las siguientes opciones… pagando los siguientes cargos ADICIONALES A LA DEUDA

Cobran Mas Que Las Tarjetas De Crédito! 

Por abrirle una cuenta contra su TARJETA DE DEBITO:

·         $52 for a direct debit agreement;

·         $105 for a standard agreement or payroll deduction agreement; or

·         $43 if your income is below a certain level.

There may be a reinstatement fee if your agreement goes into default. Penalties and interest

continue to accrue until your balance is paid in full. If you are in danger of defaulting on your

payment agreement for any reason, contact the IRS immediately.


He  aquí lo que cobran DE INTERESES:


Por lo general, se cobran intereses sobre cualquier impuesto no pagado a la fecha de vencimiento de la declaración hasta la fecha de pago. La tasa de interés se determina trimestralmente y la tasa de corto plazo federal más el 3 por ciento. El interés se capitaliza diariamente. Si usted presenta una declaración, pero no paga todas las cantidades que se muestran como adeudada a tiempo, por lo general, tiene que pagar una multa por retraso en el pago de la mitad del uno por ciento del impuesto adeudado por cada mes o fracción de mes, que el impuesto sigue pendiente de pago a partir de la fecha de vencimiento, hasta que el impuesto se paga en su totalidad o se alcanza la pena máxima de 25%. La mitad de uno por ciento la tasa aumenta al uno por ciento si el impuesto sigue pendiente de pago 10 días después de la IRS emite un aviso de intención de imponer. Para las personas que presenten en la fecha de regreso, la mitad de uno por ciento de tasa disminuye a un cuarto del uno por ciento de los meses en que un acuerdo de pago es, en efecto. 

Si usted debe impuestos y no presenta a tiempo, el fracaso total para presentar sanción suele ser de cinco por ciento del impuesto adeudado por cada mes o fracción de mes que su declaración es tardía, hasta cinco meses. Si su declaración es de más de 60 días de retraso, la pena mínima para la presentación fuera de plazo es el porcentaje menor entre $ 135 o 100 % del impuesto adeudado.

Washington launches four different investigations into IRS scandal

10:14 PM 05/27/2013 Patrick Howley

Capitol Hill aides spent their Memorial Day weekend scanning hundreds of pages of documents related to the IRS scandal in order to prepare their bosses for what will inevitably be a frantic month of June involving multiple simultaneous investigations into government wrongdoing. By the time lawmakers return to session next week, at least four different investigations will be underway.

As The Daily Caller has reported, at least five different IRS offices including Cincinnati, Ohio; Baltimore, Maryland; Chicago, Illinois and El Monte and Laguna Niguel, California improperly targeted conservative nonprofit groups for extra scrutiny between 2010 and 2012.

The IRS’ shenanigans, chronicled in a damning report by Treasury Inspector General J. Russell George, started when a “team of [IRS] specialists” came together in April 2010 to process the tax-exempt nonprofit status of conservative groups that might be “potential political operations” (page 13 of the IG report). The IRS added “additional specialists” to this effort in December 2011.

The IRS also launched audits of existing conservative nonprofit groups including the Virginia-based Leadership Institute, demanding to see training materials and personal information about the organization’s 2008 college interns.

So for those of you keeping score at home (this reporter is still waiting for Ken Starr to send in his bracket picks) The Daily Caller presents a list of some of our favorite investigations into potential IRS wrongdoing. Which one will come up with the “Alexander Butterfield” quote?

1. The House Ways and Means Committee – Oversight Subcommittee

As head of the House Ways and Means Oversight Subcommittee, Republican Louisiana Rep. Charles Boustany has conducted the toughest probe into the IRS scandal so far. Boustany managed to acquire “all communications containing the word ‘tea party,’ ‘patriot,’ or ‘conservative,’” from recently-resigned IRS acting director Steven T. Miller. He also got the names of everyone involved with the improper targeting.

Republican Ways and Means chairman Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan also raised awareness of the issue by reaching out to the public, asking Americans to write in with their own stories of IRS harassment. “Your story is critical to moving the investigation forward,” according to a form created on the Ways and Means’ Committee’s website asking for users’ stories, which also includes a two-year timeline of the scandal beginning in August 2010.

Boustany was in prime position to jump on the IRS scandal. Back in September, long before the current scandal, his subcommittee grilled Steven T. Miller with concerns about the IRS’ implementation of Obamacare.
Read more:

Former NSA official: ‘This administration is exhibiting narcissistic tendencies’

9:35 PM 05/27/2013 Josh Peterson

The Obama administration’s targeting of journalists and their sources is an assault on the First Amendment, a former National Security Agency official and prominent whistleblower says.

“[R]eporters have shared with me privately that some of their most trusted sources within government are increasingly afraid to speak with them, even off-the-record, for fear that they will be monitored and surveilled,” Thomas Drake, a former senior executive of the National Security Agency and a whistleblower who was prosecuted by the Obama administration, told The Daily Caller in an exclusive interview.

“That’s self-censorship,” he said.

Drake explained to TheDC that he sees a “soft tyranny” enveloping the United States through the federal government’s targeting of journalists and their sources.

Such a fear of speaking to the press, he said, interferes with the freedom of association —  recognized in the First Amendment as an essential component of free speech.

Reporters are then left with talking points and privileged access to government officials, he explained, all amounting to government propaganda.

Drake was first caught up in the whistleblower investigations of the second Bush administration, but was indicted and prosecuted under the Espionage Act by the Obama administration in 2010.

Drake passed along unclassified information about wasteful spending on the development of the National Security Agency’s post-9/11 secret surveillance program. For that, he was singled out by the Obama administration for indictment and prosecution.

“We were the canaries in the coal mine,” Drake said.

Drake fought the charges leveled against him, which were ultimately dropped in 2011 in exchange for a guilty plea to a misdemeanor, but the damage was done.

“I became a criminal and was labeled an enemy of the state because I was calling out government wrongdoing and illegality,” he said.

When the Associated Press revealed that the Department of Justice was engaging in the secret surveillance of its journalists to find a source that leaked classified information about a confidential foreign espionage operation, Drake took to his Twitter account in a fury.

4all hypertwitterlating abt gov’t spying on AP. Wake up Amerika! Welcome 2 NatSec surveillance state! Just the tip. Whereya been past 10yrs?

— Thomas Drake (@Thomas_Drake1) May 14, 2013

The prosecution or targeting of journalists has been central to the government’s expanding investigations against leakers and whistleblowers who have disclosed embarrassing or confidential national security and foreign policy information.

Tags: First Amendment, NSA, Surveillance, The Associated Press, Thomas Drake, Whistleblower
Read more:

Estamos viviendo ATERRORIZADOS‏ Ricardo Samitier 5/27/13  

Qué Vergüenza Para Estados Unidos

Tenemos una Prensa Acobardada o complice Hoy El New York Time Reporta La Quema De Dos Escuelas En Suecia Pero No Dicen Quienes La Quemaron

Porque Fueron Musulmanes… Lea la información por usted mismo clic aquí.


Barack Brain-child Obama Demands Justice! Tells Holder To Investigate Holder President Barack Obama has asked his friend Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate Holder’s unprecedented investigation of a Fox News reporter. Holder approved the Justice Department’s extraordinary 2010 investigation of … READ MORE


Los Rusos Le Suspendieron El Permiso A LosHomosexuales A Marchar En El Día Que Ellos Llaman “Orgullo Gay”…  Los Rusos Son El primer País Cansado… Ayer Por Primera Vez Mas De 150,000 Franceses Marcharon En Contra De Los Homosexuales En París…

El Mundo Se Está Cansando De Tanta


Marriage by Gays Is Protested in France Huge anti-gay marriage protest march in Paris

There were some skirmishes between police and activists, which led to 100 arrests

Tens of thousands of people have rallied in Paris against a new French law allowing same-sex marriage.

Police estimate that up to 150,000 people joined marches that converged on the city centre, but organisers put the figure close to one million.

Clashes erupted after the rally finished between far-right activists and riot police. The authorities said nearly 100 people were arrested.

On Saturday 50 people were detained for blocking the Champs-Elysees.

Saudi voice calls Obama a failure Blames ‘hesitant’ leadership for disaster in Syria

A columnist for a London-based Saudi daily newspaper is calling President Obama a failure and blaming his “hesitant” leadership for the catastrophic situation in Syria, where tens of thousands are dead as a result of the civil war.

The report comes from the Middle East Media Research Institute, which monitors and reports on media in the Middle East.

“The problem of U.S. President Barack Obama can be summed up in a single word: hesitation. The man is short-sighted, confused and diffident,” wrote Mashari al-Zaydi, a columnist for the daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat.

MEMRI reported the column called Obama out as the weakest president in U.S. history and blamed him for allowing the crisis in Syria to escalate.

He warned that Obama’s failures in the Middle East have set the foundation for an extremism and sectarian violence that will be greater than al-Qaida.

MEMRI said it’s just the latest in a series of reports from Saudi press members who have attacked America on its Syrian position. The criticism has come since Secretary of State John Kerry met in Moscow with Russians to set a meeting date to talk about the situation in Syria.

For example, the report said, the Saudi government daily Al-Yawm said, “The Syrian opposition did not welcome the outcome of the meetings that U.S. State Secretary John Kerry held in Moscow [on May 6, 2013], because [this outcome] is a clear American retreat towards the position of the Russian-Iranian alliance. Considering the crimes of ethnic cleansing that have been perpetrated by Iran’s and Assad’s killing machine in Baniyas [in early May 2013], the American position is a clear [act of] capitulation to this killing machine at the expense of human rights and America’s claims that it supports the freedom of the peoples…”

And Baina Al-Mulhim, a columnist for the government daily Al-Riyadh, asked whether the U.S. had “sold out the Syrian revolution.”

Al-Zaydi’s commentary noted that the prevailing assessment of Obama comes not just from his political foes.

It also comes from “proponents of his own school of thought, like the well-known American author David Ignatius, who recently wrote a critique of the Obama administration’s policy that was not confined to foreign [policy] affairs … Summarizing the problematic aspects of Obama’s conduct, he said that the public is more afraid of a weak administration than a strong one!”

Al-Zaydi noted Lebanese-American writer Fuad ‘Ajami slammed Obama for his feebleness, his lack of leadership, and his inability to take bold decisions under difficult circumstances.

“Evidence of Obama’s narrow approach to the Syrian crisis can be found in statements he made to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in their meeting several days ago. [He said that] there was no ‘magic solution’ to the escalating Syrian crisis and that a realistic solution was needed, [namely] a non-ideal political solution,” al-Zaydi wrote.

“[But Obama] is the one who complicated the Syrian problem and caused the wound to grow deeper, the bloodshed [to continue] … the voices to grow louder and the thugs to interfere, from Hassan Nasrallah’s militia … to the young men who come from all over [the world] to fight jihad in [the ranks of the Al-Qaeda-affiliated organization] Jabhat Al-Nusra.”

He continued, “The U.S. is currently living under one of the weakest leaders in its [history] … while Russia has a firm and determined leader. This becomes even sadder when you realize that the U.S. is believed to be supporting the Syrian rebels while Russia [is considered] a supporter of the [Syrian] regime. In this situation, the alliance [between the U.S. and the rebels] is a liability more than an asset. …”

The writer charged that Obama’s “policy of wholesale retreat” ultimately will cause more problems.

“[We must conclude that] this is not a skilled statesman and politician with creative solutions, but an ordinary academic who repeats meaningless slogans and does not possess the political sensitivity to give each factor the weight it deserves, to take bold [action] when necessary and to refrain [from action] when necessary.”

La falsa teoria de Darwin‏ Ricardo Samitier

Basta Mencionar El Fraude Mas Grande Del Siglo XX Para Justificar A Darwin… Que Debía De Enseñarse en Todas las Escuelas…

Hace ya un siglo en 1912… Se perpetró el más famoso fraude en la historia de la paleontología. El crimen fue un cráneo con una singular combinación de rasgos humanos y simiescos. Fue llamado por la PRENSA el Perfecto Eslabón Perdido,

El Fraude se inició en un cementerio abandonando del sureste de Inglaterra, en Piltdown, el engaño duró cuatro décadas y aún no se ha descubierto al autor.  

El fraude salió a la luz con las nuevas técnicas de datación química que se aplicaron a los restos de Piltdown: en 1950 quedó claro que la mandíbula no tenía más de 50.000 años, y los análisis posteriores desvelaron no solo que eran de un orangután moderno, sino que habían sido manipuladas para que encajaran; todas las piezas estaban teñidas con óxido de hierro; los fragmentos del cráneo humano eran de pocos años de antigüedad y los restos de animales mucho más antiguos. Pero a esa altura, casi todos los protagonistas de la historia habían muerto y ninguno de los que estaban vivos aún se  confesó culpable…

El enlace para leer sobre el caso está al final

La Verdad Que No Se Puede Ocultar Es Que Nunca Se Ha Encontrado Un Fósil “MEDIO HUMANO”…

Tampoco un fósil de MONOS MEDIO HUMANOS, nunca se han descubierto los famosos llamados ESLABONES PERDIDOS después de años e incluso décadas de búsqueda, aún no hay rastro de un ESLABÓN PERDIDO!

Todos los fósiles encontrados, SON TOTALMENTE HUMANO o fósiles de algunas otras especies de primates desaparecidas ANTES DE LA APARICIÓN DEL HOMBRE…

La Falta De Evidencia Fósil, Es Suficiente Para Desacreditar A Darwin, Pero NO… Eso Nunca…


Hay Que Seguir Escribiendo MENTIRAS… Para Anular La Creación Del Hombre Por Dios…  

La Verdad Hoy Es Conocida… Pero Nadie la Menciona…


Esta prueba ESTA CIENTÍFICAMENTE COMPROBADA Por Los Verdaderos CIENTÍFICOS DE LABORATORIOS… No por los Pseudo Científicos Que Salen en la TV y Los Medios de Publicidad…  

La Verdad Es Que La Teoría De Darwin Esta Desacreditada…Pero Los Politiqueros No Se Atreven A Dar Marcha Atrás… Y Se Continúa Enseñando Esa Falsa Teoría En Las Escuelas…

El descubrimiento en 1956 del ADN…  demuestra CLARAMENTE que el hombre no puede mutarse… SE PUEDE COPIAR y hacer uno EXACTAMENTE IGUAL… pero no se puede cambiar…

Piense en esto!

Una de las cosas más INTERESANTES que he aprendido es que para poder abrir un ADN se requiere tener un ARN…

Para ponerlo a la altura de mis conocimientos el ARN es la llave que abre el ADN.  Para comenzar a entender… es como cuando se te queda la llave dentro de tu carro… como se abre…

Dios aparentemente OLVIDO LA LLAVE DENTRO… No hay manera, de mutar… los organismos vivos, los virus y las plantas a los seres humanos, no mutan tienen y usan un MECANISMO CONOCIDOS por todos… La REPRODUCCIÓN CELULAR comienza en el momento que UN ÓVULO ES FECUNDADO y no se detiene hasta que morimos.

Las Únicas Mutaciones Conocidas:


Pues un niño que nace con un defecto ES LO MAS PARECIDO o lo ÚNICO que se pudiera considerar  una MUTACIÓN FALLIDA…

Esta Probado Que La Mutación En El Humano Lo Mata O Lo Degenera

Cuando hay una mutación grave, la célula o el individuo GENERALMENTE MUERE o SE TORNA SEVERAMENTE ENFERMO. Por ejemplo Mongolismo, síndrome de Down o trisomía y otros.

He Aquí Algunas Pruebas Contra La Teoría De Darwin Que Las Puedes Reconocer Porque Las Puedes Observar Diariamente En Tu Persona:

Para comenzar de acuerdo a Darwin… las mutaciones se realizaban para asegurarle a la PRÓXIMA GENERACIÓN UN BENEFICIO… cuando se daban cuenta que sufrían o carecían de algo… y lo remediaban mejorándose mutando… veamos:

Hay 220 especies de Monos en la Tierra;

Pero sólo el hombre tiene “Escleral” Lo que significa que la parte blanca del ojo es visible.

¿Cómo el hombre pudo obtener ese BENEFICIO, si como nos quieren hacer creer venimos de los monos, que no lo tienen???

No puede ser una mutación… eso fue UN BENEFICIO que se le dio SOLO A LOS HOMBRES.

¿Cómo es posible, si la teoría de Darwin es correcta?

¿Por qué la hembra humana TIENE SENOS todos los días de su vida…?

Mientras que todos los otros primates, y todos los mamíferos TIENEN PECHOS, sólo cuando tienen que amamantar su cría?

Una vez más, ¿dónde está la VENTAJA BIOLÓGICA de transportar grandes senos pesados ​​para la mujer?

Es otra equivocación BIOLÓGICA de Darwin…

¿Cómo es que la hembra humana es el único primate que debe CARGAR a su bebé?

Todos los otros bebés primates, naturalmente, se aferran a la madre!

¿Que BENEFICIA LA MADRE tener que cargar a su bebe? Es otra equivocación de Darwin!

Así que la próxima vez que un Darwinista (comunista) trata de venderle la historia,.. de que Dios No existe…

Simplemente pídele que explique, como es posible que la LLAVE PARA ABRIR EL ADN… este DENTRO…

Desafortunadamente, la mayoría de las personas no exigen a los políticos… y luego envían a sus hijos a las escuelas, donde los maestros han RECIBIDO LAS ORDENES de enseñar la Teoría de Darwin y DE NO MENCIONAR A DIOS los niños creen que los maestros saben lo que dicen….

Hemos permitido que en las escuelas se enseñe la TEORÍA FALSA de Darwin y que descendemos del los monos…

Mira como EXPLICAN a los niños como los hombres  aprendimos a Caminar…

Como piensas que vas a CONTROLAR a tus hijos para que no practiquen la HOMOSEXUALIDAD cuando en los colegios dicen ahora que es NORMAL… “PREFERENCIA SEXUAL…

Enlaces para leer la estafa del “Eslabón Perdido”

Sen. Vitter: “Offensive for Washington to Make Taxpayers Pay for Free Cellphones for Others” 26 May 2013 /

Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) and TracFone Wireless, a pre-paid cellphone carrier, are hurling accusations at each other over a federal phone subsidy program for the poor.

The company has claimed that Vitter is trying to gut a program that was “born out of” Hurricane Katrina, while Vitter has accused TracFone of profiting from a wasteful government hand-out.

The program, called “Lifeline,” has been pejoratively referred to as the “Obama phone” program, although it began long before Obama took office. It had its genesis as a subsidy for landline phones in 1985 and expanded to cover cellphones in 2008, during the George W. Bush administration.

The spat began when Vitter and other GOP senators introduced a bill earlier this month to end a provision that relates to the cellphones portion of the fund.

“This phone program has expanded far beyond its original intent, and as so many middle class Americans struggle underneath this economy, it is really offensive for Washington to make taxpayers pay for free cellphones for others,” Vitter said in a statement when he offered the bill.

The program, which is managed by the Federal Communications Commission, subsidizes phone service, not the phones themselves. But many companies that receive funding through the program offer free and low-cost phones to their subscribers. The program is funded through fees that the telephone companies pass on to consumers on their monthly bills, not taxes.
Read more:

Why Do They Slaughter Their Victims?

May 25, 2013 by Mordechai Kedar

What is common to Daniel Perl, Nick Berg, a British soldier on London street, the Jews of Hebron in 1929 and the Fogel family in Itamar? They all were butchered. They were not simply stabbed to death, but were killed by an act designed to decapitate them or to cause fatal bleeding by severing their carotid artery. Another common denominator: all were slaughtered by Moslems. An endless list of Moslem girls and women can be added to them, those who were similarly slaughtered by their brothers, fathers or other relatives for “violating the family honor”. A question that arises automatically is where does this Moslem tendency to this kind of slaughter come from?

The answer is simple: Slaughter is a routine, widespread practice among many Moslem families. Many children see how their fathers slaughter sheep when celebrating an important event, and the whole family is present at the sacrificial slaughter during Eid al-Adha, the Festival of Sacrifice, when the slaughter is part of the holiday ritual.

In modern societies, the slaughter of animals for meat consumption takes place in slaughterhouses, far from the eyes of the public and children, who generally get their meat free of blood and hair and ready for cooking or eating. This sterile arrangement spares the public the sight of the slaughter, the blood and the accompanying cries. In the West, many of those who witnessed animal slaughter become vegetarian.

In many Islamic societies, slaughter generally occurs at home, in front of the children, and is part of the routine of life. They are immunized against the sight of slaughter, are not moved by the blood dripping from the animal’s neck and are not frightened by its snorts and struggles. In many cases, the children hold the legs of the lamb in order to immobilize it during slaughter; they sense very well its frantic reactions as the knife so painfully slices through its neck. The presence and participation of the children in the act of slaughter immunizes them emotionally against its influence; when they are older they perform the custom of sacrifice with their own hands and knives, and in front of their own children.

Read full article here

Sheriffs plan to put feds back in their place

‘Restoring liberty in America is not only possible, but already underway’

Sheriffs and peace officers from across the country will be meeting with likeminded supporters for a national convention focused on one goal: restoring constitutional rule in the United States of America.

From May 31-June 1, the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, or CSPOA, will be meeting in St. Charles, Mo., for its Heartland of America Conference.

The purpose of the conference is to equip sheriffs, peace officers and public officials with information and public support to carry out their oaths of office – specifically, to uphold the U.S. Constitution – recognizing that in the case of federal overreach, the county sheriff may be the last line of defense in protecting Americans’ constitutional rights.

“We are going to train and vette them all, state by state, to understand and enforce the constitutionally protected rights of the people they serve, with an emphasis on state sovereignty and local autonomy,” explains CSPOA Founder and Executive Director Sheriff Richard Mack. “Then these local governments will issue our new Declaration to the Federal Government regarding the abuses that we will no longer tolerate or accept. Said declaration will be enforced by our Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers.

“In short,” Mack says, “the CSPOA will be the army to set our nation free.”

Mack is more than familiar with fighting federal overreach. The former sheriff of Graham County, Ariz., in 1994 Mack joined six other sheriffs in challenging a provision of the federal Brady Bill placing the burden of its background checks on local sheriffs. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to strike down the provision.

Police Chief Larry Kirk of Old Monroe, Mo., told WND, “In the past few years we have seen many of the citizens of this country become concerned over the direction it has taken. We have watched personal rights being eroded and a disconnect developing between citizens and officers working in law enforcement.

“I wanted to find other officers that shared my concerns,” he continued. “I wanted to be able to work with our sheriffs and other peace officers in educating the citizens and others in our career field on the powers of the sheriff’s office and what is needed for us to stand on guard to protect our rights and those of our fellow citizens. The CSPOA is the organization at the front of this movement.

“The people of my state are seeing the overreach of government at the federal level and want to know where their sheriffs will stand,” he concluded. “The people of this state need to hear this message, and the sheriffs of this state need to hear it. Sheriffs and officers need the support of their communities, and we need to support them. This is the organization that can help educate us all on the proper roles that we should play and what we can do to stop the encroachment on our liberties and unalienable rights.”

Sheriff Mack further told WND, “In view of the culture of corruption, which seems so prevalent in Washington, many Americans are searching for hope and solutions that are both effective and peaceful. The purpose of the CSPOA convention is to offer absolute evidence that both indeed exist. Each attendee will leave with this evidence and a renewed hope that restoring liberty in America is not only possible, but already underway!”

The convention, to be held at the Ameristar Hotel in St. Charles, Mo., is free to all public officials and open to the public at large.

Register to attend the Heartland of America Conference at the CSPOA website now!

The trailer for a video featuring previous convention speakers can be seen below:

“We already have hundreds of police, sheriffs and other officials who have expressed a desire to be a part of this holy cause of liberty,” Mack explains.

In fact, CSPOA maintains a growing list of – at last count – 18 state sheriffs associations and over 450 sheriffs across the country already taking a stand against what they perceive as attempts by the Obama administration to enact unconstitutional gun-control measures.

As WND reported, Maricopa County Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio is among those after telling a local radio host the federal government is “going to have a problem” if they expect him to confiscate guns from private citizens.

“I took [multiple] oaths of office, and they all say I will defend the Constitution of the United States,” Arpaio told Mike Broomhead of KFYI Radio in Phoenix, Ariz. “Now if they’re going to tell the sheriff that he’s going to go around picking up guns from everybody, they’re going to have a problem. I may not enforce that federal law.”

Broomhead pushed the man sometimes called “America’s toughest sheriff” even further, asking Arpaio if the feds passed a law banning ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, would his deputies confiscate such magazines?

“No,” Arpaio said. “My deputies, I said before, I’m going to arm all my deputies – a month ago I said before this – with automatic weapons and semi-automatic weapons. We’re going to be able to fight back. … I don’t care what they say from Washington.”

Larry Pratt, president of Gun Owners of America, told WND he supports sheriffs taking a tough stand.

“The county sheriffs need to act and make new deputies to stop federal authority in the counties,” Pratt said. “There is a misconception in our time that the court somehow is the arbiter of what is constitutional; that’s not true! Every official that raises their right hand and says they’re going to adhere to the constitution, seek to protect it to the best of their ability, ‘so help me God’ – that’s something that they’re all obligated to do.”

DOJ Begged Judge to Keep Fox Reporter in Dark About Monitoring

Friday, 24 May 2013 09:19 PM By Todd Beamon

The Justice Department begged a federal judge to not tell Fox News reporter James Rosen that it was tracking his telephone calls and emails in a probe regarding a national security leak.

U.S. Attorney Ron Machen argued in 2010 that the traditional 30-day notice period did not apply to Rosen as Justice secretly monitored his Gmail account, according to new exhibits unsealed this week and disclosed by The Hill.

Related: Holder Personally OK’d Fox Reporter’s Warrant

“Where, as here, the government seeks such contents through a search warrant, no notice to the subscriber or customer of the e-mail account is statutorily required or necessary,” Machen wrote in a June 2010 motion. “Thus, this court’s indication on the face of the warrant that delayed notice of 30 days to the customer and subscriber was permissible was unnecessary.”

Machen, through another request granted by the court, stopped Google from telling Rosen that Justice was spying on his e-mail account, the Hill reports.

The prosecutor had demanded to see all of Rosen’s emails — including deleted messages, emails in his trash folder and all attachments sent to and from him.

The original warrant in the Rosen case was signed personally by Attorney General Eric Holder, NBC News reported this week.

Meanwhile, Fox News President Roger Ailes on Thursday blasted Justice for targeting journalists as if they were criminals and said the government’s seizure of reporters’ emails and phone records would not stand “the test of law.”

“The administration’s attempt to intimidate Fox News and its employees will not succeed and their excuses will stand neither the test of law, the test of decency, nor the test of time,” Ailes said. “We will not allow a climate of press intimidation, unseen since the McCarthy era, to frighten any of us away from the truth.”

President Barack Obama on Thursday asked Holder to review Justice’s guidelines on leak investigations and news organizations. Holder promised a report by July 12, the Hill reports.

Reports of the FBI’s tracking of Rosen’s movements, phone, and email conversations with a former State Department contractor — Stephen Jin-Woo Kim — followed the disclosure last week that phone records of editors and reporters at The Associated Press had been secretly seized by Justice in another probe of leaked government information.

But unlike the AP reporters, Rosen was named as a “co-conspirator” by FBI officials in the warrant signed by Holder.

Read Latest Breaking News from
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!



“En mi opiniónLázaro R González Miño Editor ‘In GOD we trust’ 


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s