No 679 “En mi opinión” Junio 6, 2014


“IN GOD WE TRUST” Lázaro R González Miño Editor

“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.” ~Abraham Lincoln



Estimados Amigos:

Con gran placer los invitamos a asistir a otro evento, parte de nuestro ciclo de “Simposios por un mundo libre”, diseñado para promover una mayor concienciación política con apego a la libertad y la democracia. Su presencia se le agradecerá.


Julio M. Shiling

Patria de Martí

Alianza Democrática

Se complacen en invitarlos al Simposio

Racismo sistémico en Cuba comunista

Exponiendo el racismo práctico y funcional en Cuba hoy

Jueves, 12 de Junio 2014, 7:00 pm

West Dade Regional Library

9445 Coral Way, Miami FL 33165

Ayúdanos a promover una cultura de libertad

Programación de Evento


Julio M. Shiling


Patria de Martí


Darsi Ferret                                               

Médico y Ex Preso Político

Gilberto Conill Godoy                                              

Sociólogo e Investigador

Habrá una sesión de preguntas y respuestas en un formato de conversatorio.

La entrada es gratis y abierta al público.

(305) 389-3536        Patria de Martí     









Today marks the tenth anniversary of the passing of President Ronald Reagan. As significant as this anniversary is to America and the world, there is a more important Reagan anniversary this year.

I am referring to the 50th anniversary of actor Ronald Reagan’s speech, televised nationwide, on October 27, 1964, on behalf of Barry Goldwater for President. The speech eventually became known as, “A Time for Choosing.” Years later, President Reagan wrote of it, “Of course, I didn’t know it then, but that speech was one of the most important milestones in my life—another one of those unexpected turns in the road that led me onto a path I never expected to take.”

What is remarkable about that speech, yet seldom noted, is there was no chance of Goldwater winning by the time Reagan delivered it. Barry Goldwater would lose the election one week later carrying only six states and gathering only 38.5% of the vote. Reagan used valuable national airtime to articulate conservative principles rather than salvage the races of some Senate or House candidates who might have benefited from blurring the differences between Goldwater and Johnson. 

Goldwater’s loss was looming in late October 1964. One of his earliest and most prominent backers, William F. Buckley, Jr., had already warned Goldwater’s most enthusiastic supporters in Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) that the Senator would lose. Buckley noted in his YAF speech, “I speak of course of the impending defeat of Barry Goldwater!” Later Buckley suggested, “This is probably Lyndon Johnson’s year, and the Archangel Gabriel running on the Republican ticket probably couldn’t win.”

F. Clifton White, another close Goldwater associate and the Conservative Movement’s political guru of the 1960s, wrote, “Barry Goldwater’s defeat was the most thorough-going rout ever suffered by any candidate of a major political party…the awesome magnitude of the Goldwater defeat affected Republican candidates at all levels.”

Theodore White, the Establishment’s scribe of the time, noted of Goldwater, “Never in any campaign had I seen a candidate so heckled, so provoked by the opposition…so cruelly bill-boarded and tagged.”

Teddy White knew it was not the Johnson forces alone who were vehemently anti-Goldwater. Moderate Republican leaders including New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller and Pennsylvania Governor William Scranton, “had drawn up the indictment. Lyndon Johnson was the prosecutor. Goldwater was cast as defendant. He was like a dog with a can tied to his tail—the faster he ran, the more the can clattered.”

It was in this rigged courtroom of public opinion that Ronald Reagan offered himself up to serve as the defense attorney for Goldwater and Goldwater’s principles.

Reagan surely knew Goldwater was heading for a bruising defeat. How many of today’s political “leaders” would be willing to risk their future to speak out on behalf of a candidate who could not muster 40% of the vote and whose closest allies had already conceded his defeat just because the candidate had the right principles? Such a speaker would be trashed as “hopelessly, politically naïve,” even dangerous, and accused of ignoring “reality” to tilt at windmills.

In fact, there is no modern equivalent of an emerging or promising personality who has proven willing to champion a losing candidate, one who made fatal mistakes or “blunders” in his campaign, solely to make the case for limited government, individual freedom, and a strong foreign policy.

What Reagan demonstrated in the “A Time for Choosing” speech, and he would later repeat in similar speeches as a recently inaugurated President at CPAC in March 1981 and at the Brandenburg Gate in June 1987, is unusual political courage. Repeatedly, he was willing to ignore conventional political pundits, and staid White House and State Department advisors, to boldly raise a banner for the cause of freedom.

As actor Reagan jokingly made clear in 1964, “[T]he performer hasn’t been provided with a script…I have been permitted to use my own words and discuss my own ideas.”

Reagan’s own ideas were clear: “I think it’s time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers…Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.”

What were the consequences of delivering such a courageous speech?

The Washington Post’s David Broder and Stephen Hess referred to it as  “the most successful national political debut” in 70 years. The Washington Post decades later admitted, “Reagan launched his political career…with a nationally televised speech that immediately made him a top prospect for governor of California.”

Reagan biographer, Lou Cannon also caught its implications. “Believers who heard Reagan felt they were being summoned to a vital battle that would surely end in victory…” Cannon ultimately concluded, “It was indeed the right message at the right time.”

 A half century later, we can see through his timeless speech how Reagan became a leader the whole country would honor when he died.

Reagan articulated freedom’s principles even in the face of certain near-term defeat for his cause. Unlike many current public figures, he did not worry whether championing an unpopular position would hurt his personal fortunes. In fact, Reagan continued to speak his mind despite previous threats of losing his television show, General Electric Theater. That is because, for Reagan, principles came first. It was to advance those principles that he would even consider a political career.

President Reagan concluded, “[T]he speech changed my entire life.” Indeed, Reagan went on to restore our prosperity from the debilitating Carter economy, and win the Cold War. We now know that speech changed our nation and the world.

Perhaps it is time once again to look closely for leaders who willingly advance “their own ideas” without worrying about the reaction of professional political pundits.

Ronald Reagan gave us an example of principled leadership, and that is why we honor the anniversary of his passing.




Senator Graham Warns of Possible Obama Impeachment Over Gitmo


Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) warned Wednesday that Republican lawmakers would call for President Obama’s impeachment if he released more prisoners from Guantanamo Bay without congressional approval.

Republicans worry Obama may try to shut down the prison camp unilaterally after congressional opposition has repeatedly stymied efforts to pass legislation to close it.

“It’s going to be impossible for them to flow prisoners out of Gitmo now without a huge backlash,” Graham said. “There will be people on our side calling for his impeachment if he did that.”
Graham served as a House prosecutor during former President Clinton’s 1998 impeachment trial.

Congress tried to build in a safeguard against Obama making unilateral decisions on releasing terrorist detainees by including language in the National Defense Authorization Act requiring the administration to alert Congress of such moves at least 30 days in advance.




AMENPER: Susana la Mucama

Todo el que tenga el más mínimo sentido de racionalización tiene que saber que la política exterior del gobierno de Obama ha sido un desastre completo.

El gobierno de Barack Hussein Obama en el mundo se parece a Casper el fantasmita amistoso con el papel de EE.UU. apareciendo y desapareciendo de la vista como es su costumbre.  Obama personalmente no es el responsable de ningún fracaso, para explicar esto tiene a Susan Rice que se ha convertido en Susana la Mucama que cubre las espaldas y arregla la cama de su empleador, diciendo las mentiras más cómicas que uno pude imaginar.  La corte del emperador Obama tiene también a Hillary Clinton que viajó a miles de kilómetros como Secretario de Estado sin un concepto claro de lo que estaba haciendo y ahora a. John Kerry que se desliza sin cesar dentro y fuera de las capitales, hablando y hablando sin decir nada concreto.

 Esto, dicen que es “poder inteligente”.

Hoy es una semana en que recordamos diferentes eventos que reflejan la lucha por la democracia en el mundo..

En esta semana este jueves se cumplen años de la protesta democrática de Tiananmen, el viernes es el 70 º aniversario del Día-D, cuando 160.000 soldados aliados desembarcaron en las playas de Normandía.

Un año después, los aliados encabezados por Estados Unidos libertaron Europa y pararon la amenaza Nazi.

El jueves es también el 10 º aniversario de la muerte de Ronald Reagan. Fue la decisión de Reagan, a comienzos de su presidencia,  la determinación de terminar la guerra fría no capitulando pero ganándola. En noviembre de 1989, el Muro de Berlín cayó y paramos de momento la amenaza comunista que avanzaba desbocadamente.

¿Que vemos hoy?  La frontera rusa revienta y se derrama, vemos avanzar el proyecto-bomba nuclear de Irán, el de los gases sarín de Siria sarín, los ataques a sus vecinos Corea y Japón por parte de China, las amenazas de Corea del Norte contra Corea del Sur y Japón, la represión de sus manifestantes por la democracia de Venezuela con el silencio cómplice del gobierno de Estados Unidos, y vemos a al Qaeda subdividirse en varias celdas de Asia a África.   El “fin” de la guerra en Afganistán es sólo el principio de la guerra que se extenderá hasta nuestras fronteras cuando los Talibanes tomen el poder total del país, con los generales liberados y al-Qaeda al frente del gobierno.

Susana la Mucama, igual que en el caso de Bengasi, nos dice con su cara linda de cemento, que este es “un gran día para los Estados Unidos” refiriéndose al cambio de los talibanes, porque se ha logrado la libertad de un soldado que “sirvió a Estados Unidos con honor y distinción”.  

Yo creía que la linda de cara de Susana la Mucama había alcanzado su mayor dureza cuando dijo que lo que había pasado en Bengasi había sido una manifestación protestando de un video ofensivo que se había ido de las manos.  Me equivoqué, parece que todavía la cara de Susana tiene capacidad para aumentar su dureza.

No sólo es mentira el que el soldado sirvió con honor, cuando es un desertor, pero la manera en que se hizo el cambio es irregular.

El Presidente  ignoró una ley exigiendo que el Congreso deba de ser consultado con 30 días de anticipación de cualquier liberación de prisioneros de Guantánamo. Pero el senador demócrata Dianne Feinstein, que fue informado sobre el canje después de los hechos, dice que ella “oyó ninguna evidencia de que el sargento. Bergdahl estaba en peligro médico inmediato que obligó a actuar sin consultar al Congreso.” Sra. Feinstein, demócrata, judía, y  liberal quien dirige el Comité de Inteligencia del Senado, y el republicano de mayor rango Saxby Chambliss dijo que no habían sido consultados sobre el canje durante meses. “Sin duda era el momento de tomar el teléfono y llamar y decir ‘yo sé que todos hayan tenido preocupaciones acerca de esto, hemos consultado en el pasado, queremos que sepas que hemos revisado estas negociaciones'”, dijo la Sra. Feinstein.

Obama abochorna hasta a sus más cercanos seguidores.  Los secretarios de prensa han renunciado llenos de vergüenza porque se vieron abochornados de las cosas que tenían que decir.  El último Jay Carney renunció después que había declarado que no se estaba negociando la liberación de Talibanes de Guantánamo, lo cual lo hizo quedar en un ridículo monumental.

Jay Carney tiene alguna vergüenza y renunció, no podemos decir lo mismo de Susan Rice. Susana la Mucama hace y dice cualquier cosa por avanzar la agenda de su amo.

El problema más grande es que el Sr. Obama trata a todo lo de la política exterior como si fuera simplemente parte de su cálculo político interno, como parte de la campaña para declarar una administración ejemplar del primer presidente negro, y la prensa le gusta esta novela, y lo ayuda.

 Es demasiado fácil imaginarlo pensando que si él anunció la retirada de todas las tropas de Afganistán en 2016 como lo hizo la semana pasada, él podría entonces vender más fácilmente el intercambio de prisioneros, y luego ayudar a vaciar Guantánamo para que pudiera cumplir esa promesa de campaña también y así mejorar su imagen doméstica.

No importa que estas promesas sean evidentemente contrarias a la seguridad de la nación, lo importante es hacer lucir que su presidencia es efectiva.

¿Es demasiado pedir que, en sus últimos dos años y medio en el cargo, el Presidente actuara como si hay más en juego en la política exterior de su índice de aprobación en el hogar?

No creo que es demasiado pedir, pero es demasiado ingenuo pensar que Obama abandone su eterna y continuada campaña política.




After 50 Years, Washington Has Lost the War on Poverty

Written by Gary North 


Fifty years ago, LBJ’s speech writer, Richard Goodwin, was asked to strip naked and swim with a naked Lyndon Johnson.

Press secretary Bill Moyers, the only LBJ senior staffer who survived the administration with his reputation intact, also had to jump in. He still regales us with his opinions on PBS — the last Wise Man of that era to do so. His war on personal poverty was highly successful.

While swimming with Johnson, Goodwin gave him a tip. Start something called “the war on poverty.” Johnson loved the phrase. He used it, along with “the Great Society.”

That society was not great. That war was lost.

Johnson lost the war in Vietnam. So did Nixon. Finally, Ford pulled out the troops.

No one in power in Washington suggests that the war on poverty has been lost, and that we should pull out the troops.


Here is an article on poverty. Drudge posted it, so it got coverage.

The Census has been tracking these data since 1959, when the percentage of children under 18 living in poverty was 26.9%. In 1964, when then-President Lyndon B. Johnson announced the War on Poverty, the percentage of children living in poverty was 22.7%. Since then until now, the percentage has decreased by only 6.2%.”In 2012, over one in five children (21.3%) in the United States, some 15.4 million, were poor — both their poverty rate and estimated number poor were statistically unchanged from 2011,” said the CRS report. “The lowest recorded rate of child poverty was in 1969, when 13.8% of children were counted as poor.”

So, after 50 years of welfare spending, the poverty rate has not changed. A variation of 6% is basically statistical noise.

(For the rest of my articcle, click the link.)

Continue Reading on




Lindsey Graham: Susan Rice Can’t Be Trusted, Should Be Replaced

By Bill Hoffmann

Susan Rice should be replaced immediately as national security adviser because she is untrustworthy and unreliable, Sen. Lindsey Graham says. 

“I have no confidence in her. When I hear her on television talking about a world event, I can’t believe anything she tells me,” Graham, a South Carolina Republican, told “The Steve Malzberg Show” on Newsmax TV.

“I mean,” Graham said Wednesday, “do you trust that she’s going to tell you accurately what happened?”

Rice has come under fire for her appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” in which she said of just-released Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, “He served the United States with honor and distinction.”

But hours after Rice’s statement about Bergdahl, who was swapped for five top-ranking Taliban terrorists, reports emerged that he had been captured after deserting his unit.

Graham said Rice’s alleged misinformation came on the heels of her discredited statements about the terror attack in Benghazi, Libya, blaming it on an anti-Islamic video when she was the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

“Five days after the Benghazi attack, [she] told a story about a protest and a video that never happened, wrote this off to a violent protest caused by a hateful video, [and] ignored the fact that there was no protest,” Graham said.

“[She] sold a lie to the American people about how secure the consulate was.”

Graham chalked up Rice’s misstatements to “one of two things: She’s completely detached from the reality of the situation and literally makes things up that sound good, or she’s manipulating the information for political reasons.”

“Either way, should she be the national security adviser? What led her to believe that [Bergdahl’s] service could be characterized as honorable — ‘honor and distinction’?”

Graham also has theories about what is ultimately behind Rice’s remarks.

“I am convinced that the White House, [deputy national security adviser] Ben Rhodes, and others came up with a storyline of a protest and a video to get us away from terrorism [on Benghazi],” he said.

“[And] I am now convinced that they expected the whole world — the public here in the U.S. — to stand up and cheer when [Obama] said the war is over in Afghanistan, we’re going to have no troops, and by the way, I got Bergdahl home.”

Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services and Judicial committees, doubts Obama has any intention of sacking Rice.

“I would have never hired her to begin with after Benghazi, but he’s not going to replace her [just] because I say so,” he said.

Graham also told host Steve Malzberg that the trading of Bergdahl for five top terrorists was “a big day” for the Taliban.

“You know, the only reason they’re not dancing in the streets, they just don’t believe in dancing,” he said.

“Last week was a huge week for the Taliban. We’re now saying we’re going to withdraw completely by the end of 2016, which is a dumb idea because we should have some bases left in Afghanistan as lines of defenses between us, al-Qaida, and the Taliban. This is where 9/11 happened,” Graham said.

“It’s in our interest to have forward-operating locations over there to keep the enemy at bay. And it would’ve been good to have some support for the Afghan security forces so the Taliban could never come back. 

“So, we withdraw and they get their dream team back on the field in a year. So, hell of a week for the Taliban.”

While the White House has issued apologies to some lawmakers for not informing them of the swap, Graham was not one of them.

“I think hell will freeze over before Obama apologizes to me on national security, and I’m not looking for an apology,” he said.

“There’s no reason this should be classified. I want to know, is it really honestly true that Bergdahl was near death and that’s why we had to do it when we did?

“Could you have not gotten a better deal? Did you have to give all five back or did you want to give all five back?”

Graham said he believes the former Army buddies of Bergdahl who say he walked off the base as a deserter.

“The people who have appeared on television to talk about Bergdahl’s actions and behavior are members of his unit. I don’t think they’re associated with any organized political group, I don’t think they formed a pack, I don’t think they have a political agenda,” he said.
Read Latest Breaking News from 
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!



New WH Spin: Criticism of Taliban Swap is Really Obama ‘Hatred’

Town Hall has some interesting commentary today on a story that was published in Politico.   Of course, the fall back defense for any criticism the White House (namely, the President) receives is typically, ‘if you don’t like what Obama does, then you’re a racist.’

So, this scrambling to refute the uproar of criticism over Obama’s “prisoner swap” (letting five Taliban leaders out of Guantanamo Bay) comes as no surprise.   The White House response boils down to this:   “You just don’t like it because Obama did it, and you don’t like Obama….na na na na boo boo.”

Town Hall – This Politico story is highly revealing, from top to bottom. It paints a portrait of a White House reeling from a festering, self-inflicted political wound that’s flailing frantically to regain some measure of control over the narrative. It’s also a tad unnerving. This crew is so deep in the bunker that they can’t see a major mistake for what it is, preferring to take the mental exit ramp of chalking up the entire maelstrom to “hatred” of Obama — a claim that requires acute cognitive dissonance, for reasons we’ll discuss in a moment. A few choice excepts: President Barack Obama’s Rose Garden appearance Saturday afternoon with Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s parents was an attempt to humanize the prisoner swap to deflect potential criticism of letting five Taliban leaders out of Guantanamo Bay, White House aides say. It didn’t work. White House aides were aware Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl had been tagged a deserter, and that they would be grilled over not keeping Congress in the loop. But they figured people would be most outraged over the national security implications. The White House has been surprised by how much attention has remained on the questions about Bergdahl, from the circumstances of his disappearance to the wild beard his father grew while he was being held that’s even led to Bergdahl’s hometown canceling a celebration. All this, Obama aides say, is in their minds a proxy for the hatred toward the president. The new approach: Frame the criticism as another example of Republicans complaining about something just because Obama was the one to do it.White House aides and other liberal outlets are highlighting what they see as Republican hypocrisy, citing past quotes from GOP lawmakers calling for Bergdahl’s freedom.

Just a few days ago, White House aides were whispering to Chuck Todd that they were utterly shocked by the negative public reception to the Taliban swap; they had been expecting widespread “euphoria.” With soldiers who served with Bergdahl prior to his evident desertion coming out of the woodwork to douse the attempted jubilant whitewash with cold water, administration officials shifted to accusing them of “swift-boating” Bergdahl. Now Team Obama has moved on to claiming that they expected some significant backlash all along, but failed to anticipate the flash points and depth of the anger. Flummoxed, they’ve discarded the entire episode into their catch-all “Obama haters” bin, and are busily crafting a lefty media strategy to highlight Republican “hypocrisy.” Their big smoking gun on this point is a series of past statements from Republicans urging the safe return of Sgt. Bergdahl. See? They said they wanted Bergdahl home, and now that Obama’s achieved that amazing feat, they’re mad because he’s the one who did it.

Read More:




Would-Be Intruders Get The Surprise Of Their Life!

“I just hope the boy is OK…”



One resident at an East Point, Ga. apartment complex took decisive action to avoid becoming the latest crime victim in the community. Local police say there have been six break-ins at the complex within just the past week; and when a trio of young men came knocking at one door late last week, the occupant was ready.

The individuals claimed to be police. When the unidentified renter opened the door and they tried to force their way in, however, it was clear she was skeptical from the beginning.

At least one subject pulled a handgun on the resident but quickly learned she had a firearm of her own. The resident drew her handgun and fired three shots, reportedly striking one of the suspects twice.

The woman spoke to a local ABC affiliate on the condition of anonymity, suggesting the attempted break-in could have been “retaliation.”

Two of the three suspects got away and the third – with gunshot wounds to the head and backside – caught by police a short time after the incident. Despite the obvious attempt on her life, the renter’s thoughts remain with the juvenile suspect she shot.

“I just hope the boy is OK,” she said.

As for resident Ramona Ferrell, she is glad her neighbor is safe but is saddened by the impact crime has had in the neighborhood.

She said she was at home when the incident occurred, noting she “knew it was gunshots” and that it “was very close.”

Ferrell noted that such attempts have grown frustratingly common recently.

“I think it’s ridiculous,” she explained. “Something should be done. There’s a lot going on in this apartment complex.”

She concluded that the result of this latest attempt highlights what has become of her community.

“I’m glad she did have something,” Ferrell said, though she noted that it is “sad that you have to walk around as a female with a gun to protect yourself.”

Photo credit: The Knowles Gallery (Creative Commons)




UNBELIEVABLE: Obama Seizing Americans’ Bank Accounts!

Obama and right-hand man Eric Holder couldn’t ban guns and ammunition outright—so they’re doing the next best thing.


Using an obscure section of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act, the Department of Justice is forcing banks to cease doing business with so-called “high risk” gun and ammunition dealers under a program called Operation Choke Point—in some cases seizing their accounts!

Operation Choke Point is absolutely illegal according to a House of Representatives report issued by Darrell Issa—but that doesn’t seem to be stopping the rogue Obama administration.

Left without access to banking services, thousands of gun and ammunition dealers across America are on verge of bankruptcy. Credit cards cannot be processed. Cash deposits cannot be made. Checks cannot be written. A business simply cannot function without banking services—exactly what the Obama administration planned on.

Obama and right-hand man Eric Holder couldn’t ban guns and ammunition outright—so they’re doing the next best thing: “choking off” the supply of guns.

When Obama has seized all the guns from Americans, what can we expect to happen? Well, when Hitler seized all the guns in Germany, he went about killing all his political enemies, including six million Jews.

Was the de facto martial law declared by Obama after the Boston Bombing a precursor of what is to come? Were the light-armored tanks roaming the streets, illegal house-to-house searches, and suspension of habeas corpus just a taste of nationwide martial law?

Let us hope Barack Hussein Obama is stopped before that happens.

Boom: It Took Morgan Freeman Just Seven Words To Destroy This Common Idea About Race

Don Lemon of CNN didn’t know what hit him…


Oscar-winning actor Morgan Freeman was interviewed last night on CNN by Don Lemon. When asked if he thought race largely determined how wealthy a person can become over the course of his life, Morgan, without any hesitation, gave this great response. Hopefully, Mr. Lemon will not be foolish enough to ask this question of any of his guests in the future.



RICARDO SAMITIER: Los Turcos Buscan La Guerra Contra Siria.

Esta Vez, Cortando El Agua Y La“Prensa Globalista”, No Se Entera.

Están Provocando Otra Nueva Guerra, Aunque El Pueblo Americano

Este Cansado, De Guerras Sin Victorias!:

A new Turkish aggression against Syria: 

Ankara suspends pumping Euphrates’ water



See Why This Senator Believes Barack Obama Thinks He Is An Emperor!

“This is a pattern of behavior…”


Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) says the President broke the law for failing to notify Congress about the release of five Taliban terrorists from Guantanamo Bay in exchange for U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.  Rubio was speaking with Fox News’ Gretchen Carlson on Tuesday about the White House’s unilateral move to make the exchange deal, claiming the president “believes somehow that he has become a monarch or an emperor.” Rubio continued that Obama didn’t tell Diane Feinstein, the intelligence committee chairwoman, about the deal.

The Senator asserted that “the president has violated the law here,” which requires a 30 day notification before any individual detained at Guantanamo can be transferred to his country of origin.  See NDAA H.R. 1960 Title X, Subtitle D, Section 1033 at




Para aquellos que creían saberlo todo….

El líquido dentro de cocos jóvenes puede ser usado como substituto del plasma humano.                                            

Ninguna pieza de papel puede ser doblada por la mitad más de 7 (siete) veces. (a ver, pruébalo…)                                             

Los Burros matan anualmente más gente que los accidentes aéreos o los ataques de tiburón  

Uno quema más calorías durmiendo que mirando la tele 

El primer producto que llevó código de barras fue el chicle Wrigley´s

Solamente el Rey de Corazones es el que no tiene bigote.

American Airlines ahorró $40,000 en 1987 eliminando 1(una) aceituna de cada ensalada servida en Primera Clase 

Venus es el único planeta que gira en sentido de las agujas del reloj.

Dado que Venus es asociado normalmente con las mujeres, ¿qué les dice ésto?

¿Que las mujeres van en la “dirección correcta”?

Manzanas y NO cafeína, son más eficientes para despertarte a la mañana. 

La mayoría de las partículas del polvo hogareño están hechas de ¡PIEL MUERTA! (Puajjj……!!)

La   (Puajjj……!!)

¡Las perlas se derriten en VINAGRE!

Las marcas más populares del planeta: Marlboro, Coca Cola y Budweiser, en este orden.

Es posible que una vaca suba una escalera… pero NO que la baje…..
Un “quack” de pato no tiene o produce eco, y nadie sabe la causa.

Dentistas recomiendan colocar el cepillo dental a más de 2(dos) metros del inodoro, para evitar partículas aeróbicas resultantes al apretar el botón.

(Desde ahora, ¡mi cepillo se queda en el living! 

Y lo mejor para el final….

Las tortugas pueden respirar por su trasero. 

Ahora sabes algo más que antes….

Comparte el conocimiento.

¡¡¡ Y no te olvides de mover tu cepillo de dientes !!!…..



Why Team Obama Was Blindsided by the Bergdahl Backlash

The president and Ms. Rice seem to think that the crime of desertion in wartime is kind of like skipping class.

By Ralph Peters

Congratulations, Mr. President! And identical congrats to your sorcerer’s apprentice, National Security Adviser Susan Rice. By trying to sell him as an American hero, you’ve turned a deserter already despised by soldiers in the know into quite possibly the most-hated individual soldier in the history of our military.

I have never witnessed such outrage from our troops.

Exhibit A: Ms. Rice. In one of the most tone-deaf statements in White House history (we’re making a lot of history here), the national-security advisor, on a Sunday talk show, described Bergdahl as having served “with honor and distinction.” Those serving in uniform and those of us who served previously were already stirred up, but that jaw-dropper drove us into jihad mode.

But pity Ms. Rice. Like the president she serves, she’s a victim of her class. Nobody in the inner circle of Team Obama has served in uniform. It shows. That bit about serving with “honor and distinction” is the sort of perfunctory catch-phrase politicians briefly don as electoral armor. (“At this point in your speech, ma’am, devote one sentence to how much you honor the troops.”)

I actually believe that Ms. Rice was kind of sincere, in her spectacularly oblivious way. In the bestManchurian Candidate manner, she said what she had been programmed to say by her political culture, then she was blindsided by the firestorm she ignited by scratching two flinty words together. At least she didn’t blame Bergdahl’s desertion on a video.

The president, too, appears stunned. He has so little understanding of (or interest in) the values and traditions of our troops that he and his advisers really believed that those in uniform would erupt into public joy at the news of Bergdahl’s release — as D.C. frat kids did when Osama bin Laden’s death was trumpeted.

Both President Obama and Ms. Rice seem to think that the crime of desertion in wartime is kind of like skipping class. They have no idea of how great a sin desertion in the face of the enemy is to those in our military. The only worse sin is to side actively with the enemy and kill your brothers in arms. This is not sleeping in on Monday morning and ducking Gender Studies 101.

But compassion, please! The president and all the president’s men and women are not alone. Our media elite — where it’s a rare bird who bothered to serve in uniform — instantly became experts on military justice. Of earnest mien and blithe assumption, one talking head after another announced that “we always try to rescue our troops, even deserters.”

Uh, no. “Save the deserter” is a recent battle cry of the politically indoctrinated brass. For much of our history, we did make some efforts to track down deserters in wartime. Then we shot or hanged them. Or, if we were in good spirits, we merely used a branding iron to burn a large D into their cheeks or foreheads. Even as we grew more enlightened, desertion brought serious time in a military prison. At hard labor.

This is a fundamental culture clash. Team Obama and its base cannot comprehend the values still cherished by those young Americans “so dumb” they joined the Army instead of going to prep school and then to Harvard. Values such as duty, honor, country, physical courage, and loyalty to your brothers and sisters in arms have no place in Obama World. (Military people don’t necessarily all like each other, but they know they can depend on each other in battle — the sacred trust Bergdahl violated.)

President Obama did this to himself (and to Bergdahl). This beautifully educated man, who never tires of letting us know how much smarter he is than the rest of us, never stopped to consider that our troops and their families might have been offended by their commander-in-chief staging a love-fest at the White House to celebrate trading five top terrorists for one deserter and featuring not the families of those soldiers (at least six of them) who died in the efforts to find and free Bergdahl, but, instead, giving a starring role on the international stage to Pa Taliban, parent of a deserter and a creature of dubious sympathies (that beard on pops ain’t a tribute to ZZ Top). How do you say “outrageous insult to our vets” in Pashto?

Nor, during the recent VA scandal, had the president troubled himself to host the families of survivors of those vets who died awaiting care. No, the warmest attention our president has ever paid to a “military family” was to Mr. and Mrs. Bergdahl.

(I will refrain from criticism of the bumptious attempts to cool the flames of this political conflagration by Secretary Hagel: I never pick on the weak.)

What is to be done? Behind the outrage triggered by Team Obama’s combination of cynicism and obliviousness (Bergdahl was so ill we had to set those terrorists free immediately, without notifying Congress, but now he’s chugging power shakes in a military hospital . . . and all this just happened to come at the peak of the VA scandal . . . ), military members don’t really want to lynch Bergdahl. But they want justice.

Our military leaders need to rediscover their moral courage and honor our traditions, our regulations, and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. We need a fresh, unprejudiced 15-6 investigation (the military equivalent of a grand jury). We already know, as the military has known since the first 24 hours after Bergdahl abandoned his post, that sufficient evidence exists for a court-martial, but it’s important to do this by the numbers.

It’s hard to believe that the resulting court-martial would not find Bergdahl guilty of desertion (although there will be heavy White House pressure to reduce the charge to Absent Without Leave, or AWOL, status, a lesser offense). If he is convicted, I for one do not want him to go to prison. I’m sure he’s paid and paid for betraying his comrades, quite possibly suffering brutal sexual violence. But if he is found guilty, he needs to be formally reduced to the rank of private, stripped of all privileges and entitlements (the taxpayer should not pay for a deserter’s lifelong health care — Bergdahl’s book and film deals can cover that), and he should be given the appropriate prison sentence, which would then be commuted by the president. Thereafter, let Mr. Bergdahl go home and live with himself.

As for President Obama, how about just one word of thanks to the families of those fallen soldiers you sent out to find Bowe Bergdahl?

— Fox News Strategic Analyst Ralph Peters is a retired Army officer and former enlisted man.




Watch Obama Smile As Soon As Bergdahl’s Father Praises Allah

While the Obama administration is proudly touting how it was able to free an American soldier who was captured by the Taliban, what no one picked is the fact that Obama SMILED as soon as he heard the most famous war cry of Islam, “bismillah al-rahman al-rahim,” Arabic for “in the name of Allah the most gracious, the most merciful.”

Watch Obama smile as soon as Bergdahl gives the most famous Muslim expression, the “Bismillah” or the “Basmallah”:


The “basmallah” is the Islamic expression for victory and only indicates that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s father is a Muslim.

Think that the man is acting as “Muslim” for a stealth operation to rescue his son who is already in good hands in Germany? And what is with the long beard and trimmed mustache?

No this is not a bum, biker, or a Santa Clause fan. When one gives the basmallah, trims his mustache and elongates his beard, its the first sign of a convert to Islam, just as that an ex-Muslim putting on a cross and saying, “In the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” is evidence enough of conversion to Christianity. But there is much more we obtained on this stealth jihadist.

But first, Obama’s smile says much. Obama has never declared the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and has no real testimony of converting to Christianity, as his pastor Jeremiah Wright stated:

I made it easy for him to come to an understanding of who Jesus Christ is and not feel that he was turning his back on his Islamic friends and his Islamic traditions and his understanding of Islam

We were first hit with news from Brietbart that the Taliban said that Robert Bowe Bergdahl’s son, Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, converted to Islam, changed his name to Abdullah, and even trained the Taliban in bomb making techniques.

And like father like son, the young Bergdahl, also trims his mustache and extends his beard.

But is it the speech with the Basmallah, the beard and the trimmed mustache, the testimonies from his colleagues on his desertion, that confirm our suspicion that these men are Jihadi converts?

What no one in the media captured was Robert Bowe Bergdahl’s favorites on his Youtube account.

It reveals a dark mind, a collector of a litany of ‘terrorist favorites’, videos from training on how to become Muslim Jihadist to urging American troops to desert and even favorite speeches by confirmed terrorists like Shaykh Anwar al-Awlaki, condemning America as a terrorist state:


Bergdahl’s Youtube account’s favorites list has an anti-American Anwar al-Awlaki video. Notice Bergdahl’s name above the list, showing that it is indeed his account

On one of the videos Bergdahl subscribes to a Jihadi message titled, “Duaa (prayer).”

But prayer for what? His son’s release only? Hardly, its for the release of the terrorists in American captivity. The prayer begins in Arabic, as translates:

O Allah, release our prisoners, the Muslim prisoners, and send them back to our families in peace!

One would think that Bergdahl does not understand what is said in Arabic? Think again, he comments himself stating:

“Al-Hamdu Lillah, Ameen, Ameen May the duas of the ummah be heard and may Allah free my son from captivity! بِسْمِاللَّهِالرَّحْمَٰنِالرَّحِيمِإِيَّاكَنَعْبُدُوَإِيَّاكَنَسْتَعِينُ


Praise be to Allah, Amen, Amen, my prayers for all the Muslim Nation (ummah) be heard and may Allah free my son from captivity. In the name of Allah most merciful most beneficient, it is thee whom I worship, it is thee whom I seek refuge.

He types perfect Arabic and announces he is Muslim, “thee [Allah] I worship …”

Another favorite is a lecture from Mufti Ismail Menk, who identifies himself as a Muslim scholar titled “Qualities Of A True Worshipper”. Menk was also a favorite of Boston bombing suspect Dzhokar Tsarnaev.

Another video favorited by Bergdahl, is a Muslim jihadist terrorist video uploaded by th

– See more at:



Why Reagan Lives on 10 Years After Death. Harris @KelsRenHar / 

Photo: Newscom


Kelsey Harris@KelsRenHar

Kelsey Harris the visual editor at The Daily Signal and digital media associate at The Heritage Foundation.

On June 5, 2004, President Ronald Reagan died after battling Alzheimer’s disease. Ten years later, his legacy lives on through the conservative principles he espoused.

Reagan began his term in 1981, with the country in a deep economic crisis. Americans faced high unemployment, fallout from an energy crisis, stagnation, massive government spending, tax burden, a hollow military and Soviet threats. But Reagan turned toward less government—not more.

President Reagan giving his first Inaugural Address from the U.S. Capitol.

1. Courage


Chaos outside the Washington Hilton Hotel after the assassination attempt on President Reagan. James Brady and police officer Thomas Delahanty lie wounded on the ground. (Photo: Ronald Reagan Library)

When he was shot on Mar. 30, 1981, and the bullet stopped one inch from his heart, Reagan spent much of his time in recovery assuring everyone that he was just fine.

President Reagan with Nancy Reagan inside George Washington Hospital four days after the shooting. (Photo: Ronald Reagan Library)

Even liberal commentators applauded his courage:

“Everybody knows,” wrote James Reston of The New York Times, “that people seldom act in the margin between life and death with such light-hearted valor as they do in the movies. Yet Ronald Reagan did.”

2. Prudence


Photo: Ronald Reagan Library

Reagan relied upon his “70 percent rule” — he knew when to bend a little and when to stand firm.

“Die-hard conservatives thought that if I couldn’t get everything I asked for, I should jump off the cliff with the flag flying-go down in flames. No, if I can get 70 or 80 percent of what it is I’m trying to get … I’ll take that and then continue to try to get the rest in the future.” — Ronald Reagan

3. Justice


President Reagan and Nancy Reagan sitting on the dock with their grandchildren Cameron Reagan and Ashley Marie Reagan. (Photo: Ronald Reagan Library)

Reagan stood firm in protecting the rights of every American—from the moment of conception to that of natural death.

“For him the sanctity of life was not a slogan but a fundamental principle to be honored,” Edwards said.


President Reagan salutes an Air Force cadet at the United States Air Force Academy Commencement in Colorado Springs Colorado. (Photo: Ronald Reagan Library)

He was the first sitting president to write a book while in office when he wrote “Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation” in 1983.

Photo: Newscom

“I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.” – Ronald Reagan

4. Wisdom


Photo: Newscom

In late 1981 and all of 1982, when Reagan’s tax cuts had not yet kicked in and the U.S. economy still lagged, people, including his staff, were worried. But he had faith in the American people:

“[If they] could be liberated from the restraints imposed on them by government, they’d pull the country out of its tailspin.” – Ronald Reagan

At the end 1982, America began the longest peacetime economic expansion in U.S. history up to that time, creating 17 million new jobs during the Reagan years.


Ya encontré a quien encargarle que termine con todos los problemas del mundo y de Los Estados Unidos. Es un hombre blanco, rubio, bueno,  perfectamente instruido en las debilidades y los vicios de los hombres y su infinita maldad. Tiene mucha experiencia en esto porque hace algún tiempo, después que les enseño la verdad se aferraron a la mentira, como ahora, y lo traicionaron, encarcelaron y torturaron hasta asesinarlo clavándolo en un madero. Pero resucito y no se rindió tiene fe y yo también el regreso para completar la obra de redención. Regresa para que los hombres sean buenos y trabajen para hacer este mundo mejor. Tendremos ahora la oportunidad de demostrarle a ese hombre que ahora sí que no le fallaremos que ahora si sacaremos a los mercaderes, los fariseos  y los falsos líderes de LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS DE AMERICA y los enviaremos al infierno de donde nunca debieron ni volverán a salir y allí pagaran por todos sus pecados. AMEN. “En mi opinión” Lázaro R González Miño




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