President Obama's many "accomplishments".

by COL. ROBERT F. CUNNINGHAM and PATRICK RISHOR, "The Gilmer Mirror"

Quit trashing Obama. He has done more than any other President before him. Here is a list of his impressive accomplishments:

First President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.

First President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.

First President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United States.

First President to violate the War Powers Act.

First President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

First President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.

First President to spend a trillion dollars on "shovel-ready" jobs when there was no such thing as "shovel-ready" jobs.

First President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.

First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat.

First President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S., including those with criminal convictions.

First President to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.

First President to tell a CEO of a major corporation (Chrysler) to resign.

First President to terminate America’s ability to put a man in space.

First President to cancel the National Day of Prayer and to say that America is no longer a Christian nation.

First President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.

First President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it.

First President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke out on the reasons for their rate increases.

First President to tell a major manufacturing company in which state it is allowed to locate a factory.

First President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).

First President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.

First President to actively try to bankrupt an American industry (coal).

First President to fire an inspector general of AmeriCorps for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.

First President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his office.

First President to surround himself with radical left wing anarchists.

First President to golf more than 150 separate times in his five years in office.

First President to hide his birth, medical, educational and travel records.

First President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.

First President to go on multiple "global apology tours" and concurrent "insult our friends" tours.

First President to go on over 17 lavish vacations, in addition to date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends paid for by the taxpayers.

First President to have personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife.

First President to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.

First President to fly in a personal trainer from Chicago at least once a week at taxpayer expense.

First President to repeat the Holy Quran and tell us the early morning call of the Azan (Islamic call to worship) is the most beautiful sound on earth.

First President to side with a foreign nation over one of the American 50 states (Mexico vs Arizona).

First President to tell the military men and women that they should pay for their own private insurance because they "volunteered to go to war and knew the consequences."

Then he was the First President to tell the members of the military that THEY were UNPATRIOTIC for balking at the last suggestion. (Thank God he didn't get away with THIS one.)

TJOC: Another one stolen from "Wired Right"

Feds Attack American Businesses

By Newt -

In an administration that has pioneered the use of regulatory power to bully businesses into doing “voluntarily” what the bureaucrats can’t require by law, a secretive federal program that has become public in the last few months stands out as an especially disturbing abuse of power.

The program's name, “Operation Choke Point,” is a pretty strong indication of trouble--an eerie way for bureaucrats to describe their conduct toward private citizens.

It’s a reference to the banking system as the “choke point” of businesses, a critical piece of the economic infrastructure which government can co-opt to strangle legal activities it doesn't favor. In fact, I first learned about the program through my work as an advisor to the U.S. Consumer Coalition, which is fighting attacks like these on legal American businesses.

The revelation is alarming in part because it suggests federal officials have realized that they can leverage their strong regulatory authority over one industry, financial services, to exert broad control over many others.
The “choke point” initiative, a joint project of the Department of Justice, the FDIC, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and other agencies, started by targeting payday lenders. Officials approached banks and third-party payment processors, advising them that they could be held accountable if regulators concluded that any of their customers (the payday lenders) engaged in illegal behavior. The feds suggested ominously that banks ran a “reputational risk” if they serviced such clients.

The banks got the message. Nice bank you've got there. Shame if something happened to it.
As the Independent Community Bankers of America, an industry association, said in a letter to the Justice Department regarding Operation Choke Point, the program “gives community banks the untenable choices of either severing valuable and legal customer relationships or risking DOJ enforcement actions.” It could “close access to the financial system to law-abiding businesses,” the letter continued, “because the mere prospect of an enforcement action is sufficient to cause financial institutions to restrict access to their payment systems to only established companies that present low risks.”

Heeding the feds' thuggish warning, the banks have been dropping the payday lenders as customers en masse. In a recent story on this phenomenon, the Washington Post quoted a letter from a banker to a payday lender with whom the bank was ending its relationship. “Based on your performance, there’s no way we shouldn’t be a credit provider,” the banker wrote. “Our only issue is, and it has always been, the space in which you operate. It is the scrutiny that you, and now that we, are under.”
Could it be any clearer?

The lenders aren’t the only legal businesses the regulators are using their authority in financial services to "choke." A document the FDIC released in 2011 warns third-party payment processors that the agency is concerned about their business with “disreputable merchants” in 30 industries. In addition to “pay day loans,” the document warns about “ammunition sales,” “firearms sales,” “coin dealers,” “online gambling,” “tobacco sales,” “racist materials,” “pornography,” and “telemarketing,” among others.

Bureaucrats, it seems, are indeed deputizing bankers and payment processors to cut off these industries from the financial services they need to survive. The Washington Times reported last week that banks and payment processors have been terminating the accounts of law-abiding gun dealers across the country.
Much like the letter to the payday lender in the Post, the Times quotes a bank assuring a gun dealer that its decision to drop him as a client “in no way reflects any derogatory reasons for such action on your behalf. But rather one of industry. Unfortunately your company’s line of business is not commensurate with the industries we work with.”

There are reports of similar account terminations in many other industries the FDIC has labeled "high-risk."
These developments should concern every American. For the government to hold banks responsible for monitoring the business of all their customers is unprecedented. To do so with the explicit aim of chilling the perfectly legal economic activities of private citizens is such a jaw-dropping abuse of power that it would have been unbelievable from any previous administration.

If the Department of Justice has evidence that particular businesses have broken the law, it should prosecute them. Lacking that, it certainly has no right to attack entire industries through the banking system. This story is as outrageous as they come. The federal bureaucracy has gone completely off the rails.


TJOC: Oh Yes, The Feds make all kinds of rules that the Congressional Committees, supposedly responsible for doing oversight, never find out about. Even when the agency trys to inform the Committee, the Committee has too full of a schedule - they use as an excuse!

"Obama - You Lie!" Is the Truth.

Joe Wilson, at a joint session of Congress on September 9,2009, called out an Obama claim that no illegal aliens would be eligible for Obamacare.  We have come to learn differently and thus Wilson was prescient in understanding Obama's penchant for chronic obfuscation and prevarication.

See this article at "The American Thinker" that vindicates Joe Wilson for his early comment on Obama's terrible conflicts with the truth.

TJOC: Stolen from Wired Right Blogspot. 

Article V Convention: How “Individuals of Insidious Views” Are Stealing Our Constitution

By Publius Huldah

Q: How are amendments to the federal Constitution made?
A: Article V of our Constitution provides two method of amending the Constitution:

1. Congress proposes amendments and presents them to the States for ratification; or
2. When 2/3 of the States apply for it, Congress calls a convention to propose amendments.

Q: Which method was used for our existing 27 amendments?
A:  The first method was used for all 27 amendments including the Bill of Rights which were introduced into Congress by James Madison. ³

Q:  Is there a difference between a constitutional convention, con con, or Article V Convention?
A:  These names have been used interchangeably during the last 50 years.

Q:  What is a “convention of states”?
A:  That is what the people pushing for an Article V convention now call it. 

Q: Who is behind this push for an Art. V convention?
A:  The push to impose a new Constitution by means of an Article V convention (and using a “balanced budget” amendment as justification) started in 1963 with the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations.  ¹    Today, it is pushed by:

• Hundreds of progressive (Marxist) groups listed at https://movetoamend.org/organizations
• George Soros
• Michael Farris, Esq., of “Convention of States” (COS), and author of the “parental rights” amendment which delegates power over children to the federal & state governments.
• Nick Dranias, Esq., of the Compact for America, Inc., whose “balanced budget” amendment imposes a new national sales or VAT tax on the American People.
• Former law professor, Rob Natelson.
• Nullification denier and law professor, Randy Barnett, who proposes an amendment which delegates to Congress the power to regulate “emissions” [EPA now exercises usurped powers].
• Nullification denier and birther denier,  Mark Levin, Esq., whose “balanced budget” amendment legalizes Congress’ unconstitutional spending and does nothing to control the debt.

Q:  Why do they want an Article V Convention?

Continued at: Publius Huldah Wordpress

TJOC: I had totally forgotten about this site. It's a great learning experience or - remembering experience - go look at it and Read! 

Mark Levin’s “Liberty” Amendments: Legalizing Tyranny

By Publius Huldah

For 100 years, the federal government has usurped powers not delegated to it in our Constitution.

What should we do about it? Should we reclaim our existing Constitution and put an end to the usurpations?

Or should we “modernize” the Constitution by delegating to the federal government the powers it has usurped – so as to legalize what is now unconstitutional?

Mark Levin begins “The Liberty Amendments” by saying he doesn’t believe the Constitution requires “modernization through amendments”. But he then proposes a series of amendments, six of which modernize our Constitution to delegate to the federal government most of the powers it has usurped during the last 100 years.

And each of his six amendments does the opposite of what its title promises. I’ll show you. ¹

Levin’s amendment to “limit the federal bureaucracy” [p 99-100 of his book]

George Washington’s cabinet had four members: Secretary of State, Secretary of War, Secretary of the Treasury, and Attorney General. Those functions are authorized by our Constitution. ²

But today there are numerous agencies in the Executive Branch of the federal government. Where is the constitutional authority? What Article, Section, and Clause authorizes the Departments of Agriculture, Education, Energy, Labor, Transportation, HHS, HUD, DHS, EPA, SBA, etc., etc., etc.?

Continued at Publius Hhuldah Wordpress

TJOC: An interesting take on the federal government and our current predicament. If I remember correctly, the EPA or Department of Education was done under Richard Nixon's watch. Something everyone wanted, but no amendment has ever been made - for any of the bureaucracies the now control the American populace.

Follow the Money in Politics

TJOC: Many thanks to "Project Veritals." Hollywood objecting to an energy efficient USA.

 

or go to:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kbDseBwYKg

You Do?

William F. Buckley

Race Relations

Wolff Bachner • from the comment section of Daily Clash

.... 298 Bachners died in the Holocaust whose names we know by checking the records at Yad Vashem. Probably 600 of my own flesh and blood were murdered by Hitler and there are less than 50 alive today when there would probably be more than 2000 if they had survived and raised families.

Do I condemn every German, every European, every Christian and every citizen of every country that refused entry to Jews during the Holocaust.

NO. I condemn Nazis and their supporters , 99.9% of whom are long dead. Neo Nazis I condemn as well as grossly stupid and dangerous thugs.

Sure, Caucasians have done terrible things and so have Christians. Muslims have slaughtered more than 270 million human beings since the so-called prophet made up Islam in 638 ce. Jews used to stone people for having sex. People used to worship Kali and killed millions in her name. African kings sold entire tribes into slavery, usually to Muslim slavers. Aztec and Inca kings scarified thousands at a time by cutting out their beating hearts. White European Christians do not have a monopoly on murder, intolerance and brutality.

The constant vilification of past behavior has never improved anything. It has only driven a wedge between people and enriched a few clever exploiters. Now we have people using this nonsense to brainwash our own children and make them good little drones who are blindly obedient to the demands of the state. They are turning our children against the values and beliefs parents want to impart to them in an effort to destroy the concept of family. We recently witnessed a nationally syndicated commentator actually go on network TV and tell the nation that children do not belong to their families, they belong to the community. Instead of being run out of town on a rail, she was given her own weekly coast to coast show.

So the bottom line is no family, no faith, no morality, no national pride. Instead we get glorification of a leader, in our face sexual deviance, open hatred of anyone who believes in god and demonetization of 63% of the American population based on the color of their skin.

How will this build a better society in which people enjoy their short time on this earth and fulfill their dreams. Are we to be forced to live a life of negativity and blame. The goal is to crush the human spirit until we are all so down trodden we either die or do what we are told. Masters and serfs. Toiling forever under the whip of the elite.

To the lunatic progressives who live to impose their tainted beliefs on all of humanity and steal our freedom and individuality, I say no, no, and hell no. I will resist them to the end and if they come for me, I will fight until I die. My relatives didn't fight back and they died in gas chambers by the millions.

NEVER AGAIN MEANS NEVER AGAIN.

AM YISRAEL CHAI. MAY GOD BLESS YOU AND KEEP YOU.

TJOC: Yes, it's about time the "Race Baiters" leave America - for good. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton "First" PLEASE!

Two Top Ten Lists

TOP TENS INDICATORS THAT YOUR EMPLOYER HAS CHANGED TO OBAMACARE
 

(10) Your annual breast exam is done at Hooters.

(9) Directions to your doctor's office include "Take a left when you enter the trailer park."

(8) The tongue depressors taste faintly of Fudgesicles.

(7) The only proctologist in the plan is "Gus" from Roto-Rooter.

(6) The only item listed under Preventative Care Coverage is "an apple a day."

(5) Your primary care physician is wearing the pants you gave to Goodwill last month.

(4) "The patient is responsible for 200% of out-of-network charges," is not a typographical error.

(3) The only expense covered 100% is... "Embalming."

(2) Your Prozac comes in different colors with little M's on them.

And - - -

(1) You ask for Viagra, and they give you a Popsicle stick and duct tape.

ONLY IN AMERICA

 
Number 10) ...could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a
$35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.

Number 9) ...could people claim that the government still discriminates

against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney

General and roughly 20% of the federal workforce is black while only 14% of

the population is black 40+% of all federal entitlements goes to Black, 3-X the

rate that go to Whites, and 5-X the rate that go to Hispanics!

Number 8) ...could they have had the two people most responsible

 for our tax code, Timothy Geithner (the head of the Treasury Department)

and Charles  Rangel (who once ran the Ways and Means Committee),

BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.

Number 7) ...can they have terrorists kill people in the name of

Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims

might be harmed by the backlash.

Number 6) ...would they make people who want to legally become

American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens

of thousands of dollars for the privilege, while they discuss letting

anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just 'magically' become

American citizens.

Number 5) ....could the people who believe in balancing the budget

and sticking by the country's Constitution be thought of as "extremists."

Number 4) ...could you need to present a driver's license to cash a

check, buy alcohol or cigarettes, or enter a government building; but not to vote.

Number 3) ...could people demand the government investigate

whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas

went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company

(Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes (Nike).

Number 2) ...could the government collect more tax dollars from the

people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars

more than it has per year - for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE,

and complain that it doesn't have nearly enough money.

And - - -

 

Number 1) ...could the rich people - who pay 86% of all income taxes -

be accused of not paying their "fair share" by people who don't pay any

income taxes at  all.

''Every country has the government it deserves.''

The Cruelty of Gun-Free Zones

by John Lott

Even law enforcement recognizes that gun-free zones leave shooting victims defenseless.

Recently, President Obama vowed to “help stop more tragedies from visiting innocent Americans in our movie theaters and our shopping malls, or schools like Sandy Hook.”

But before he continues pushing his typical gun-control agenda, he should consider what law enforcement in Europe and the United States advise.  It might surprise him.

In November 2013, Interpol’s secretary general, Ron Noble, noted there are two ways to protect people from such mass shootings:

“One is to say we want an armed citizenry; you can see the reason for that.  Another is to say the enclaves [should be] so secure that in order to get into the soft target, you’re going to have to pass through extraordinary security.”

Noble sees a real problem: “How do you protect soft targets?  That’s really the challenge.  You can’t have armed police forces everywhere.”

“It makes citizens question their views on gun control,” he noted.

“You have to ask yourself, ‘Is an armed citizenry more necessary now than it was in the past, with an evolving threat of terrorism?’”

His comments were made right after the terrorist attack at the Westgate Mall in Nairobi, Kenya, where 68 people were killed.  Kenya bans both open and concealed carrying of firearms by civilians.  Yet, obviously, those bans didn’t stop the terrorists.

The vast majority of mass shootings in the U.S. have been extensively planned beforehand -- often many months or even years in advance, allowing them to find unprotected targets and obtain weapons.

Take Adam Lanza, the Sandy Hook Elementary School killer, who spent over two years studying everything about previous mass public shootings: the weapons used, the number of people killed, and even how much media coverage each shooting received.

Police described the 7-by-4 foot spreadsheet as sickeningly thorough, even likening his careful study to a doctoral dissertation.

James Holmes, the Aurora, Colorado killer, was another careful planner.  He started buying items two and a half months in advance.

He visited neighboring theaters, and bought his ticket almost two weeks before his attack.  To help prepare, he photographed the layout of the theater where he’d commit his heinous crimes.

Ironically, President Obama mentioned movie theaters and malls in his speech.

Holmes appears to have carefully selected the theater he did: Seven theaters within a 20-minute drive of his apartment were showing the premier of The Dark Knight Returns.

He chose the only one posting signs banning concealed guns -- not the theater closest to his apartment or the one prominently advertising the largest auditoriums in Colorado.

Not only are these killers deterred from attacking where victims are able to defend themselves, but if an attack occurs, it is quickly stopped before many people are harmed.

The significance of letting citizens defend themselves was demonstrated just days before the Newtown attack at the Clackamas Town Center Mall in Portland, Oregon.

At the crowded mall, a likely mass shooting was stopped after two people were killed.  It ended because one brave person, Nick Meli, a concealed-permit holder, stopped the shooter simply by pointing his gun at him.

Unfortunately, as is all too typical, the news media all but completely ignored the story.

The mall in Columbia, Maryland, where a shooter killed two people before killing himself, also banned guns.

With all the discussions about the weapon used and how the killer obtained it, the simplest fact for the media to obtain is whether the attack occurred in a gun-free zone, but it almost never gets mentioned in the hard-news accounts.

The gun-control debate would be dramatically different if the media mentioned this even once in a while.

Finally, consider the advice from PoliceOne, whose 450,000 members make it the largest private organization of active and retired law-enforcement officers in the U.S.

It surveyed its members last March and asked, “What would help most in preventing large-scale shootings in public?”

Their No. 1 answer: “More permissive concealed carry policies for civilians.” (It was followed by “More aggressive institutionalization for mentally ill persons.”)

Yet the media does understand the dangers of gun-free zones -- at least when it comes to their own safety.

Shortly after the Journal News of Westchester County, New York, got national attention in December, 2012 for publishing the names and addresses of local gun owners, documentarian and activist James O’Keefe secretly filmed editors of the paper deciding not to put signs in front of their homes saying that their houses were “gun-free.”

One of the editors, after saying he hated guns, worried out loud that such a sign would make his home a target of criminals.

When Europe-based Interpol is finally considering the notion of letting victims defend themselves, the debate is changing.

So-called gun-free zones shouldn’t be the place where victims are sitting ducks.

— John Lott is the President of the Crime Prevention Research Center and the author of "More Guns, Less Crime" (University of Chicago Press, 2010, 3rd edition).

 

TJOC: A Thank you to the National Association for Gun Rights for sending this to me.

From the National Review Online

[...] The Editors would like to extend our condolences to Senator Harry Reid and his family as they go through this difficult time. While we can only guess at the exact nature of the psychiatric or neurological trauma the Senate majority leader has suffered, we assume that it is severe, judging by his symptoms, the most prominent of which is his new habit of taking to the Senate floor to deliver speeches that sound like they ought to be coming from a man wearing a bathrobe in front of a liquor store in Cleveland. [...]

Read more about the seriously troubled and obviously mentally disordered Harry Reid HERE.  Harry Reid is the most divisive Senate Majority leader in my lifetime.  But, what is worse is that he is absolutely sociopathically driven in his chronic prevarications.  He is an embarrassment to all Americans, yet his own political party simply refuses to rein Dingy Harry in.  Reid is a tragic example of a liberal that has gone around the bend to a life of unethical behavior and questionable political actions bordering on the illegal.

TJOC: Thanks "Wired Right."

 

From The Young Conservatives: Top 10 questions to ask a liberal

     

10. How many people should we let into this country?
9. How are rules that apply equally to everyone discriminatory and racist?
8. How are rules that only apply to one group of people not discriminatory and racist?
7. Do you know what a pyramid scheme is?
6. Why is it okay to kill unborn children but wrong to kill convicted murderers?
5. How does stagnating growth stimulate the economy?
4. Does it make sense to do the same thing over and over and expect a different result?
3. How will punishing law-abiding people stop criminals from breaking the law?
2. How can you count to ten if you skip the number two?
1. Why was George W. Bush a bad President but Barack Obama is a good one?
For the answers to these Top 10 Questions to ask a liberal, please follow this LINK to the Young Conservatives website.

SUPRISE !!

TJOC: Finally - Some one is asking members of the press very valid questions.

A You Tube Video

Famous Presidential Lies - I believe we have a winner!

written by "To The Point News"

LBJ:
  *  We were attacked (in the Gulf of Tonkin - The reason for the Vietnam War)

Nixon:
  *  I am not a crook (any more than any other President since Washington - actually true)

GHW Bush:
  *  Read my lips - No New Taxes

Clinton:
  *  I did not have sex with that woman... Miss Lewinski

GW Bush:
  *  Mission Completed

Obama:
  *  I will have the most transparent administration in history
  *  The stimulus will fund shovel-ready jobs
  *  I am focused like a laser on creating jobs
  *  The IRS is not targeting anyone
  *  It was a spontaneous riot about a movie
  *  If I had a son
  *  I will put an end to the type of politics that "breeds division, conflict and cynicism"
  *  You didn't build that!
  *  I will restore trust in Government
  *  The Cambridge cops acted stupidly
  *  The public will have 5 days to look at every bill that lands on my desk
  *  It's not my red line - it is the world's red line
  *  Whistle blowers will be protected in my administration
  *  We got back every dime we used to rescue the banks and auto companies, with interest
  *  I am not spying on American citizens
  *  The Health Care Act (Obama Care) will be good for America
  *  You can keep your family doctor
  *  Healthcare remiums will be lowered by $2500
  *  If you like it, you can keep your current healthcare plan
  *  It's just like shopping at Amazon
  *  I knew nothing about "Fast and Furious" (gunrunning to Mexican drug cartels)
  *  I knew nothing about IRS targeting conservative groups
  *  I knew nothing about what happened in Benghazi
  *  I never lived with that uncle (finally admitted - on 12-05-2013 - that he DID know his uncle and that he DID live with him)
  *  I have never known my uncle from Kenya who is in the country illegally and that was arrested and told to leave the country over 20 years ago

And his biggest one of all:

  *  "I, Barrack Hussein Obama, pledge to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America."

Ethenol Fuels

So, bring on the discussion. A refresher on what people are saying about the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), E15 and issues related to mandates for ever-increasing ethanol use:

“For every false signal to the market that tells you to put corn on your land this year when you had wheat last year, that then distorts the rest of the commodity markets.” – Mike Brown, National Chicken Council

“When E15 was approved my industry and our friends in the marine industry and the automobile industry … said you can’t do this. You can’t reverse-engineer the marketplace, the legacy equipment, the legacy fleet, legacy automobiles, the refueling infrastructure and people, frankly, who use it. These people have fueled their products since the beginning of engines the same way. Everything that goes into the car goes into the (gas) can, what goes into the can goes into the chainsaw or the generator or the bass boat, the ATV and the mower. … What happens is, failure of one of those products not only is an economic failure, this is engine destruction. So the product is destroyed. … Regrettably, if your boat fails 30 miles offshore, your snowmobile fails out in the wilderness in inclement weather, your chainsaw engages while it’s in neutral – somebody gets hurt. ” – Kris Kiser, Outdoor Power Equipment Institute

“This issue affects chainsaws and chain restaurants. And so it’s very unique, a broad coalition. … We’re not anti-ethanol, we’re just asking for the free market to work.” – Rob Green, National Council of Chain Restaurants

“We have serious, well-documented and data-driven concerns with the safety of high ethanol fuel blends which have been proven to cause damage to marine engines. This damage puts consumers at risk and hurts manufacturers during a time of important economic recovery. The RFS is a broken law which sets unrealistic fuel mandates and requires a long term fix from Congress.” – John McKnight, National Marine Manufacturers Association

“The RFS has destabilized corn and ethanol prices by offering an almost risk-free demand volume guarantee to the corn-based ethanol industry. Domestic and export corn users other than ethanol producers have been forced to bear a disproportionate share of market and price risk. Ethanol prices should reflect the fuel’s energy value relative to gasoline, not a corn price that is both inflated and destabilized by the inflexible RFS. As corn is siphoned off to ethanol, animal agriculture is losing jobs in rural America.” – Joel Brandenberger, National Turkey Federation

“The American Motorcyclist Association remains committed to its members—and all motorcyclists—as we continue to support legislation that prohibits E15 fuel. The bottom line is that this decision certainly slows the unnecessary rush on bringing E15 fuels to market for at least the next year, but it doesn’t address the central issue that real-world motorcyclists face, and that is that no motorcycle currently on the road is approved for E15 use, and the risk of inadvertent mis-fueling is tremendous once it is available at the pump.” – Former U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, American Motorcyclist Association

“…the fact remains the RFS is a flawed policy that requires Congressional action. Even with a record corn crop expected this year, the damaging ripple effect of this defective policy has been moving through the meat and poultry complex for the past several years. The time for Congressional action is now.” – Mark Dopp, American Meat Institute

“Government studies show, at higher blend levels, ethanol's chemical properties cause corrosion, reduce fuel economy, burn hotter and can wreak havoc with fuel mixtures and injectors (in historic/legacy vehicles).” – Historic Vehicle Association “Chain restaurants aren’t all mega-corporations. Many are systems of small business franchises like the one my family owns. … The government picked winners and losers when they passed the RFS mandate. This mandate is costing me $20,000 to $30,000 per restaurant. It is blatantly unfair and we urge Congress to repeal it.” – Ed Anderson, Wendy’s franchise owner

“Ethanol has inherent properties that can cause corrosion of metal parts, to include carburetors and the degradation of plastic and rubber components. It can also reduce engine life and make them harder to start.” – Marv Klowak, OPEI member Briggs & Stratton Manufacturers of outdoor power equipment and their engines say they will not honor the warranty of a product someone has been running with E15. The reason? Besides the above effects of ethanol, engines running even E10 gasoline run hotter. And with E15, the results can be dangerous, considering reports of "unintentional clutch engagement"—such as a powered-up chain saw that suddenly decides, because it's running so hot, that you've pressed the button to start the chain. Manufacturers see a train wreck coming because their customers will ultimately blame them for problems. – Consumer Reports.org

“The corn-based ethanol program and the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) continue taking their toll on the baking industry and consumers. Corn-based ethanol has accelerated the decrease of wheat acreage in the U.S. over the past 30 years and tightened food supplies around the world.” – American Bakers Association President & CEO Robb MacKie

 “When you have a type of fuel that, if inadvertently used, has the potential to damage engines and fuel systems and void a manufacturer's new-vehicle warranty, you really should move with caution when it comes to putting that fuel in the marketplace. Issuing rules that allow the sale of E15 at gas stations without adequate testing to be sure it's safe in motorcycles and ATVs, not to mention engines in boats and power equipment, just isn't wise.” – American Motorcyclist Association Board

Chairman Maggie McNally E10 fuel has 3% oxygen while E15 fuel has 5%-6% oxygen. On a typical marine engine, this additional oxygen makes the fuel burn hotter, and the higher temperatures can reduce the strength of the metallic components. In addition, ethanol can cause compatibility issues with the other materials in the fuel systems because of the chemical interaction. – David Hilbert, Mercury Marine

 “This is much bigger than just oil or ethanol. This is all about consumers – consumer choice, the ability to pick products that actually work in the products they use every day. … As the consumer enters the debate, this does need to be fixed permanently. … The Renewable Fuel Standard as currently constituted is forcing fuels on consumers that consumers don’t want, number one, and number two, are impacting their products – their cars, small engines, etcetera.” – Jack Gerard, President and CEO, API

- See more at: Energy Tomorrow

ThoughtsJustOffCenter:  AND the ethanol fuels are worse for the environment in all areas of consideration. Government Twits and Scientists on the "Government Dole" that just want to increase their control and pocket books.

Unenployment Numbers - OR called "Cooking the Books"

TJOC: Why do I always publish articles by Adrian Vance - because most of the time he is right on target with his comments concerning the situation.

- - - - -

It is amazing how long the American people, to say nothing of the journalists, and especially financial writers, stay silent with the monthly unemployment rate now officially said to be 6.3%.  The only places where that is true are the Bakken Oil Fields and states with Republican Governors who have cut taxes and driven wooden stakes through the chests of union thug bosses.

This month the Obama Administration claimed that 806,000 more people dropped out of the work force which then brought the unemployment rate down to 6.3% so they are celebrating?  This reads like the old jokes we used to tell about Communists in Russia twisting statistics in the Cold War days.  We have become pathetic.

Isn’t the statistic regarding whether or not people are employed and not whether or not they “dropped out?”  And, who says they dropped out?  Are there affidavits on file?  Would they not have accepted jobs?

Mr. Obama claims 288,000 new jobs were created in April, but 80,000 of those are replacements for people who died while employed and how many were 40 hour a week workers?  The new Obama work week is 35 hours or less.  How about the fact we create 330,000 new workers every month?
Like most of what comes from the Obama Administration this 6.3% is highly suspect.  Where we have 92,594,000 people not working of a workforce of 248,908,000 is not our real unemployment rate more like 37.2%?

Our numbers are official and have prisoners, mothers of children under 12, lottery and Publishers Clearing House winners subtracted from 2010 census figures.

The point of this is that we have a President who is running from reality for political purpose and gain.  He is either  ignorant, inept or insane and cannot define the problem to set his forces to work on it.  There is no solution forthcoming save removing Mr. Obama and we can only wonder how much longer the Democrats will put up with his numbers. 

 

by Adrian Vance, "The Two Minute Conservative"

Babies - One of God's Special Gifts

What the Environmentalists Get Wrong and How to Set Them Straight

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency justifies its new climate regulations on the claim that the “social cost of carbon” is $40 per ton—i.e., that every ton of carbon dioxide does about $40 worth of harm to the world through the next 286 years.

That’s right, 286 years—to A.D. 2300.

Imagine trying to forecast the impact of any of your actions that far in advance.

Wondering how to get started at it? Try figuring out what your ancestors in 1728 might have imagined your life to be like today. They couldn’t have foreseen the discovery of electricity, or the Theory of Relativity, or nuclear energy, or computers, or the use of petroleum to power vehicles.

Think you’re any better equipped to imagine the world 286 years from now? When technological advances occur orders of magnitude faster than they did 50 years ago, at which time they occurred orders of magnitude faster than 50 years before that, at which time …. You get the point.

Nonetheless, EPA thinks it can predict that far into the future, despite the fact that the “science” on which its predictions are based is highly contested by some of the world’s top scientists.

But let’s assume EPA’s claims of catastrophic, anthropogenic warming are true. Even so, their forecasts of the effects of CO2 emissions are junk—plain and simple.

As David W. Kreutzer and Kevin Dayaratna demonstrated, if you plug into EPA’s economic models for forecasting harm done by CO2 just two factors—a more realistic discount rate (how much more you value $100 today than in the future) and a more realistic estimate of climate sensitivity (how much warming comes from added CO2), EPA’s estimates of the “social cost of carbon” fall by over 80 percent and can even yield the conclusion that added CO2 does more good than harm.

And that’s without even considering the well-known benefit of added CO2 to plant growth. On average, plant growth efficiency rises by 35 percent for every doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentration. From 1961–2011, increased atmospheric CO2 added $3.2 trillion in food value, and it can be projected to add $9.8 trillion more from now to 2050.

EPA’s arrogant assumption that it can predict the future three centuries from now, coupled with the assumption that free people do more harm than good to the environment and their neighbors unless saintly bureaucrats micromanage their lives, leads to its formulating, and rationalizing, burdensome regulations.

TJOC: AND to the destruction of a proper way of taking care of "spaceship earth."