En mi opinión No382 5/11/2013 Editor Lázaro R González Miño

“En mi opinión”    IN GOD WE TRUST.

.No 382 Mayo 11 2013  Editor Lázaro R González Miño.  

“Feliz día de las madres”

http://player.vimeo.com/video/27920977?title=0&%3Bbyline=0&%3Bportrait=0href%3D

IRS admits targeting conservative groups. Ahora somos perseguidos politicos-economicos???

By Associated Press May 10, 2013 12:25 pm

        

WASHINGTON - The Internal Revenue Service inappropriately flagged conservative political groups for additional reviews during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status, a top IRS official said Friday.
Organizations were singled out because they included the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their applications for tax-exempt status, said Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups.
In some cases, groups were asked for their list of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases, she said.
"That was wrong. That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate. That's not how we go about selecting cases for further review," Lerner said at a conference sponsored by the American Bar Association.
"The IRS would like to apologize for that," she added.
Lerner said the practice was initiated by low-level workers in Cincinnati and was not motivated by political bias. After her talk, she told The AP that no high level IRS officials knew about the practice. She did not say when they found out.
Many conservative groups complained during the election that they were being harassed by the IRS. They accused the agency of frustrating their attempts to become tax exempt by sending them lengthy, intrusive questionnaires.
The forms, which the groups made available at the time, sought information about group members' political activities, including details of their postings on social networking websites and about family members.
Certain tax-exempt charitable groups can conduct political activities but it cannot be their primary activity.
IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman told Congress in March 2012 that the IRS was not targeting groups based on their political views.
"There's absolutely no targeting. This is the kind of back and forth that happens to people" who apply for tax-exempt status, Shulman told a House Ways and Means subcommittee.
Shulman was appointed by President George W. Bush. His 6-year term ended in November. President Barack Obama has yet to nominate a successor. The agency is now being run by acting Commissioner Steven Miller.

US

Huckabee: Benghazi Cover-Up Could Lead to Obama Impeachment

Friday, 10 May 2013 02:36 PM By Jim Meyers and Kathleen Walter

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee tells Newsmax that the Obama administration is guilty of disseminating "deliberate misinformation" regarding the Benghazi attack and continues to "stonewall" efforts to uncover the facts behind the tragedy.

The 2008 Republican presidential candidate also reiterates his earlier prediction that the Benghazi affair could lead to President Barack Obama's impeachment.

And he declares that the House "should do any and everything" to stop further implementation of Obamacare.

Huckabee is now the host of "The Mike Huckabee Show," broadcast on more than 200 radio stations, and a Fox News contributor. His latest book is "Dear Chandler, Dear Scarlett: A Grandfather’s Thoughts on Faith, Family and the Things That Matter Most."

Latest: Do You Support Giving Illegals Citizenship? Vote Here Now

On Thursday, House Speaker John Boehner demanded that Obama and administration officials turn over emails pertaining to the Benghazi controversy. In an exclusive interview with Newsmax TV on Friday, Huckabee was asked if the administration will be forced to be more forthcoming about what happened.

"They're going to have to," he says.

"They have been stonewalling since September of last year and they no longer can say, 'Look, we don’t want to turn this into an election-year issue,' because the election's long over.

"But it doesn’t mean that the interest in what happened in Benghazi is over. In fact, it's just beginning to really heat up and even members of the mainstream press who have done everything possible to ignore this story are having to pay attention, because as new information comes out and as the hearings really validated this week, there was deliberate misinformation that was given out by the White House and by the State Department as to what happened that night.

"We have a right to know, why did four people get killed, and we also have a right to know, why didn’t they tell us the truth about what happened that night?"

Story continues below video.

Earlier this week on his radio show, Huckabee predicted that the Benghazi "cover-up" will drive Obama from office.

He tells Newsmax: "Let me begin by saying that it's not my wish or hope. Some people presume that I sit around just licking my chops over the idea that the president would either resign or be impeached, but that is not at all something that I relish because I don’t think it's good for the country.

"It's good for the country for the president to step forward, tell the truth, lay everything on the table, and not only tell us what did happen, but tell us why they didn’t tell us this before.

"But if the White House continues to stonewall and this information ekes out little by little because reporters and members of Congress have to uncover it rather than it being opened up by the administration, then it could [lead to impeachment].

"I'm not saying it necessarily will lead to an impeachment, and without the Senate changing it probably wouldn’t lead to a conviction. But it could be that his term is over, not so much that he resigns or is impeached, but that he becomes just a completely inept president with no power, because once you lose credibility, you lose the power to govern.

"Rather than being a lame duck, he could well be a dead duck sitting in office, basically biding his time and not able to move anything forward."

Huckabee agrees with the more than 130 House Republicans who want to impanel a select committee to investigate Benghazi.

"There's a limitation on what these standing committees are going to be able to delve into," he says.

"Also, a select committee gives it a focus and a level of attention that, frankly, it does deserve, and I hope it happens.

"But the other thing that I hope happens is that the esteemed members of the Fourth Estate, those who are supposed to be the watchdogs of government, and I'm speaking of our national press, will begin to take their job seriously and not be apologists for the president, but begin to ask the serious questions objectively.

"True reporters and journalists are supposed to go after the truth wherever it takes them, or they lose all of their credibility."

Huckabee opines that the Benghazi affair "could have a big impact" on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's chances of gaining the White House in 2016, "not just in the general election but in the primary."

Huckabee also says he hopes the House and Senate will be able to reach an agreement on immigration reform this year.

"One of the concerns that I think we're seeing is whether or not they're going to put the securing of the border in front of any type of path to legalization. That's going to be very important, especially in the House," he says.

"People don’t want this issue to linger on. They don’t want people to live in the shadows. They don’t want to be punitive to people who come here.

"But we need to know who's coming, why they're coming, can they support themselves, do they have a communicable disease? Knowing that is an important part of immigration reform."

But Huckabee disagrees with those who say that if immigration reform doesn't pass, it will hurt Republicans at the polls.

"If the immigration legislation doesn’t pass and the reason it doesn’t pass is because Democrats insisted on open borders without any accountability, without any responsible pathway for people to catch up to the law, then I don’t think the American public or Hispanic voters who have come here legally, or are descendants of people who have come here legally, are going to hold that against [Republicans]."

The House votes again on repealing Obamacare next week, although a full repeal is nearly impossible considering that Democrats control the White House and Senate.

Asked if the House should simply use its budget controls and defund Obamacare, Huckabee responds: "They should do any and everything they can to try to stop this from getting so far implemented that we can't undo ourselves from what even Democrats like Max Baucus, who sponsored the bill, are now calling a train wreck.

"House Republicans have an opportunity to be heroes and to say this was legislation that shouldn’t have been passed. We may not be able to completely repeal it but we're going to stop this until we can get a president and a Senate in place that will stop the bleeding that is going to happen to the American economy, and to jobs, if this goes forward."

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/benghazi-huckabee-obama-impeachment/2013/05/10/id/503915?s=al&promo_code=1372F-1##ixzz2SvLL5Tq9
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

ABC Releases Big Benghazi Report: Talking Points Changed 12 Times, ‘Dramatically Edited by Administration,’ and Scrubbed of Terror References

May. 10, 2013 8:42am Jonathon M. Seidl

US ambassador for United nations Susan Rice and Brazilian Foreign Minister Antonio Patriota (out of frame) during a Press conference at Itamaraty Palace in Brasilia, on April 17, 2013. Rice is on a three-day visit to Brazil. Credit: AFP/Getty Images

The talking points used by Amb. Susan Rice on the Sunday shows on the weekend after the 9/11/12 terror attack in Benghazi underwent at least 12 edits –  including revisions by the Obama administration’s State Department — new emails obtained by ABC News show. Those revisions included scrubbing all references to an Al Qaeda-affiliated group and all references to previous CIA warnings about a terror threat.
From ABC:
When it became clear last fall that the CIA’s now discredited Benghazi talking points were flawed, the White House said repeatedly the documents were put together almost entirely by the intelligence community, but White House documents reviewed by Congress suggest a different story.
ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack.
White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department.  The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack.
ABC’s Chief White House Correspondent Jonathan Karl said on Friday morning that the talking points were “dramatically edited by the administration” and that State Department Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland played a major role in them.
From the report:
State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland raised specific objections to this paragraph drafted by the CIA in its earlier versions of the talking points:
“The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa’ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya.  These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks.”
In an email to officials at the White House and the intelligence agencies, State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland took issue with including that information because it “could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either?  Concerned …”
Karl explained the new information:
In a addition, a new report by the Weekly Standard says then-CIA director David Petraeus “was surprised when he read the freshly rewritten talking points an aide had emailed him in the early afternoon of Saturday, September 15″:
Before circulating the talking points to administration policymakers in the early evening of Friday, September 14, CIA officials changed “Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda” to simply “Islamic extremists.” But elsewhere, they added new contextual references to radical Islamists. They noted that initial press reports pointed to Ansar al Sharia involvement and added a bullet point highlighting the fact that the agency had warned about another potential attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in the region. “On 10 September we warned of social media reports calling for a demonstration in front of the [Cairo] Embassy and that jihadists were threatening to break into the Embassy.” All told, the draft of the CIA talking points that was sent to top Obama administration officials that Friday evening included more than a half-dozen references to the enemy​—​al Qaeda, Ansar al Sharia, jihadists, Islamic extremists, and so on.
The version Petraeus received in his inbox Saturday, however, had none. The only remaining allusion to the bad guys noted that “extremists” might have participated in “violent demonstrations.”
In an email at 2:44 p.m. to Chip Walter, head of the CIA’s legislative affairs office, Petraeus expressed frustration at the new, scrubbed talking points, noting that they had been stripped of much of the content his agency had provided. Petraeus noted with evident disappointment that the policymakers had even taken out the line about the CIA’s warning on Cairo. The CIA director, long regarded as a team player, declined to pick a fight with the White House and seemed resigned to the propagation of the administration’s preferred narrative. The final decisions about what to tell the American people rest with the national security staff, he reminded Walter, and not with the CIA. [Emphasis added]
All of the information doesn’t seem to bode well for Press Secretary Jay Carney, who said back in November that only a “single adjustment” had been made.
“Those talking points originated from the intelligence community.  They reflect the IC’s best assessments of what they thought had happened,” Carney said on November 28, 2012.  “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate.”

State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland listens to US Secretary of State John Kerry and Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida speak to the press prior to a meeting at the State Department in Washington on February 22, 2013. Credit: AFP/Getty Images 

Still, Carney is standing by the remarks, and now seems to be carefully clarifying the difference between the White House and the “administration” and noting the CIA still signed off on them.
“The CIA drafted these talking points and redrafted these talking points,” Carney told ABC. “The fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this, but the only edits made by anyone here at the White House were stylistic and nonsubstantive. They corrected the description of the building or the facility in Benghazi from consulate to diplomatic facility and the like. And ultimately, this all has been discussed and reviewed and provided in enormous levels of detail by the administration to Congressional investigators, and the attempt to politicize the talking points, again, is part of an effort to, you know, chase after what isn’t the substance here.”

Hillary Clinton Lied Under Oath – Now, What Is Congress Going To Do About It?…….

Posted on April 24, 2013 by sundance

It’s not a question of whether former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lied, she did.   But, again we knew that at the time - the latest information from the Congressional Hearing report only confirms it.

WASHINGTON DC - House Republicans released their report on the investigation into the Benghazi terrorist attack, having concluded that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was not telling the truth when she told Congress that she wasn’t aware that officials at the U.S. mission in Benghazi had requested extra security.

“The specific security requests pertaining to Benghazi, you know were handled by the security professionals in the department,” Clinton told Congress in January. “I didn’t see those requests, they didn’t come to me, I didn’t approve them, I didn’t deny them.”

The House report suggests that Clinton received a request for more security from Gene Cretz, who preceded Christopher Stevens as ambassador to Libya.

“On April 19, 2012, the response cable from the Department of State to Embassy Tripoli, bearing Secretary Clinton’s signature, acknowledges Ambassador Cretz’s request for additional security but instead articulates a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including the Benghazi Mission,” the House report says.  (read more)

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/04/24/hillary-clinton-lied-under-oath-now-what-is-congress-going-to-do-about-it/

Treasonous Obama To Charge 14 Governors With Treason?

May 10, 2013 by Breaking News 5 Comments

inShare2

It has been repeatedly reported on some of our websites that President Barack Hussein Obama is guilty of multiple accounts of treason against the people and Constitution of the United States. He has not been charged with any of his many crimes because he controls the US Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice (Holder is just as guilty of treason as is Obama). The rest of Congress seems too spineless or fearful to say or do anything about it.
But let someone else try to stand up against Obama’s crime syndicate and he’s the first one to start hollering treason.
It seems that a growing number of state governors are re-establishing State Defense Forces, also known as State Guards, State Military Reserves and State Militias. These forces are under the direct authority of the governor of the state and are not subject to federal control. They can be readily deployed in the case of any natural or man-made disasters.
As of 2010, 23 states and territories have organized State Defense Forces (SDFs) with approximately 14,000 people serving in them. SDFs were established by federal and state law at the very beginning of our country’s history. They have played important roles over the years in helping to defend our nation, however, due to many state budget deficits, SDFs are becoming a thing of the past.
The Heritage Foundation did a report on State Defense Forces back in 2010 and if you want to read more about their history, please click here.
Read More at godfatherpolitics.com . By Dave Jolly.

3 Reasons Benghazi Still Matters

May 10, 2013 by NewsEditor 2 Comments

inShare2

The House of Representatives’ Oversight Committee hearings about the September 2012 attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya have concluded…yet this is still an important story for Americans to follow. http://www.westernjournalism.com/3-reasons-benghazi-still-matters/

Increíble…Pero…Cierto…Las Tarjetas De Crédito No Van A Servir Para Adquirir Armas De Fuego... Ricardo Samitier.

Square es la PRIMERA QUE SE SOMETE y es un servicio que aprueba los pagos con tarjeta de crédito a través de sus teléfonos inteligentes. Esta mañana, envió un Acuerdo modificado del Artículo (23) de su contrato... diciendo que no permitirá y no aprobaran transacciones de armas de fuego, municiones y otras armas... (estoy seguro que las compañías de tarjetas de crédito sigan su ejemplo)

Ahora; mediante contrato, los banqueros tratan de eliminar que los usuarios de sus TARJETAS hagan el uso de sus derechos constitucionales con su DINERO... y es una  manera de eliminar el derecho a la SEGUNDA ENMIENDA constitucional.

Siguiendo esta lógica, la Constitución ya no importa cuando los banqueros la han eliminado. Los términos de los contratos de servicios bancarios serán supremo...

Un paso más y llegamos al Sistema Feudal... en que el señor feudal tenía el derecho a “DESVIRGAR” a todas las jóvenes de su FEUDO...

La Prensa Controlada Por Los Socialistas Y Homosexuales Censuran Las Noticias Sin Que La TV Y la Prensa Los Denuncie

Los Mundialistas quieren nuevamente DIVIDIR A USA...‏

IMPORTANTE: Obama Y Su “Grupo” Acaban De Enviar Una Carta OFICIAL A 14 Gobernadores Diciéndole Que No pueden Organizar Milicias...Lo Cual Es Permitido Por Ley

Barack Hussein Obama advirtió a los gobernadores de 14 estados, en Cartas de Seguridad Nacional (NSL) alertando a los gobernadores que solo el intento de formar "Fuerzas de Defensa del Estado" debe ser detenido "inmediatamente" o se enfrentarán al arresto por el delito de traición a la patria.

La organización y empleo de las NSL fue autorizado por la Ley Patriota introducido por George W. Bush. La sección que regula las cartas de seguridad nacional, prohíbe para cualquier persona que reciba una advertencia de NSL a reconocer siquiera la existencia de dicha comunicación.

Obama se enojó por los varios gobernadores de los estados que han restablecido estas fuerzas que se describen como "Fuerzas de Defensa del Estado.": (también conocida como Guardia del Estado, reservas militares del Estado, las milicias estatales) en los Estados Unidos son las unidades militares que operan bajo la exclusiva autoridad de un gobierno estatal, ya que no están regulados por la Oficina de la Guardia Nacional ni forman parte de la Guardia Nacional del Ejército de los Estados Unidos. Fuerzas de Defensa del Estado están autorizados por la ley estatal y federal y están bajo el mando del gobernador de cada estado. Las Fuerzas de Defensa del Estado son distintas de la Guardia Nacional de su estado, ya que el PRESIDENTE no las puede convertirse en las fuerzas federales ".

Obama es temerosa de estas Fuerzas de Defensa del Estado, en el que no tiene el control de dichas fuerzas, y con el Ejército de los EE.UU. se extendía hasta casi romper con múltiples despliegues y acciones teatrales en Irak y Afganistán, las fuerzas militares del Estado estarían bajo la mando directo y la autoridad de los gobernadores de los estados que han dicho las fuerzas. En esencia, los Gobernadores tendrían "control de facto" de los Estados Unidos.

Los dos gobernadores que lideran este movimiento son: Tim Pawlenty, gobernador de Minnesota, y Rick Perry, gobernador de Texas. Ambos gobernadores estatales han declarado que tienen: "... el miedo profundo que el Presidente está destruyendo a su nación." Miedo a la Obama del gobernador Pawlenty es que desde que Obama asumió el cargo se ha apaciguado enemigos de Estados Unidos y ha evitado algunos de los aliados más fuertes de Estados Unidos, sobre todo Israel.

El gobernador Perry ha declarado que Obama está castigando a su Estado de Texas por el dumping decenas-de-miles de inmigrantes ilegales mexicanos a las ciudades y pueblos pequeños de Texas. Gobernador Perry más recientemente declaró: "Si Washington de Barack Obama no deja de ser tan opresiva, TexaS podrían sentirse obligados a renunciar a su ciudadanía estadounidense y separarse de la Unión."

Las Informaciones Son ¡ALARMANTES! Miami Dade Va A Tener Un Déficit De $50 Millones En Un Presupuesto De $6,000,000,000 Es Decir 0.080%

Los Politiqueros solo encuentran UNA SOLUCIÓN aumentar Los Impuestos...

Hasta ahora Que sepamos al AGUA LE VAN A SUBIR UN 8% y no se han atrevido

aun a anunciar las otros Aumentos...

Seguro estoy que van a sacar a la POLICÍA a poner MULTAS... es una forma de

Recaudación... el año pasado recaudaron 210 Millones en Miami Dade... 

Hay que actuar como CAPITALISTAS... pues somos un países capitalistas...

Los dueños de negocios privados lo primero que hacen es bajarse los sueldos

para SALVAR EL NEGOCIO...

Yo propongo”

UN 80% de rebaja a los “Profesionales Politiqueros Electos” no de los $6,000.00 de

Salario... sino de los $600,000.00 de Beneficios ADICIONALES que tienen y el

Personal (Sargentos Políticos) que tienen a sus ordenes...

Quizás los Miamenses debían de saber que los 11 Comisionados Y El Alcalde

cuestan $21 MILLONES DE DÓLARES anuales... y viajan de Vacaciones

disfrazándolas de viajes para promover los negocios de la ciudad... y para eso

llevan a sus esposas... aunque los dueños de negocios privados viajan SOLOS... 

Si no les conviene  “Que RENUNCIEN” PALABRA QUE ELLOS NO CONOCEN...

pues son una partida de GENTE que nunca han tenido un Empleo en la LIBRE EMPRESA...

TODOS HAN SIDO desde que salieron de la escuela... “Empleados del Gobierno”

Al resto de empleados gubernamentales... les recuerdo que el GOBIERNO es un servicio

Publico al pueblo... No es un negocio... y se supone que según ellos mismos dicen  es una “VOCACIÓN...”  Así que les rebajaría un 25% a las PERSONAS NO ELECTAS...

Si no Les Cuadra... Renuncien y busquen empleo en otros negocios PRIVADOS...y den

Como experiencia lo que han trabajado para el gobierno... ES DECIR NO TIENEN EXPERIENCIA.

Todo lo anterior es un chiste... Pues Ustedes... como yo SABEMOS que NO VAN A RENUNCIAR... NI LOS ELECTOS... NI LOS NO ELECTOS...

Obama to Charge 14 Governors with Treason?

10 May 2013 / 128 Comments It has been repeatedly reported on some of our websites that President Barack Hussein Obama is guilty of multiple accounts of treason against the people and Constitution of the United States.  He has not been charged with any of his many crimes because he controls the US Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice (Holder is just as guilty of treason as is Obama).  The rest of Congress seems too spineless or fearful to say or do anything about it.

But let someone else try to stand up against Obama’s crime syndicate and he’s the first one to start hollering treason.
It seems that a growing number of state governors are re-establishing State Defense Forces, also known as State Guards, State Military Reserves and State Militias.  These forces are under the direct authority of the governor of the state and are not subject to federal control.  They can be readily deployed in the case of any natural or man-made disasters.
As of 2010, 23 states and territories have organized State Defense Forces (SDFs) with approximately 14,000 people serving in them.  SDFs were established by federal and state law at the very beginning of our country’s history.  They have played important roles over the years in helping to defend our nation, however, due to many state budget deficits, SDFs are becoming a thing of the past.
The Heritage Foundation did a report on State Defense Forces back in 2010 and if you want to read more about their history, please click here.
According to a recent report, 14 governors have been working to reinstate SDFs in their states.  Governors Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and Rick Perry of Texas have been fronting the drive to get more states to re-establish their STFs.
The report goes on to say that each of the 14 governors have now supposedly received National Security Letters from the Obama administration demanding that they halt the formation of their SDFs or face possible charges of treason.  It seems that since Obama has drastically reduced the size of the military and their forces are stretched thin with troops still in Afghanistan and Iraq, that he is fearing rebellion from the states.  Further evidence of his fear of a rebellion or revolution is the fact that he has nationalized all of the state National Guard units.

Read more: http://MinuteMenNews.com/2013/05/obama-to-charge-14-governors-with-treason/#ixzz2Sv9Ko5PW

He aquí una de las noticias censuradas Desde Agosto del 2012 Y que ahora fue Distribuida solo por Fox News...

Floyd Corkins, el activista homosexual que entró en el vestíbulo del Family Research Council, en agosto de 2012 con una pistola semiautomática y una mochila con 100 rondas de municiones y 15 sándwiches de Chick-fil-A. Corkins... disparó e hirió al guardia de seguridad del Consejo de Investigación Familiar, Leo Johnson, que luego lo sometió con éxito antes de que fuera detenido.  Durante el interrogatorio del FBI, Corkins declaró que tenía la intención de "matar a tantos como sea posible y frotis de los sándwiches Chick-fil-A en las caras de las víctimas." Para Leer más sobre la AGRESIVIDAD DE LOS HOMOSEXUALES:  http://savingourfuture.com/2013/05/why-havent-these-homosexual-stories-been-reported/

ESTO LO PUSE AQUÍ PORQUE SE PARECE A LOS ARTICULOS DE RICARDO SAMITIER PERO NO ES DE EL. Esto lo envio J Caula. Espero que se diviertan>>>

What's wrong here -

"Good morning. We want to apply for a marriage license."

"Names?"

"Tim and Jim Jones."

"Jones?? Are you related?? I see a resemblance."

"Yes, we're brothers."

"Brothers?? You can't get married."

"Why not?? Aren't you giving marriage licenses to same gender couples?"

"Yes, thousands. But we haven't had any siblings. That's incest!"

"Incest?" No, we are not gay."

"Not gay?? Then why do you want to get married?"

"For the financial benefits, of course. And we do love each other. Besides, we don't have any other prospects."

"But we're issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples who've been denied equal protection under the law. If you are not gay, you can get married to a woman."

"Wait a minute. A gay man has the same right to marry a woman as I have. But just because I'm straight doesn't mean I want to marry a woman. I want to marry Jim."

"And I want to marry Tim, Are you going to discriminate against us just because we are not gay?"

"All right, all right. I'll give you your license. Next."

"Hi. We are here to get married."

"Names?"

"John Smith, Jane James, Robert Green, and June Johnson."

"Who wants to marry whom?"

"We all want to marry each other."

"But there are four of you!"

"That's right. You see, we're all bisexual. I love Jane and Robert, Jane loves me and June, June loves Robert and Jane, and Robert loves June and me. All of us getting married together is the only way that we can express our sexual preferences in a marital relationship."

"But we've only been granting licenses to gay and lesbian couples."

"So you're discriminating against bisexuals!"

"No, it's just that, well, the traditional idea of marriage is that
it's just for couples."

"Since when are you standing on tradition?"

"Well, I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere."

"Who says?? There's no logical reason to limit marriage to couples. The more the better. Besides, we demand our rights! The mayor says the constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. Give us a marriage license!"

"All right, all right. Next."

"Hello, I'd like a marriage license."

"In what names?"

"David Deets."

"And the other man?"

"That's all. I want to marry myself."

"Marry yourself?? What do you mean?"

"Well, my psychiatrist says I have a dual personality, so I want to marry the two together. Maybe I can file a joint income-tax return."

"That does it!? I quit!!? You people are making a mockery of marriage!!"

"John Bolton: Benghazi Could Topple Administration"

 -NewsMax

       Make no mistake... before the Benghazi hearings even started, damning details from witnesses, who were being intimidated into silence, started to leak... but those damning allegations were just the tip of the iceberg.

       An unprecedented and putrid cover-up of the highest magnitude is taking place... the rotting stench of which leads all the way to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. And finally, the American people are beginning to learn the horrendous truth.

       But... it's NOT going to be enough to simply expose the full truth of Benghazi-gate. Congress must ACT on the information... Barack Obama and other administration officials must be held accountable... and we need to make it clear to our elected officials, here and now, that we're expecting them to do just that.

Is It Possible? Could Benghazi-Gate Topple the Obama Administration?

       Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee said: "The highest levels of people in the United States government all the way up to the president knew that what they did tell us was not true. ... And when the facts come out, they will not be able to stand. They will have lost the right to govern."

       Former UN Ambassador John Bolton said: "This could be a hinge point for the Obama administration. It's that serious for them... And what we’ve seen leaked already from interviews the committee staff has done is DEVASTATING." [Emphasis ours]

       National Review chimed in: "The shaky edifice of lies that the Obama administration erected about Benghazi is about to collapse."

       Even Senator Lindsey Graham recently said: "Political manipulation is rampant here. The dam's about to break on Benghazi."

       But whether or not the dam actually breaks is up to each and every one of us... our elected officials must be made to understand that it's not enough to simply expose the truth to the American people... Barack Obama’s administration must be held to account and it's up to us to ensure that they simply don't let Benghazi-gate go away.

Did Obama Lie To Maintain A Campaign Narrative Or Did People Die To Cover Up Something Far More Sinister?

       If you've been listening to talk radio or watching Fox News, you've heard the opinion that the Benghazi lies were nothing more than an attempt by Barack Obama to advance a campaign narrative... That "Osama bin laden is dead and Al-Qaeda is on the run."

       But some believe that the issue is much bigger than that.

       Jay Sekulow with The American Center for Law and Justice recently wrote: "The Obama Administration's Middle East policy is in a shambles; it empowers and even funds radicals and terrorists, and it refuses to face facts. ... Now it may try to spin and lie even more to avoid accountability. Don't let them."

       Glenn Beck takes the accusation a step further and is claiming that the very same administration that ran a gun-running operation to criminal cartels south of the border also ran a gun-running operation to America's enemies:

       "I was told by a source last night that the gunrunning thing is a foregone conclusion, everyone in Washington, they all know it was gunrunning to Syrian rebels, which are now headed by the Muslim Brotherhood guy from Dallas, Texas."

       Retired Navy SEAL Billy Allman, who maintains connections with members of the Special Ops community went so far as to claim that Team Obama is trying to hide the fact that Libya is now the nerve center for weapons that are winding up in the hands of violent jihadists throughout the Middle East.

       And The New American has contended for months that Benghazi-gate is an attempt to conceal "the Obama administration’s full role in helping violent Jihadists [and] self-styled al Qaeda terrorists."

       Truth be told, the jury is still out on whether or not the Obama Regime is covering up foreign policy ineptitude or something far more sinister. But with each passing day, the administration’s story continues to crumble like a ton of bricks.

       And it is up to concerned Americans like you to ensure this story doesn’t die… That the full truth comes out and Barack Obama and his administration are held to account.

---

Use the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every Member of the Republican Leadership of the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. Or alternatively, send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every Republican Member of the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives.

Send My Blast Faxes

---

Yours In Freedom

Center for Individual Freedom
815 King Street
Suite 303
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703-535-5836
Fax: 703-535-5838

Preparémonos para el Cambio

---

Astroarqueología: Preguntas que permanecen sin respuesta: Objetos que siguen sin explicación racional Posted: 09 May 2013 12:08 PM PDT En varios artículos anteriores hemos tratado cuestiones relativas a este gran misterio: Los objetos fuera de lugar, o los denominados OOPARTS (Out of Place Artifacts). En este artículo, trataremos de exponer los hallazgos más relevantes y extraños que hemos seleccionado entre decenas de miles de objetos, fósiles y pinturas rupestres, para tratar de exponer hechos concretos, dataciones objetivas y bibliografía científica de soporte, equipos de investigación que  los analizan, con el fin de que los lectores puedan informarse, investigar al respecto, etc… 1.- Naturaleza de los hallazgos. El planteamiento general, conduce a localizar objetos, manifestaciones arqueológicas y/o hallazgos rupestres, o incluso fósiles que no deberían corresponder a los datos objetivos, pero que tras las oportunas pruebas de datación del Carbono 14, u otras análogas, se confirma la antigüedad de los objetos. En el caso de capas procedentes de períodos prehistóricos, no cabe duda que los objetos fósiles hallados, corresponden a la etapa respecto de la que el fósil es datado. Más controvertidos son los objetos aislados que han sido encontrados en conjuntos arquitectónicos, megalíticos o enterramientos prehistóricos, dado que no es posible saber con certeza si dichos objetos fueron colocados ahí con posterioridad al conjunto analizado, debido a los múltiples saqueos e interacciones externas. Por esa razón, la mayoría de estudios científicos, versa su atención en tres tipos de manifestaciones arqueológicas en las que no cabe duda de su antigüedad: Pinturas rupestres, Fósiles de capas prehistóricas y figuras antropomorfas esculpidas en materiales diversos. En todas ellas existe una datación objetiva, una procedencia concreta y de esta forma se desplaza inequívocamente el problema de la autenticidad a lo que, pudieran representar. Sólo de esta forma se despeja el debate de su autenticidad y se plantea, hacia el debate de su controvertida interpretación. 2.- Modalidades Seleccionadas y Cuya autenticidad está fuera de toda duda: De todas las examinadas, hemos seleccionado las siguientes, por su autenticidad y estado de conservación: a).- Las Pinturas Rupestres halladas en FERGHANA (Uzbekistán): El hallazgo fue realizado por Dr. Vyacheslav Saizev, y en 1972, fueron expuestas por Erich von Däniken en 1972, en su obra el Oro de los Dioses. La datación estimada fue de unos 5000 años de antigüedad. Tuvo muy poca difusión especialmente en la década de los 70. Tras diversas críticas y censuras, Jason Colavito, un conocido escéptico internacional en materia de arqueología, trató sin éxito de ridiculizar  el hallazgo,(1)en 2012  intentando convencer a la comunidad Científica Internacional que se trataba de una falsificación de dudosa existencia. Posteriormente, la Universidad de Washington, procedió a mantener la defensa de la autenticidad de la evidencia,(2) pese a los insistentes intentos de Colavito por desacreditarla, tal y como el mismo Colavito expuso en 2012. (3). Por tanto, su autenticidad está fuera de duda por el momento, tanto respecto a su datación, como a su existencia. Un análisis de los detalles del grabado rupestre: (Ampliación 1). (Ampliación 2). b).- La figura del astronauta de piedra en el complejo maya de Tical. (Guatemala) La figura está esculpida en piedra y forma parte del relieve de uno de los edificios del complejo de Tical.(4). En la misma línea, ver nota (2). en In Search of Ancient Astronauts” Classrom Support Services (Washington University). c).- Tornillo de 300 millones de años. El hallazgo fue publicado por la Revista Ogonek , en Diciembre  de 2008. Y puede verse el detalle del hallazgo, también en kosmopoisk.org. Durante la expedición de Chernobrov  y su equipo en la búsqueda de un meteorito caído en la región de Kaluga, uno de los miembros del equipo, reparó en un extraño hallazgo: Una roca que fue datada en 300 a 320 millones de años. En su interior, parece albergar otro fragmento de algo que parece un tornillo. (5). Poco después la comunidad escéptica consideró que el fragmento semejante al tornillo, podría corresponder a un fósil de la crinoidea, una conífera del período Ordovícico (480-440) millones de años. Seguidamente presentamos diversas imágenes de fósil de Crinoidea, procedentes del Ordovícico: Segmentos de Crinoidea: Puede verse que los fragmentos del tronco, presentan una fosilización estriada de forma horizontal, debido a los segmentos del tallo. Una sección del Tallo: Aunque la coincidencia es curiosa, el hallazgo presenta dos aspectos cruciales que descartan la posibilidad de que se trate de una Crinoidea: 1º.- Si la datación  del fósil es correcta (300-320 millones de años), no podría tratarse de una Crinoidea, sino de otra especie semejante que tuviera las estrías en espiral y no en horizontal, lo que no consta en los archivos, o no se conoce. La Crinoidea, desapareció 100 millones de años antes de la datación del fósil, hace  (480-440) millones de años. 2º.- El objeto del fósil, presenta un contorno con cabeza hexagonal y una base de Tuerca con tope, lo que unido a una configuración espiral de las estrías, que son en pico y no romas como la Crinoidea, hace que la comunidad científica descarte la Crinoidea, como explicación del fósil. Fundación EticoTaku 2013 ——–Notaciones del artículo——- (1).-El Intento de descrédito en 2012 del hallazgo del Dr.Saizev. La cuestión del descrédito, se basaba en un argumento “ad hominem” de Colavito,  en su web escéptica personal (ver) consistente en argumentar que el propio Saizev, había reconocido que el hallazgo era falso en privado, aunque declaraba su autenticidad, en público.  (Algo que siempre sucede en este tipo de evidencias arqueológicas incómodas). (2).-Ver “ In Search of Ancient Astronauts” Classrom Support Services (Washington University) Leer textualmente: “interviews with eminent scientists discussing the pros and cons of the theory are interspersed with startling visual evidence of mysteries which might be explained by such a visit. The theories put forth in 2001 are supported in a scientific manner.” (3).-Colavito, cita al final de su artículo su opinión personal: “ Sadly, this case of ancient astronaut fraud continues to be repeated down to this very day as fact despite its obviously fraudulent nature.”  (4).-Ver archivo de documentos del Canal Historia.  (5).-Ver 16-05-2010) Detalle del informe. Datación, tamaños y cuestiones conexas. También en la Revista Revista Ogonek. (6).-Ver Detalle de Crinoideos. fundacion-eticotaku.org Mas información sobre los objetos OOPARTS: Artefactos de Civilizaciones Desconocidas: Klaus Dona

Extraña Esfera Turquesa ¿Qué Oculto Misterio Esconderá Ante su Aparente Soledad? Posted: 09 May 2013 11:14 AM PDT Poema o poesía, es lo que he pretendido expresar en las siguientes líneas. Reconozco que lo he pensado dos veces el compartirlo o no, en el blog, con todos ustedes. Y por qué no, me dije, cierto es que nada tiene que ver con la temática expuesto en él, pero bueno, ¿no es otra forma que tiene el alma de sentir lo que siente compartiendo sentimientos en forma de palabras? Con motivo a un proyecto humanitario, al cual he sido invitado, lo escribí hace unos días. Consciente de que la poesía no es lo mío, al menos, mi intención ha sido, solo, el de aportar, a la causa, mi pequeño granito de arena. Ahí va eso... Esfera Turquesa ¡Oh, extraña esfera turquesa! La leyenda cuenta que eres bella y dulce a la vez, y todo el mundo dice que eres difícil encontrar. ¡Oh, extraña esfera turquesa! La leyenda cuenta que eres dura en tu interior y aterciopelada tu piel, mas todo el mundo decía lo difícil que eras encontrar. Y sin embargo, al fin verte, tan solo me ha llevado una eternidad. ¡Oh, extraña esfera turquesa! ¿Por qué te haces tan difícil buscar? Si todas las almas te desean experimentar. ¡Oh, extraña esfera turquesa! Aquí estoy, temblando, mientras presencio tu hermosura, esperando mi preciso momento, a que haya un nuevo cuerpo preparado para la aventura. ¡Oh, extraña esfera turquesa! ¡Ya me encuentro dentro de ti!, y a punto de ver tu luz estoy. ¡Oh, extraña esfera turquesa! ¿Por qué mis ojos sienten tanto dolor al ver la vida de mis hermanos? ¡Pues todos como yo deseaban vivir en tu halo! ¡Oh, extraña esfera turquesa! Que confuso y loco mundo éste. Algunos mucho tienen e infeliz sienten su alma; otros nada poseen y placidez rebosan sus miradas. Mas, sin embargo, un grotesco y ridículo proceder mis ojos ven, pues, ante pobres y miserables desgraciados, muchas son las ostentosas miradas que no quieren ver. ¡Oh, extraña esfera turquesa! Que singular y al tiempo absurda es la vida que acoges en tus entrañas, toda una eternidad para encontrarte, para al fin saber que quizás me equivoqué al buscarte, pues ahora mi alma no siente alivio, sino deseo de abandonarte. ¡Oh, extraña esfera turquesa! Quizás no esté preparado para vivir en este mundo. O quizás ya lo haya estado, y mis recuerdos no me lo contaron. ¡Oh, extraña esfera turquesa! Y ahora aquí, sin aliento, me encuentro clavado de pies y mano, y en una estaca me siento sangrar y crucificado, por el solo y simple hecho de predicar AMOR entre hermanos. ¡Oh, extraña esfera turquesa! Quizás regrese para terminar mi trabajo, o quizás no y lo deje en tus manos. ¡Oh, extraña esfera turquesa!

ROMMNEY HAD IT RIGHT...AND WAS CRUCIFIED FOR SAYING IT...READ THIS

This is excellent, but is a sad place to be. Please Read to the end.

We Are Not Coming Back

Please take a moment to digest this provocative article by a Jewish Rabbifrom Teaneck , N.J.
It is far and away the most succinct and thoughtful explanation of how our nation is changing. The article appeared in The Israel National News, and is directed to Jewish readership. 70% of American Jews vote as Democrats. The Rabbi has some interesting comments in that regard.

Rabbi Steven Pruzansky is the spiritual leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, New Jersey

"The most charitable way of explaining the election results of 2012 is that Americans voted for the status quo - for the incumbent President and for a divided Congress. They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence, economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility. And fewer people voted.

But as we awake from the nightmare, it is important to eschew the facile explanations for the Romney defeat that will prevail among the chattering classes. Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle.

Romney lost because he didn't get enough votes to win.

That might seem obvious, but not for the obvious reasons. Romney lost because the conservative virtues - the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness - no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate.

The simplest reason why Romney lost was because it is impossible to compete against free stuff.

Every businessman knows this; that is why the "loss leader" or the giveaway is such a powerful marketing tool. Obama's America is one in which free stuff is given away : the adults among the 47,000,000 on food stamps clearly recognized for whom they should vote, and so they did, by the tens of millions; those who - courtesy of Obama - receive two full years of unemployment benefits (which, of course, both disincentivizes looking for work and also motivates people to work off the books while collecting their windfall) surely know for whom to vote. The lure of free stuff is irresistible.

The defining moment of the whole campaign was the revelation of the secretly-recorded video in which Romney acknowledged the difficulty of winning an election in which "47% of the people" start off against him because they pay no taxes and just receive money - "free stuff" - from the government.

Almost half of the population has no skin in the game - they don't care about high taxes, promoting business, or creating jobs, nor do they care that the money for their free stuff is being borrowed from their children and from the Chinese.

They just want the free stuff that comes their way at someone else's expense. In the end, that 47% leaves very little margin for error for any Republican, and does not bode well for the future.

It is impossible to imagine a conservative candidate winning against such overwhelming odds. People do vote their pocketbooks. In essence, the people vote for a Congress who will not raise their taxes, and for a President who will give them free stuff, never mind who has to pay for it.

That engenders the second reason why Romney lost : the inescapable conclusion that the electorate is ignorant and uninformed. Indeed, it does not pay to be an informed voter, because most other voters - the clear majority – are unintelligent and easily swayed by emotion and raw populism. That is the indelicate way of saying that too many people vote with their hearts and not their heads. That is why Obama did not have to produce a second term agenda, or even defend his first-term record. He needed only to portray Mitt Romney as a rapacious capitalist who throws elderly women over a cliff, when he is not just snatching away their cancer medication, while starving the poor and cutting taxes for the rich.

During his 1956 presidential campaign, a woman called out to Adlai Stevenson : "Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!" Stevenson called back : "That's not enough, madam, we need a majority!"
Truer words were never spoken.

Obama could get away with saying that "Romney wants the rich to play by a different set of rules" - without ever defining what those different rules were; with saying that the "rich should pay their fair share" - without ever defining what a "fair share" is; with saying that Romney wants the poor, elderly and sick to "fend for themselves" - without even acknowledging that all these government programs are going bankrupt, their current insolvency only papered over by deficit spending.

Similarly, Obama (or his surrogates) could hint to blacks that a Romney victory would lead them back into chains and proclaim to women that their abortions and birth control would be taken away. He could appeal to Hispanics that Romney would have them all arrested and shipped to Mexico and unabashedly state that he will not enforce the current immigration laws. He could espouse the furtherance of the incestuous relationship between governments and unions - in which politicians ply the unions with public money, in exchange for which the unions provide the politicians with votes, in exchange for which the politicians provide more money and the unions provide more votes, etc., even though the money is gone.

Obama also knows that the electorate has changed - that whites will soon be a minority in America (they're already a minority in California) and that the new immigrants to the US are primarily from the Third World and do not share the traditional American values that attracted immigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a different world, and a different America . Obama is part of that different America , knows it, and knows how to tap into it. That is why he won.

Obama also proved again that negative advertising works, invective sells, and harsh personal attacks succeed. That Romney never engaged in such diatribes points to his essential goodness as a person; his "negative ads" were simple facts, never personal abuse - facts about high unemployment, lower take-home pay, a loss of American power and prestige abroad, a lack of leadership, etc. As a politician, though, Romney failed because he did not embrace the devil's bargain of making unsustainable promises.

It turned out that it was not possible for Romney and Ryan - people of substance, depth and ideas - to compete with the shallow populism and platitudes of their opponents. Obama mastered the politics of envy – of class warfare - never reaching out to Americans as such but to individual groups, and cobbling together a winning majority from these minority groups. If an Obama could not be defeated - with his record and his vision of America , in which free stuff seduces voters - it is hard to envision any change in the future.

The road to Hillary Clinton in 2016 and to a European-socialist economy - those very economies that are collapsing today in Europe - is paved.

For Jews, mostly assimilated anyway and staunch Democrats, the results demonstrate again that liberalism is their Torah. Almost 70% voted for a president widely perceived by Israelis and most committed Jews as hostile to Israel . They voted to secure Obama's future at America 's expense and at Israel 's expense - in effect, preferring Obama to Netanyahu by a wide margin.

A dangerous time is ahead. Under present circumstances, it is inconceivable that the US will take any aggressive action against Iran and will more likely thwart any Israeli initiative. The US will preach the importance of negotiations up until the production of the first Iranian nuclear weapon - and then state that the world must learn to live with this new reality.

But this election should be a wake-up call to Jews. There is no permanent empire, nor is there an enduring haven for Jews anywhere in the exile. The American empire began to decline in 2007, and the deterioration has been exacerbated in the last five years. This election only hastens that decline.
Society is permeated with sloth, greed, envy and materialistic excess. It has lost its moorings and its moral foundations.. The takers outnumber the givers, and that will only increase in years to come.

The "Occupy" riots across this country in the last two years were mere dress rehearsals for what lies ahead - years of unrest sparked by the increasing discontent of the unsuccessful who want to seize the fruits and the bounty of the successful, and do not appreciate the slow pace of redistribution.

If this election proves one thing, it is that the Old America is gone. And, sad for the world, it is not coming back."

The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.

Arturo Pérez-Reverte se desahogó ayer en Twitter y se quedó a gusto.

La Cultura, la Educación, la Sanidad, las clases altas, medias y bajas, expoliadas. Y el disparate administrativo-político-autonómico, ni tocarlo.

[“EMO” PONGO ESTO AQUÍ PORQUE SE LE PUEDE APLICAR PERFECTAMENTE AL CONDADO MIAMI DADE. QUE CLASE DE M…LRGM]

A ver si lo he entendido, señor presidente…

• Hasta por morirme debo pagar un 21 %…
• A ver si lo entiendo. Insisto.
• Alemania tiene 80 millones de fulanos y 150.000 políticos. España, 47 millones y 445.000 políticos. Sin contar asesores, cómplices y colegas.
• O en Alemania faltan políticos, o aquí sobran.
• Si en Alemania faltan, apenas tengo nada que decir. Si en España sobran, tengo algunas preguntas. Señor presidente.
• ¿Para qué sirven 390 senadores (con la brillantez media y la eficacia política media de un Iñaki Anasagasti, por ejemplo)?
• ¿Para qué sirven 350 diputados y 54 eurodiputados? ¿Nos apañaríamos peor de lo que estamos con la mitad? ¿Me lo dice en serio?
• ¿Para qué sirven 74.000 alcaldes y concejales, cada cual con su paquete adosado de asesores de ambos sexos y sexas?
• Subpregunta: si un concejal de Villacantos del Botijo, por ejemplo, necesita contratar a 15 asesores…
• ¿Para qué puñetas sirve ese concejal, aparte de para dar de comer a numerosos compadres y parientes?
• ¿Para qué sirven 1.206 parlamentarios autonómicos y 1.031 diputados provinciales? ¿Sabe usted lo que cobra toda esa gente? ¿Y lo que come?
• Ese tinglado regional, repartido en diecisiete chiringuitos distintos, duplicados, nos cuesta al año 90.000 millones de euros.
• Con ahorrar sólo la mitad… Eche usted cuentas, señor presidente. Que yo soy de Letras.
• En vista de eso,¿cómo es posible que el Gobierno de este putiferio de sanguijuelas y sanguijuelas se la endiñe a las familias y no a ellos?
• Que en vez de sangrar a esa chusma, se le endiñe a la Dependencia, a la Sanidad, a la Educación, a la Cultura, al pequeño comercio?
• ¿A la gente que de verdad lucha y trabaja, en vez de a esa casta golfa, desvergonzada y manifiestamente incompetente?
• A ese negocio autonómico absurdo e insostenible, del que tanta gentuza lleva viviendo holgadamente desde hace más de treinta años.
• 17 parlamentos, 17 defensores del pueblo, embajadas propias, empresas, instituciones. Negocios casi privados(o sin casi)con dinero público.
• El único consuelo es que a esa pandilla depredadora la hemos ido votando nosotros. No somos inocentes. Son proyección y criaturas nuestras.
• Treinta años engordándolos con nuestras imbecilidad y abulia política. Cuando no con complicidad ciudadana directa: Valencia, Andalucía…
• Con unos tribunales de Justicia cuando no politizados o venales, a menudo lentos y abúlicos. El golfo, impune. Y el ciudadano, indefenso.
• Esos políticos de todo signo (hasta sindicalistas,rediós) puestos en cajas de ahorros para favorecer a partidos y amiguetes. Impunes, todos.
• Me creeré a un presidente de Gobierno, sea del color que sea, cuando confiese públicamente que este Estado-disparate es insostenible.
• Cuando alguien diga, señor pesidente, mirándonos a los ojos, “voy a luchar por un gran pacto de Estado con la oposición”
• “Me voy a cargar esta barbaridad, racionalizándola, reduciéndola, controlándola, adecuándola a lo real y necesario”.
• “Voy a desmontarles el negocio a todos los que pueda. Y a los que no pueda, a limitárselo al máximo. A lo imprescindible”
• “Aquí hay dos autonomías históricas que tendrán algo más de cuartelillo, dentro de un orden. Y el resto, a mamarla a Parla”.
• “Y el que quiera entrar en política para servir al pueblo, que se lo pague de su bolsillo”.
• Pero dudo que haga eso, señor presidente. Es tan prisionero de su propia chusma político-autonómica como el Pesoe lo es de la suya.
• Ese toque de jacobinismo es ya imposible.
• Tiene gracia. No paran de hablar de soberanía respecto a Europa quienes son incapaces de ejercerla en su propio país. Sobre sus políticos.
• Dicho en corto, señor presidente: no hay cojones.
• Seguirán pagándolo los mismos, cada vez más, y seguirán disfrutándolo los de siempre. El negocio autonómico beneficia a demasiada gente.
• Usted, señor presidente, como la oposición si gobernara, como cualquiera que lo haga en España, seguirá yendo a lo fácil.
• A cargar a una población triturada,con cinco millones de parados,lo que no se atreven a cargar sobre sus desvergonzados socios y compadres.
• Seguirá haciéndonos aun más pobres, menos sanos, menos educados. Hasta el ocio para olvidarlo y la cultura para soportarlo serán imposibles.
• Así que cuando lo pienso, a veces se me va la olla y me veo deseando una intervención exterior.
• Que le vayan a frau Merkel con derechos históricos, defensores del pueblo, inmersiones lingüísticas, embajadas y golferías autonómicas.
• De tanto reírse, le dará un ataque de hipo. De hippen, o como se diga allí.
• Lo escribía el poeta Cavafis en “Esperando a los bárbaros”. Quizá los bárbaros traigan una solución, después de todo.
• Para esto, que nos invadan los bárbaros de una puta vez. Que todo se vaya al carajo y el Sentido Común reconozca a los suyos. Si quedan.
• Recristo. Qué a gusto me he quedado esta tarde, señor presidente.
• Lola acaba de abrir el bar. Esta noche me emborracho.Como Gardel en el tango.

.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

Para comentarios, sugerencias, aportes, artículos, noticias, opiniones, ideas, o sugerencias enviarlos a los e-mails:

LazaroRGonzalez@hotmail.com,

LazaroRGonzalez@gmail.com,      

Para leer o revisar publicaciones anteriores ir a los Blogs:

MrLazaroRGonzalez.blogspot.com,

EnMiOpinionLazaroRGonzalez.blogspot.com,

RomelBPaz1@wordpress.com,

Para ver nuestros Flash en Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/lazarorg?ref=tn_tnmn

.  “EN MI OPINION”  .

 “THE FREEDON NEVER IS FREE”  Editor Lázaro R González Miño.