No 597 “En mi opinión” Febrero
18, 2014
“IN GOD WE TRUST” Lázaro
R González Miño Editor
-IN CASE OF GOVERNMENT
TYRANY-
“USE THE SECOND
AMENDMENT”
American National Guard Training Against American 2nd
Amendment Supporters
The Ohio National Guard released this statement:
“In January 2013,
Ohio National Guard 52nd Civil Support Team members participated in a one-day
training exercise in Portsmouth that was created and run by the West Virginia
National Guard. The exercise--one of more than 20 the team did last year was
designed to test team members' ability to respond to an unknown chemical,
biological, radiological or high-yield explosive incident. To maximize the
realism of the exercise, the Ohio National Guard wasn't involved in the
creation or execution of the exercise's fictitious scenario and was
deliberately not informed of its details in advance. It's not accurate to
suggest that certain details of the exercise somehow reflect views or opinions
of officials of the Ohio National Guard.”
By: Jesse Hathaway
Documents from an
Ohio National Guard (ONG) training drill conducted last January reveal the
details of a mock disaster where Second Amendment supporters with
“anti-government” opinions were portrayed as domestic terrorists.
The ONG 52nd Civil
Support Team training scenario involved a plot from local school district
employees to use biological weapons in order to advance their beliefs about
“protecting Gun Rights and Second Amendment rights.” http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/02/13/american-national-guard-training-against-american-2nd-amendment-supporters?cmpid=NL_foxnation
Ohio National Guard Shifts Blame for
Questionable Training Drill
Ohio National Guard 52nd Civil Support Team
Responding to Media
Trackers reporting, the Ohio National Guard (ONG) has denied involvement in the
planning and execution of a training drill where Second Amendment supporters
with “anti-government” views were depicted as domestic terrorists.
Documents “found” during a 52nd Civil Response Team drill tie the
fictional terror cell to right-wing extremism
In the disaster-preparedness exercise conducted in January 2013, local police responded to
reports of gunfire at the Portsmouth Junior High School.
Police discovered that the school’s janitor had been shot multiple times
by an unknown assailant.
Police called the ONG 52nd Civil Support Team after discovering that the
victim and the school’s chemistry teacher were members of an “anti-government
movement” planning to “cause harm to the community.”
Local news reported that during the drill, documents were found
identifying the terrorists’ motive as “protecting Gun Rights and Second
Amendment rights,” and Media Trackers provided
further context this Monday using ONG
documents obtained through an open records request.
On Tuesday, ONG issued a statement that the
exercise “was created and run by the West Virginia National Guard” and that
“the Ohio National Guard wasn’t involved in the creation or execution of the
exercise’s fictitious scenario.”
“It’s not accurate to suggest that certain details of the exercise
somehow reflect views or opinions of officials of the Ohio National Guard,” the
statement concluded.
“The fictitious scenario, created by the West Virginia National Guard,
was designed to provide a training environment in which to conduct the
exercise,” ONG wrote in a comment on the Media
Trackers Ohio Facebook page posted the same day.
“The 52nd CST conducts extensive training, and in training year 2013 the
team participated in more than 20 hazardous material response exercises in a
variety of locations,” ONG added.
During a previous interview with Media Trackers, ONG spokesman James
Sims II denied that the training scenario took place as described by internal
ONG documents, ending the interview when excerpts from the documents were
read to him.
Speaking about the drill in 2013, Portsmouth Fire Chief Bill Raison told the Portsmouth Daily
Timesthat the training was realistic, saying, “we forget
that there’s a lot of domestic terrorism.”
Raison told NBC 3 WSAZ-TV in Huntington, West Virginia that the drill
represented “the reality of the world we live in.”
While local and state officials have not apologized for participating in
a drill that portrayed Second Amendment supporters as terrorists, leftist
groups sought and received an apology in a similar situation last year.
In December 2013, the Athens County Emergency Management Agency (EMA)
and Athens County Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) apologized to anti-fracking activists who felt
unfairly targeted by a drill involving eco-terrorists. ONG’s 52nd
Civil Support Team also participated in the exercise.
Expressing regret over their “choice of scenario,” Athens County EMA
Director Fred Davis and Athens County LEPC chairman Dan Pfeiffer said in a
joint statement that “the scenario caused distress to people.”
“We strive to bring our county together and our standard is to remain
neutral on local issues. We fell short of that standard,” the statement
continued.
“There was no intent to offend any local group,” Pfeiffer told the Athens Messenger.
As Media Trackers has noted, disaster training
involving left-wing terrorism has a much stronger basis in reality than
training depicting Second Amendment supporters as terrorists
Amenper: Rand Paul para Presidente
Muchas personas
incluyéndome yo entre ellas, están viendo en Rand Paul un candidato que
sería muy adecuado para enfrentarse a Hillary Clinton en las
próximas elecciones presidenciales por su dinamismo y agresividad al presentar
sus argumentos.
El problema mayor de Rand
es su padre Ron y las implicaciones de la filosofía libertaria.
Los libertarios a través
de los años han sido unos buenos aliados por su motivación y agresividad en
exponer sus principios políticos, y coinciden con los conservadores en muchos
temas principalmente los temas económicos.
Para saber lo que piensa un
libertario moderno creo que lo más apropiado es oír lo que dicen sus
principales líderes como Ron Paul y Gary Johnson.
Hay coincidencias con los
conservadores, pero hay puntos preocupantes.
Por eso Rand Paul tiene
que defiinir su posición en las diferencias que no están de acuerdo con los
conservadores. No podemos condenar a un hijo de los pecados del
padre, pero tiene que explicar bien claro cuál es su manera de pensar.
Sabemos y lo admiramos a
él, a su padre y a Gary Johnson por su posición en cuanto a su firmeza en sobre
un gobierno pequeño. y sus creencia de que el gobierno debe
fomentar el libre mercado al permitir la libertad de las empresas a competir
sin restricciones
Compartimos sus ideas en cuanto a favorecer el desarrollo del sector
privado para energías renovables como la energía nuclear, y de viento, pero sin
oponerse a los métodos tradicionales como el gas natural el carbón y el
petróleo. Consideran que la mejor practica ambiente es una buena economía.
Que hay que revisar las políticas de imprimir dinero y aumentar la
deuda llegan y llegan hasta a pedir el fin de la Reserva Federal.
Creen los mercados libres y gobierno limitado son el fundamento de la
prosperidad. Se oponen a los subsidios gubernamentales a los negocios; que "eligen
los ganadores y perdedores," que es del consumidor privado este
trabajo, no del gobierno. Igual que los conservadores apoyan a
los tratados de libre comercio pero se opones a las tarifas impositoras. Creen
que el mercado de libre comercio corrige las inequidades entre
socios.
Se han opuesto al Obamacare, están a favor, como lo estuvo George W.
Bush, en la reforma de las demandas frívolas como un medio de reducir los
costos del cuidado de Salud.,
Consideran a los sindicatos que contribuyen a las campañas políticas
como una práctica peligrosa que debe de ser abolida.
Por todo esto y muchas otros puntos filosoficos tenemos que ver a los
libertarios y en particular a Rand Paul como alguien con el que tenemos muchas
coincidencias. Nunca ha hablado como su padre y otros libertarios de
las cosas que nos preocupan, pero es indispensable que exponga su pensamiento
sobre estos puntos discordantes, antes de iniciar una campaña
presidencial.
Su padre Ron Paul dijo durante un debate en la primarias que Cuba no va a invadir Estados Unidos , y que los
estadounidenses no estaban mirando debajo de sus camas, esperando este ataque.
Que era hora para iniciar la comunicación y las relaciones diplomáticas
con Cuba, diciendo que las posiciones de las personas han cambiado
dramáticamente en los últimos años, que hay que poner fin al bloqueo con
Cuba. Paul dice esto basado en su filosofía
libertaria que no debemos intervenir en la manea de pensar de otros
países. Los libertarios son enemigos del comunismo
domesticamente, pero no quieren ayudar a otros que lo sufren. No
tienen en consideración a los ciudadanos de Cuba que tienen su vida intervenida
por el gobierno. Por esta política de no intervención es que también fue uno de
los pocos que no votó por la guerra contra Iraq, y ahora considera que hay que
usar los medios diplomáticos con Irán y que no importa que tenga un arma
nuclear, que Rusia también la tiene y tenía armas nucleares cuando la guerra
fría y que Corea del Norte la tiene actualmente y no se habla de atacarlos.
Quiere recortar el presupuesto militar y el personal uniformado y
civil de las fuerzas armadas. Se opone a Guantánamo y el uso de tortura física
o psicológica a los detenidos por el terrorismo, que debe "darse debido
proceso mediante las cortes o tribunales militares y no deben ser detenidos
indefinidamente sin tener en cuenta los procesos fundamentales"
Gary Johnson en su
campaña presidencial, ttambién se ofreció a abrir
el comercio con Irán. declaró
que no cree que Irán es una amenaza militar y utilizaría todo su poder
presidencial para impedir que Israel ataque Irán. La politica exterior
libertaria es completamente entreguista.
Los libertarios repetidamente han comparado la actual la prohibición
de drogas a la prohibición del alcohol de la década de 1920. Dicen que "el
90% del problema de las drogas es relacionada con la prohibición, no
relacionados con el consumo".
Gary Johnson cree que la marihuana debe de ser legalizada, regulada y
gravada, "igual que el tabaco"
Johnson se opone a la construcción una valla o
muro a lo largo de la frontera con Méjico. Cree que gran parte de
los problema en la frontera mexicano-estadounidense problemas son debido a la
prohibición de las drogas, y que al poner fin a la prohibición de la marihuana
y la guerra contra las drogas acabaría con el 75% de los problemas lo largo de
la frontera.
El día 1ro. de Diciembre del 2011, Johnson expresó su
apoyo a la igualdad del matrimonio. Él cree que "negar esos derechos y
beneficios a las parejas homosexuales es discriminación, simple y
llanamente"
En 2013, Johnson fue signatario de un escrito amicus curiae presentado
al Tribunal Supremo, en apoyo a los matrimonios del mismo sexo durante
la caso Hollingworth v Perry.
Gary Johnson favorece una ley federal para legalizar el matrimonio gay
en Estados Unidos, en lugar de dejar la cuestión a los Estados individuales.
Estas cosas son las que Rand Paul tiene que aclarar.
Su juventud y su trayectoria política lo puede ayudar para separarse
de la figura de su padre.
Lo ha hecho en algunas ocasiones, y es suficiente por ahora, pero
tiene que cubrir toda los aspectos de la gama libertaria antes de aspirar a la
presidencia.
Tiene que poner de su parte, porque el espectro libertario lo
perseguirá en sus aspiraciones presidenciales, y tiene que hacerse el exorcismo
antes de comenzar la campaña..
Amenper: Las Familias –Son los Ladrillos que forman
Edificio Social-
Para nosotros los cubanos de mi edad, no nos es extraño el nuevo
pensamiento que cada día se hace más popular en la sociedad
americana. No nos es extraño porque este era el pensamiento
predominante en nuestra sociedad antes de que Fidel Castro lo hiciera la
doctrina religiosa de la revolución.
El capitalismo y la libre empresa son incompatibles con las normas
morales, la avaricia del capitalismo crea la explotación del hombre por el
hombre y la esclavitud de los pobres.
Nos vemos
ahora, como entonces, con la obsesión de estar tratando de explicar el hecho
que la verdad es todo lo contrario de esta creencia cada día más
popular. Las razones más fuertes para defender la libertad económica y la
economía de mercado están relacionadas precisamente con la moral.
Es la
libertad económica y la economía de mercado que requieren las normas morales
judeo-cristianas, no el sistema económico opuesto, ya sea con el nombre de
socialismo, comunismo, estado del bienestar social o algún otro
nombre para el colectivismo. Al mismo tiempo, la libertad económica y la economía
de mercado requieren valores morales para que funcione correctamente.
El Diccionario de Webster define el capitalismo como "un sistema económico caracterizado por la propiedad privada o corporativa de bienes de capital, por las inversiones que se determinan por decisión privada en lugar de por el control del estado y por los precios, la producción y la distribución de los bienes que son determinados principalmente por la competencia en un mercado libre".
El Diccionario de Webster define el capitalismo como "un sistema económico caracterizado por la propiedad privada o corporativa de bienes de capital, por las inversiones que se determinan por decisión privada en lugar de por el control del estado y por los precios, la producción y la distribución de los bienes que son determinados principalmente por la competencia en un mercado libre".
Cabe
señalar que todas las economías requieren de capital, es decir, los medios de
producción. La pregunta es ¿quién controla el capital?, ¿el sector privado
(capitalismo de libre empresa) o el estado (capitalismo de monopolio)?.
Capitalismo de libre empresa es un sistema económico basado en relaciones voluntarias no en esclavitud.
Capitalismo de libre empresa es un sistema económico basado en relaciones voluntarias no en esclavitud.
Unos de
los mandamientos de la cristiandad es "Honra a tu padre y a tu madre"
implica que la familia, no el estado, es la unidad básica social y económica de
la sociedad y debe ser el más fuerte.
A lo largo
de la historia humana, el más importante proveedor de bienestar social ha sido
la familia.
La
familia, provee para sus miembros enfermos y necesitados, para educar a sus
niños, para el cuidado de los padres y para hacer frente a emergencias y
desastres, ha hecho y está haciendo más de lo que el estado ha hecho o puede
hacer.
Una
sociedad caracterizada por la libertad económica es una sociedad dominada por
fuertes unidades familiares que se proveen su propio sustento. O sea igual que
el cuerpo humano está formado por billones
de células que se agrupan en tejidos, los cuales se organizan en órganos, la familia son las células de la sociedad. Sin familia no puede
haber una sociedad fuerte. La familia son los bloques que forman el edificio de
la sociedad. Sin familia no pudiera existir la sociedad.
Compare
eso con el socialismo, cuyos objetivos fundamentales, según lo declarado por
Marx en El manifiesto comunista, incluyen la destrucción de la
familia en los intereses de los colectivos más grandes:
El
matrimonio homosexual no está apoyado por el socialismo por amor a los
homosexuales, es simplemente un paso adelante para el objetivo final que es la
destrucción de la familia para fomentar el colectivismo.
¿Estoy
exagerando? Bueno, vamos a no seguir hablando, vamos a dejar que sea Karl Marx
en el manifiesto comunista, el que hable:
¿En qué
fundamento se basa el presente la familia burguesa? En el capital, en beneficio
privado. En su forma completamente desarrollada esta familia existe sólo entre
la burguesía. Pero este estado de cosas encuentra su complemento en la práctica
ausencia de la familia entre los proletarios y en la prostitución pública. La
familia burguesa obviamente se desvanecerá cuando su complemento, el capital,
se desvanezca, y ambos desaparecerán con la fuga de los capitales”.
.No
existen personas que se engañan con los cantos de sirenas del socialismo, sólo
existen personas que quieren dejarse engañar.
EL LATIGO DE
SAMITIER: La situacion en ITALIA... igual que
en USA conservadores y socialistas aliados en el congreso
INCREÍBLE… El PARTIDO GANADOR de las ULTIMAS
ELECCIONES... Lo Dejaron Fuera Del GOBIERNO...
La minoría POLITIQUERA... de conservadores y comunistas SE
ALIARON y se han repartido
los MINISTERIOS y puestos, del nuevo gobierno y al
PARTIDO MAS VOTADO... LO DEJARON
FUERA...
Mientras El Pueblo Italiano Y Su Economía Se Desploman,
Italy’s Unemployment Soars to Record
High on Recession
Italy’s jobless rate rose more than
forecast in September to an all-time high as companies failed to hire amid
concerns about the persisting recession,
the longest since World War II.
|
Should a cop killer's advocate be
appointed by obama to the DOJ?. By Washington Times
(DC)
The battle over
President Obama's nominee for the top civil-rights job at the Justice
Department is shifting to Sen. Robert P. Casey, Pennsylvania Democrat, a friend
of the president who faces fierce home-state opposition to the nominee for
taking on the cause of a notorious cop-killer.
Mr. Casey is expected to meet this week with members
of the Fraternal Order of Police, a group vehemently opposed to the nomination
of Debo Adegbile to become the next assistant attorney general for civil
rights. Mr. Adegbile was chief of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund in 2009 when
that group worked to prevent a death sentence for Mumia Abu-Jamal, convicted of
murdering Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner in 1981.
The Senate Judiciary Committee, where Mr. Adegbile has
been serving as senior counsel, approved his nomination last week on a straight
party-line vote of 10-8. With Republicans no longer able to filibuster
nominees, they'd need to pick up six Democrats to stop the nomination on the
floor, and Mr. Casey is one of their most likely targets.
Casey spokesman John Rizzo said Thursday the senator
hasn't made up his mind whether to support the nomination.
"The vicious murder of Officer Faulkner in the
line of duty haunts his family and the people of Philadelphia to this
day," Mr. Rizzo said in a statement. "Senator Casey believes that
every person nominated by the president of the United States for a high level
position such as assistant attorney general for civil rights should be given
fair and thoughtful consideration as each senator discharges the responsibility
of 'advise and consent.' Therefore, Senator Casey will meet both with members
of the Fraternal Order of Police as well as Mr. Adegbile himself before making
a final decision."
Mr. Casey met last week with the nominee, whom Mr.
Obama is counting on to lead the administration's fight to defend and expand
voting rights. The senator is caught between the expectations of the president,
his friend and sometime basketball teammate; and influential people in his home
state who oppose Mr. Adegbile's nomination, including the Democratic district
attorney of Philadelphia, the city's police union and Pennsylvania Gov. Tom
Corbett, a Republican.
Another person hoping Mr. Casey will vote
"no" is his colleague, Sen. Patrick J. Toomey, Pennsylvania
Republican, who took to the Senate floor Wednesday with a poster-sized
photograph of Officer Faulkner to rally opposition against the nomination.
Mr. Toomey said Mr. Adegbile and his staff at the
Legal Defense Fund "spread misinformation" about Abu-Jamal's trial
and "blocked justice for Danny Faulkner and Danny Faulkner's family."
"These LDF lawyers promoted the myth that Mumia
Abu-Jamal was somehow a heroic political prisoner, that he was framed,"
Mr. Toomey said. "In fact he was a coward and an unrepentant murderer. I
do not believe that Mr. Adegbile's nomination is consistent with the goal of
promoting truth and justice in America."
Democrats are equally fervent in support of Mr.
Adegbile, a former child star on "Sesame Street," saying he is a
superb lawyer and highly qualified for the post.
"Debo is careful, he listens, and he understands
the importance of building consensus," said Judiciary Committee Chairman
Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Democrat. "Anyone who knows him understands that
he is a man of the utmost integrity."
Mr. Adegbile told the committee that his work on
Abu-Jamal's behalf "was about the legal process."
"It's important, I think, to understand that in
no way does that legal representation, zealously as an advocate, cast any
aspersion or look past the grievous loss of Sergeant Faulkner," he
testified.
Abu-Jamal, born Wesley Cook, is a former member of the
Black Panthers. From his prison cell, his rise as an international cause
celebre among liberals sometimes obscures the facts of Officer Faulkner's
murder, which are not in dispute.
In the early morning hours of Dec. 9, 1981, the
officer pulled over a car in Center City Philadelphia. The driver, who was Abu-
Jamal's brother, resisted arrest. Abu-Jamal, who happened to be nearby on the
street, approached Officer Faulkner and shot him in the back.
The officer fired a shot and wounded Abu-Jamal, but
not seriously. Abu-Jamal then stood over the fallen officer and shot him
several more times, including once in the face, killing him. The policeman was
25.
Police quickly apprehended Abu-Jamal at the scene. A
jury convicted him of first-degree murder and sentenced him to death.
Appeals dragged on for decades. In 2001, a federal
judge upheld the murder conviction but vacated the death penalty, ruling that
the jury had been improperly instructed.
After further appeals in which the NAACP Legal Defense
Fund assisted, and a ruling by the Supreme Court upholding Abu-Jamal's
conviction, Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams announced in 2011 that
prosecutors would no longer seek the death penalty. Abu- Jamal was removed from
death row in January 2012. He has exhausted all appeals.
Mr. Toomey said all criminal defendants deserve legal
representation, but said Mr. Adegbile's work on behalf of Abu-Jamal veered into
political advocacy.
"I do not believe that Mr. Adegbile's nomination
is consistent with justice for the family of Officer Danny Faulkner or for
anyone else who cares about the law enforcement community across this
country," he said.
A service of YellowBrix, Inc.
How Obama's Executive Actions Could Backfire on Dems -
and Be Suicide for ObamaCare
Obama’s executive actions can backfire on Democrats if
GOP takes the White House. Republican could dismantle his
law. By
Tom Howell Jr.-The Washington Times Sunday, February 16, 2014
President Obama's
repeated use of executive powers to ease the rollout of his health care law
could be setting the stage for Republicans to roll back the overhaul's most
controversial parts if they retake the White House in 2016, say analysts who
have tracked the law's shifting landscape.
The president has
tweaked or delayed Obamacare’s mandates on employers and individuals without
Congress on multiple occasions, each in a bid to put out a political firestorm
caused by the law’s rocky rollout.
Although he is taking
advantage of discretion built into the Affordable Care Act of 2010, those
executive powers also would give “a future President Rand [Paul] or other ACA
opponent room to throw a monkey wrench into the works and help try to dismantle
the law from the inside,” said I. Glenn Cohen, a health policy analyst at
Harvard Law School.
“That said, it was
not the president’s decision to delay parts of implementation, so much as the
design of the legislation itself, that leaves open this possibility,” he said.
Whether or not Mr.
Obama is insulated by the law’s text, Republicans have portrayed Mr. Obama as
an imperial leader with little regard for the legislative process. Most
recently, Republican leaders ripped into the Obama administration for pumping
the brakes on a mandate that requires large businesses to insure full-time
employees or pay fines.
The Treasury last
week said midsize companies now have until 2016 to comply with the employer
mandate, and businesses with 100 or more workers will have more time to comply.
The White House previously delayed the rule’s implementation from the start of
this year to 2015.
“The president is
setting a very dangerous precedent, as are the congressional Democrats who
condone it,” said Brendan Buck, a spokesman for House Speaker John A. Boehner,
Ohio Republican.
Is the Tea Party’s Dream an Illusion? By PATRICK J. BUCHANAN • February 14, 2014, 12:05 AM
“There is no education
in the second kick of a mule,” said Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.
With some such thought
in mind, Speaker John Boehner strode to the floor of the House to offer a
“clean” debt ceiling bill and relied on Nancy Pelosi’s Democrats to pass it.
They did. ”Surrender” and “betrayal,” are among the epithets coming the
Speaker’s way.
Yet Boehner was holding
a losing hand. Had he added a GOP wish-list bill to the debt ceiling, Harry
Reid’s Senate would have rejected it. President Obama would have denounced it
as putting at risk the full faith and credit of the United States. Big
Media would have piled on. The markets would have been rattled. The Dow would
have begun to swoon. Corporate America, cash cow of the Republican Party, would
have begun to howl. A clamor to pass a clean debt ceiling bill or risk a
new recession would have arisen. And the House Republicans would have caved, as
they finally had to cave on the budget bill last fall.
Rather than play Lord
Raglan and lead his cavalry in another Charge of the Light Brigade, Boehner
chose to withdraw to fight another day on another field. Yet, the Tea
Party has a right to feel cheated. When does the Republican Party, put in
power by the Tea Party, plan to honor its commitment to halt the growth of the
Federal monolith and bring the budget back into balance? Is there is any hope
things will be different, should the Tea Party help produce a GOP Senate in
2014? If the Tea Party is in some despair, is it not
understandable? For while there are countless proposals and plans to cut
back on federal spending, from Simpson-Bowles on, it is impossible today to see
in either party the political will to do the surgery.
Consider what would be
needed to roll back Big Government. First, the major entitlement programs Medicare
and Social Security would have to be peeled back. But any effort to raise the
age of eligibility, or reduce the benefits, or trim cost-of-living adjustments,
would meet with ferocious resistance, led by the AARP. Indeed, many Tea
Party members are themselves among those enjoying, or about to enjoy, the
benefits of these programs. Would they back cuts in either one? Democrats say
these programs must be expanded, and they will resist any cuts as fiercely as
the Republicans would resist any increase in payroll or income
taxes. Social Security and Medicare recipients number in the scores of
millions. Four million Baby Boomers reach eligibility every year now. That is
more then 10,000 every day. Is any party, even a GOP that controls the White
House and Congress, going to take on this army?
Consider that other
entitlement, Medicaid. Thanks to Obamacare, the number of beneficiaries of
Medicaid is soaring. And even should the GOP capture the Senate in 2016, a
Democratic minority would filibuster to death any bill to cut Medicaid. As
for interest on the debt, another major element in the budget, it has only one
way to go, up. For the Fed freeze that has held interest rates near zero for
five years must some day end.
Defense is the other big
item in the budget. But while the wind-down of our trillion-dollar wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan has made cuts possible here, most of these have already been
made. And this week the House voted 326-90 to repeal the small cut in the
COLA in pensions for working-age military retirees under 62, which was part of
the bipartisan budget deal last fall. Members of Congress panic at any
suggestion they are shortchanging the troops. Yet, since Y2K, the cost of
military personnel has doubled, while the number of those on active duty has
fallen by 10 percent. Last December, Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray,
in their budget deal, raised discretionary spending in 2014 from the $967
billion it would have been under the sequester to $1.012 trillion.
Invariably, bipartisan
budget deals between Capitol Hill liberals and conservatives move the ball
further toward the liberals’ goal line. The farm bill just signed by
President Obama contains a tiny cut in a food stamp budget that has exploded
during his days in office. But nice new subsidies are in there for peanut and
corn growers and producers of maple syrup. Embarrassed at what the House went
along with, not one Republican Congressman showed up at the signing ceremony.
Can it be that the Tea
Party’s dream of a balanced budget, and of a government that ceases to eat up
ever more of the GDP, is simply an act of self-delusion? Have the
beneficiaries of Big Government become so powerful that any champion of the
national interest who challenges them in fixed battle invites almost certain
defeat?
For today, America
appears to be maintaining speed, or even accelerating, toward that cliff that
they all warn us is out there.
From the desk of Ann Coulter
Dear reader of “En mi
opinión”
Taking control of the United States Senate in 2014 is one of our last chances to defeat President Obama's liberal agenda.
Electing a Republican Senator from North Carolina is critical to winning the majority, but only a real conservative can defeat Democrat Kay Hagan.
The latest polls prove it; Dr. Greg Brannon, the true conservative currently running in the Republican primary, is leading one of Obama's most reliable allies, Senator Kay Hagan.
Greg Brannon is pro-gun, pro-life, and he's a devoted husband and father.
And unlike his primary opponents, he refuses to support amnesty.
That's why I've proudly endorsed Greg Brannon's campaign for U.S. Senate.
He's running against a primary opponent backed by Washington special interests and he needs your help.
Greg's "AD Blitz" Money Bomb ends tomorrow night at midnight!
Will you make a generous contribution to Greg's campaign before tomorrow night's deadline?
Read Greg's letter below for more information about the campaign and why your contribution is desperately needed.
Thank you in advance for joining me and supporting Greg Brannon for U.S. Senate.
Sincerely,
Ann Coulter
Conservative Author
WND EXCLUSIVE
OBAMA'S 'BIG BREAKTHROUGH' COMING
BY END OF YEAR. Leaked:
Official declaration of Palestinian state AARON KLEIN
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry
TEL AVIV – The
Palestinian Authority received a pledge from the U.S. that by the end of 2014,
the Obama administration will issue an official written declaration presenting
general highlights of a future Palestinian state, a senior Palestinian
negotiator told WND.
The negotiator further said the goal is to have the general framework for a
deal ironed out by April.
The current framework
for an Israeli-Palestinian agreement being brokered by Secretary of State John
Kerry calls for the phased implementation of more Palestinian sovereignty
within three to five years, the negotiator said.
As part of the
written declaration, the U.S. is set to officially recognize Palestinian rights
in eastern sections of Jerusalem, without defining the exact territories that
would be eventually handed to the PA.
The U.S. will declare
on paper that the Jordan Valley territory is “occupied” by Israel and that
Palestinians have rights there, the negotiator said.
Kerry is currently
discussing a proposal in which Israel would lease some of the Jordan Valley
from the PA so some Israeli communities in the area can stay, said the
negotiator.
The written framework
will also declare the West Bank “occupied,” according to the negotiator.
Besides a declaration
on paper, Kerry continues to broker specifics of a final-status deal, the
negotiator said.
WND previously
reported that Kerry is asking for the international community to administer the
holy sites in the eastern section of Jerusalem, while details are still being
discussed about whether Palestinians will have some symbolic presence in the
area.
WND in December was
first to report Kerry’s plan
calling for an international administrative mandate to control holy sites in
eastern Jerusalem.
The exact composition
of the international mandate is up for discussion, but Kerry’s plan recommended
a coalition that includes the Vatican and a group of Muslim countries such as
Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
The international
arrangement is being proposed as a temporary solution for about two to three
years while security arrangements in Jerusalem between Israelis and
Palestinians are finalized, said Israeli and Palestinian diplomatic sources.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/02/obamas-big-breakthrough-coming-by-end-of-year/#H5OV5foCfp6mfKvt.99
WND-TV
OBAMA GETS SATAN CUT FROM
'SON OF GOD'
Eerie resemblance too much
for producers to stomach
Some are comparing Satan from "The Bible" TV miniseries with
President Obama.
An eerie resemblance between Barack Obama and Satan in the upcoming “Son
of God” movie has prompted the film’s producers to completely banish the devil.
Roma Downey, who co-produced the film with her husband Mark Burnett,
says scenes with an actor who portrayed the devil but looked like the president
have now been edited out.
“It gives me great
pleasure to tell you that the devil is on the cutting-room floor. This is now a
movie about Jesus, the Son of God, and the devil gets no more screentime,”
Downey told the Hollywood Reporter.
The 20th Century Fox film, which opens Feb. 28, is mainly a reworked
version of 2013′s popular 10-hour TV miniseries titled “The Bible.”
As WND reported last year, Twitter exploded with comments from viewers
who noticed an uncanny similarity between the face of Mr. Obama and that of the
Satan character, played by actor Mehdi Ouzaani.
Media giant Glenn Beck was among the first to make the connection,
tweeting, “Anyone else think the Devil in #TheBible Sunday on History Channel
looks exactly like That Guy?”
Beck refers to Obama as “that guy,” having vowed not to utter the name
of the president in all of 2013.
Rush
Limbaugh held up a photo of the actor on his famous “Dittocam” to show viewers
that the Satan character was “a dead ringer” for Obama.
“Folks, it is uncanny,” Limbaugh noted, before quipping, “In light of
that picture … the question that sprang to everybody’s mind is: if Satan had a son,
would he look like the guy [in the White House]?”
Find
out everything you always wanted to know about the devil but were too afraid to
ask in the autographed besteller, “Shocked by the Bible,” or get “Shocked by the Bible” bundled with Joe Kovacs’
brand-new bestseller, “The Divine Secret.”
For this new project, Downey told the Hollywood Reporter she’s eager to
avoid a similar situation, even though Jesus and Satan both made their
appearance in “The Bible” miniseries during the same episode, so it would have
made sense that “Son of God” also include Satan.
“Someone made a comment that the actor who played the devil vaguely
resembled our president, and suddenly the media went nuts,” Downey said Monday.
“The next day, when I was sure everyone would only be talking about Jesus, they
were talking about Satan instead.”
She added: “For our movie, Son of God, I wanted all of the focus to be
on Jesus. I want his name to be on the lips of everyone who sees this movie, so
we cast Satan out. It gives me great pleasure to tell you that the devil is on
the cutting-room floor.”
When the devilish controversy initially erupted last year, both Downey
and her husband blasted those trumpeting the fiendish resemblance.
“This is utter nonsense,” Burnett and Downey said in a joint statement.
“The actor who played Satan, Mehdi Ouzaani, is a highly acclaimed Moroccan
actor. He has previously played parts in several biblical epics – including
Satanic characters long before Barack Obama was elected as our president.”
Downey added, “Both Mark and I have nothing but respect and love our
president, who is a fellow Christian. False statements such as these are just
designed as a foolish distraction to try and discredit the beauty of the story
of ‘The Bible.’”
The History Channel, which aired the series, added: “History Channel has
the highest respect for President Obama. The series was produced with an
international and diverse cast of respected actors. It’s unfortunate that
anyone made this false connection. History’s ‘The Bible’ is meant to enlighten
people on its rich stories and deep history.”
Burnett told TMZ the devil has stirred the pot and created a false likeness between Obama
and the TV devil.
Burnett believes the real devil is frightened that Jesus has now entered
the picture of life and is trying to distract from God’s message by creating a
false story.
“What could be more annoying to Satan than talking about Jesus?” Burnett
told TMZ. He added he’s confident the real devil’s plan of distraction will not
work, saying, “We believe in the light.”
This is not the first time some in the public have made a connection
between evil in the Bible and President Obama.
On Nov. 5, 2008, the
very night Obama was first elected president, the Illinois Pick 3
lottery number for the Evening Pick was 666, a number associated
with “the beast” mentioned in the Book of Revelation. Obama’s home state at the
time was Illinois.
In January 2013, WND reported how prophecy websites were having a field day with the worldwide
attention Obama received for sparring with a fly.
President Obama with a fly on his face in January 2013
News reports recounted Obama’s long history of attracting flies during
recorded interviews and speeches.
Religious and other websites used the headlines to point out that a
biblical reference for Satan, the Semitic deity Beelzebub, literally translates
from Hebrew into “Lord of the Flies.”
As Obama nominated two new members of his second administration on Jan.
24, a swarming fly stole the show.
“This guy is bothering me here,” said Obama, who repeatedly swatted at a
large black fly buzzing near his face.
The London Telegraph noted a White House pool report said “the president spoke for about five
minutes while being menaced by a house fly.”
This was not the president’s first brush with a fly while the cameras
were rolling.
President Obama with a fly on his lip
In 2010, Obama halted a speech about health-care reform as a fly zipped
around him.
During a June 2009 CNBC interview, Obama killed a fly on camera.
“Get out of here,” the president said with his eyes on the fly before
the interview began. When the fly persisted, he killed it with a single blow.
“That was pretty impressive, wasn’t it?” said Obama of his feat. “I got
the sucker.”
In a 2008 campaign appearance, Obama halted a local interview after a
swarm of flies had gathered around him.
Those reaching to connect Obama’s fly troubles with the darkest biblical
references won’t have much difficulty.
One name commonly used to refer to Satan is Beelzebub, which translates
from Hebrew into “Lord of the Flies.”
A posting at the popular Free Republic Web forum discusses Beelzebub and
asks, “Is the White House fly infestation evidence of demonic presence and
influence there?”
The End Times blog named Obama the “Lord of the Flies.”
The blog connects Obama to Beelzebub, writing, “This really isn’t an
academic question. The Lord of the Flies is real.”
Over at RevalationNow.net, a posting by “editorial staff” muses about
whether Obama is possessed by a demonic entity.
“I feel like I am watching a horror movie and the secret evil character
is revealed by the evil signs around him,” the post reads.
Beelzebub is first referenced in 2 Kings 1:2-3, 6, 16, in which
Beelzebub is described as the god of the Philistine city of Ekron.
Jewish scholars have interpreted the title “Lord of Flies” as the Hebrew
way of comparing followers of the Canaanite deity Baal to flies.
The name Beelzebub is found throughout the New Testament, mostly as a
reference to the prince of demons.
In Mark 3:22, the Pharisees accuse Jesus of driving out demons by the
power of Beelzebub, prince of demons. The name also appears in the expanded
version in Matthew 12:24, 27 and Luke 11:15, 18-19.
Beelzebub also makes a cameo as the prince of demons in the Testament of
Solomon, a Hellenistic Jewish text.
The extended trailer for “The Bible” miniseries can be seen by clicking
on the video below:
Calls Grow For
Obama's Impeachmen
|
x
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
||||||||
“LA LIBERTAD NO ES GRATIS”
<IN GOD WE TRUST>
“En
mi opinión” Lázaro R González Miño
Editor.
Para
contribuir con artículos, opiniones, sugerencias o recibir “En mi opinión”
No comments:
Post a Comment