No 1016 “En mi opinión” Agosto 5, 2015
“IN GOD WE TRUST” Lázaro R González Miño Editor
Que pienso de Donald Trump ?
¿Que pienso de Donald Trump ?
Creo que lo que mejor puede determinar lo que Donald Trump ha representado a la campaña presidencial del partido republicano es su posición en las encuestas, que representa el apoyo de los votantes a las posiciones de Trump.
Este es un mensaje que los demás candidatos deben de imitar, no criticar.
"Donald Trump tiene nombre fuerte reconocimiento y la capacidad de auto financiar su campaña por tiempo indefinido. Esas cualidades lo hacen viable," dice Harry Wilson, profesor de asuntos públicos y director del Instituto de investigación en políticas y opinión en el Roanoke Collage, en Salem, Virginia
Pero el dinero y la visibilidad no son suficiente, es el mensaje lo que le ha traído el éxito en la campaña.
Pero no sólo denunciar la verdad es la solución, eso lo tienen que recordar los que apoyaron incondicionalmente y sin cuestionar su capacidad a un joven líder carismático que denunció la verdad violentamente contra la dictadura de Batista. Necesitamos a un con la capacidad política y el mensaje de Trump y la capacidad y experiencia política para ser el próximo presidente.
Los que vivimos la experiencia de las elecciones de 1992, cuando un carismático empresario millonario fue como independiente y recibió el 19% de los votos causando la victoria de Bill Clinton sobre George H Bush que comenzó la hegemonía de la maquinaria demócrata que vivimos hoy en día.
Ross Perot logró Bush lograra la nominación a pesar de su impopularidad por haber subido los impuestos,al dividir el campo como ahora Trump y luego causó su derrota en las elecciones generales al volver a dividir el campo.
Tengo miedo que la historia se repita, tenemos que aprender de las experiencias, tal parece que cuando se calmen las aguas el beneficiado de la campaña de Trump pudiera ser Jeb Bush.
Bush es el único candidato que ha subido en las encuestas desde la entrada de Trump, saltando por unos cuatro puntos porcentuales en el promedio de todas las encuestas, al 15.5 por ciento.
Trump ha robado su posición no de Jeb Bush pero de los que tienen una posición parecida a la suya pero han sido demasiado blandos al expresarlas, otros aspirantes a estrellas de GOP como el gobernador Scott Walker el senador de Florida Marco Rubio, senador de Kentucky Rand Paul el senador de Texas Ted Cruz y el ex gobernador de Arkansas Mike Huckabee, todos se han hundido significativamente en las encuestas desde que Trump asumió el triunfo y el centro de atención, mientras Bush se ha mantenido igual..
Mi opinión, estoy de acuerdo con lo que dice Trump, pero no veo como la nación pudiera estar mejor con Trump, o Hillary Clinton de presidente que con Scott Walker.
No quisiera vivir esta pesadilla del 1992
Google Translate. LRGM:AMENPER: I think of Donald Trump?
What do I think of Donald Trump?
I think what can best determine what Donald Trump has represented the Republican Party presidential campaign is his standing in the polls, which represents the support of voters positions Trump.
This is a message that the other candidates must imitate, not criticize.
"Donald Trump has strong name recognition and the ability to self finance his campaign indefinitely. These qualities make it feasible," says Harry Wilson, a professor of public affairs and director of the Institute for policy research and opinion in the Roanoke College in Salem, Virginia
But money and visibility are not enough, it is the message that has brought him success in the campaign.
But not only denounce the truth is the solution, that I have to remember those who supported unconditionally and without question his capacity to a young charismatic leader who denounced the truth violently against the Batista dictatorship. We need a policy with the capacity and the Trump message and the ability and political experience to be the next president.
Those who live the experience of the 1992 elections, when a charismatic millionaire businessman was as an independent and received 19% of the votes causing the victory of Bill Clinton on George H Bush began the hegemony of the Democratic machine that we live today .
Ross Perot won the nomination Bush succeeded despite its unpopularity for having raised taxes by splitting the field and now Trump and then caused his defeat in the general elections to re-divide the field.
I fear that history will repeat itself, we have to learn from the experience, it appears that when the waters subside the campaign benefited from Trump could be Jeb Bush.
Bush is the only candidate who has risen in the polls from the entrance of Trump, jumping by about four percentage points in the average of all polls, at 15.5 percent.
Trump has stolen his position not of Jeb Bush but which have a similar position to yours but have been too soft to express, other starlets GOP Gov. Scott Walker as Florida Senator Marco Rubio, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul Texas Senator Ted Cruz and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, all have sunk significantly in the polls since Trump triumph and took the spotlight, as Bush has remained the same ..
My opinion, I agree with what he says Trump, but do not see how the nation could be better with Trump, President Clinton or Hillary Scott Walker.
I would not want to live this nightmare of 1992
JUAN A MOLERIO: Análisis sobre Donald Trump
Donald Trump, un hombre netamente de negocios. Supo multiplicar su fortuna después de la muerte de su padre y se vale de cualquier artimaña (en donaciones) para lograrlo.
Trump le ha donado miles de dólares a Harry Reid, Rahm Emanuel, Hillary Clinton, Jhon Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Charles Rangel, y 125, 000 dólares al partido Demócrata. ¿Lo ha hecho para su beneficio personal o por simpatizar con ellos? De cualquiera de las dos formas, no aparenta ser un político genuino.
Por videos y noticias, Trump ha sido muy amigo de Hillary. En el 2008, al no ganar la presidencia Hillary, se suponia que aspiraría al terminar el mandato de Obama. En el 2009, Trump se pasa del partido Demócrata al Republicano. ¿Con qué idea? ( ? ) Aunque parece energico y conceptos algo reales, no están dicha de la mejor forma. ¿Por qué en esa forma? (? ) La prensa solo escribe sobre su popularid y no tienen en cuenta la variedad de buenos candidatos que tenemos. El divide y no es capaz de unir criterios, por tanto no es un candidato conservador confiable.
Con su discurso ofensivo a los mexicanos y a Mc Cain, ha perdido múltiples de contratos y la prensa lo tiene en las principales noticia por su forma despectivas con los demás. En estos momento le interesa mas la fama, que perder cierta cantidad de dinero (tal vez piensa que lo recuperará, si Hillary es Presidente). Como un dicho que dice: "No importa que hablen bien o mal, el caso es que hablen".
Como ha demostrado que no es un tonto (aunque sí útil), el sabe el daño que le está haciendo al partido Republicano. Aún faltan muchos meses para las primarias, y cometerá otras sorpresas favorables al partido Demócrata y en contra del partido Republicano. ¿El alma de Donald Trump, a favor de quién está? El partido Republicano tendrá que luchar contra un enemigo (Donald Trump) y un contrario. ¡Qué tarea!
Juan A. Molerio
Google translate. LRGM
JUAN A Molerio: Analysis of Donald Trump
Donald Trump, a man purely business. He knew how to multiply his fortune after the death of his father and uses any trick (in grants) to achieve this.
Trump has donated thousands of dollars to Harry Reid, Rahm Emanuel, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Charles Rangel, and 125, 000 US dollars to the Democratic party. What he has done for personal gain or for sympathizing with them? In either form, there appears to be a genuine political.
For videos and news, Trump has been a close friend of Hillary. In 2008, not Hillary win the presidency, he was supposed to aspire to end the mandate of Obama. In 2009, Trump spends the Democratic Party to the Republican. What idea? (?) Although it appears energetic and some actual concepts that are not in the best way. Why in this way? (?) The press only writes about his popularid and do not take into account the variety of good candidates that we have. The divided and unable to unite criteria, so it is not a reliable conservative candidate.
With his offensive speech to Mexican and McCain, he has lost many contracts and the press in the major news for his derogatory other way. At this moment more interested in fame, to lose some money (maybe you think he will recover, if Hillary is president). As a saying: "No matter who speak right or wrong, the fact is they speak."
As has shown that it is not a fool (though useful), he knows the damage he is doing to the Republican Party. There are still many months to the primary, and commit other pro-Democratic party and the Republican party against surprises. The soul of Donald Trump, who is in favor? The Republican Party will have to fight an enemy (Donald Trump) and a counter. What a task!
Juan A. Molerio
August 3, 2015 | 10:58pm
‘Raising the success rate of our students is the only goal,” said Carmen Fariña the day then-Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio announced that she would head New York City’s 1.1 million-student public-school system.
One way or another, she might’ve added!.......Because Susan Edelman, Carl Campanile and other Post reporters keep digging up flagrant proof of fraud at school after school.
Whether it’s the rigging of in Brooklyn or retroactively in Queens, or giving flunking students “online credit” at Flushing HS in Queens, or flat-out handing a pass to a student at William Cullen Bryant HS in Queens, it all adds up to the same thing.
Carmen Fariña is dedicated to the appearance of success, if not its achievement.
Fariña’s direct, personal culpability in the test-fixing shenanigans that Edelman and Campanile have so ably reported over the past several weeks no doubt is minimal.
But responsibility for the scandal is hers, and Mayor de Blasio’s, and they must answer for it.
Fat chance that either will recognize it, though.
That’s because each is totally invested in public education the way it used to be, before Mayor Mike Bloomberg bludgeoned Albany into granting him substantial — if not total — operational control of the system.
Reform followed — glacially, perhaps, and incompletely.
But it was real.
From 2005 to 2013, the city’s four-year-high-school graduation rate jumped by more than 40 percent, while its dropout rate halved — imperfect metrics, perhaps, but telling nevertheless.
And when Albany toughened its performance tests four years ago, scores in New York City dropped — but not nearly as sharply as in other urban school systems in the state.
Nevertheless, de Blasio & Co. have never missed an opportunity to criticize the Bloomberg reforms — and to promise to reverse them.
That’s because those reforms profoundly threaten the chief impediment to positive public-school change in New York City: the United Federation of Teachers.
Bloomberg championed teacher accountability, as measured by student performance, as well as alternatives to the old ways — in particular, charter schools.
Fariña, whose grandmotherly public demeanor masks startling private bluntness, is coy about accountability — promising to “take the temperature down around testing.”
Translation: We want no part of accountability testing.
Neither is she interested in charter schools — except to throttle their growth.
That’s to be expected from someone with more than four decades invested in the old ways — a former teacher who worked her way through the ranks all the way to a brief stint as a deputy schools chancellor in the Bloomberg years.
That the Bloomberg gig was a bad fit regarding reform is underscored by Fariña’s long policy association with bitterly anti-reform activist Diane Ravitch — said to wield substantial influence at the Department of Education now.
Then there is UFT President Michael Mulgrew’s enthusiasm for Fariña. “Carmen is a real educator. She has a deep knowledge of schools and our system and is on record criticizing Mayor Bloomberg’s focus on high-stakes testing,” he said at her appointment. “We look forward to working with her.”
So far, the association has been a winner for the union, which quickly secured a multiyear contract so lavish the raises alone won’t fully be paid for until 2020.
The mayor, of course, is mainly responsible for that lopsided contract. But it was just ducky with Fariña, the ostensible manager who got no management reforms whatsoever in return for the pay hikes.
But why would she want them? Who needs management prerogatives when the union is running the show anyway?
De Blasio is still smoldering at his rough treatment by Gov. Cuomo and the Legislature last month — especially over Albany’s refusal to grant him full, unfettered control over the schools.
So far, the mayor has done little to earn that sort of power — again, essentially aligning himself with the UFT and other anti-reform elements.
Nothing dramatizes that more than his hiring of Carmen Fariña in the first place — just as nothing will demonstrate his continuing unfitness to run the schools more clearly than permitting her to sweep the fraudulent-graduation scandals off into a corner.
It may not seem so to de Blasio, but he has another credibility crisis on his hands.
WND: Looming White House Financial
Crisis Could Erupt In 2015?
08.05.2015 by Mike Palmer, Stansberry Research
No one believed Porter Stansberry six years ago.
As head of one of America’s largest independent financial research firms, Mr. Stansberry’s work back in 2008 led him to a bold, but worrisome, conclusion:
That the world’s largest mortgage bankers–Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which at the time were responsible for nearly 50% of all the mortgages in America–would soon go bankrupt.
In fact, in June of 2008, while their stock prices were still trading at well over $20 per share, Stansberry published a report to his customers titled: “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Are Going to Zero.”
Inside this report, Stansberry explained:
“For those of you who don’t work in the financial industry, it might be hard for you to immediately grasp what’s so dangerous about the extreme amount of leverage employed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Let me explain exactly what Fannie and Freddie do and why they’re in so much jeopardy…”
We all know what happened next.
Both agencies went bust–and if not for a bailout from the Federal Government, both would have declared bankruptcy.
Barron’s–America’s second biggest financial newspaper–even wrote a story about Mr. Stansberry’s accurate prediction short, and called it “remarkably prescient.”
Over the years, Mr. Stansberry has made a name for himself by accurately predicting the biggest and most important collapses in America.
A few of the others he’s accurately identified well in advance include: General Motors, General Growth Property (America’s biggest mall owner), D.R. Horton (a homebuilder), and Gannett newspapers, to name just a few.
Stansberry also predicted the recent collapse of oil and natural gas prices as early as 2010, when he wrote a report titled: “Peak Oil is a Flat Lie.”
Well, now Mr. Stansberry has issued another fascinating warning, about a new and looming bankruptcy.
As Mr. Stansberry writes:
“No one believed me years ago when I said the world’s largest mortgage bankers would soon go bankrupt.
And no one believed me when I said GM would fall apart… or that the same would happen to General Growth Properties.
But that’s exactly what happened.”
And, he says, that brings us today…
Stansberry says the next big bankruptcy in America will be even bigger than those he’s identified in the past. In fact, he says this looming bankruptcy will threaten your way of life, whether you own any investments related to it or not.
This collapse, says Stansberry, will change everything about our normal way of life: where you vacation… where you send your kids or grandkids to school… how and where you shop… the way you protect your family and home.
I strongly encourage you to check out Mr. Stansberry’s recent write-up on this situation.
Exclusive Newsmax Poll: Trumps Surges, Walker Slips in South
An exclusive Newsmax poll released Tuesday shows businessman Donald Trump sweeping to a commanding lead among Republican presidential candidates across the South, with retired pediatric neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson surging in popularity.
Trump, who has led in the polls since his campaign began on June 16, finished with 28 points in the exclusive Newsmax-Southern Political Report Survey conducted by OpinionSavvy.
The billionaire developer leads all other candidates from the region, including former southern Govs. Jeb Bush (Florida) and Mike Huckabee (Arkansas), current Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, and Sens. Lindsey Graham (South Carolina), Ted Cruz (Texas), Marco Rubio (Florida) and Rand Paul (Kentucky).
The Atlanta-based OpinionSavvy research firm surveyed 5,728 adults in 12 Southern states on Sunday and Monday, and its results have a margin of error of 1.3 percent.
Bush finished in a familiar second place with 18 percent. Carson is third with 10 percent. The remaining 14 GOP contenders ended in single digits.
The Newsmax poll results contrast with Trump's national showing of 24 percent in the Real Clear Politics average of polls, versus 13 percent for Bush and 11 percent for Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker.
In that ranking, Carson is tied with former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee at 7 percent each.
"This is not a pretend candidacy," Matt Towery, the pollster and CEO of InsiderAdvantage, which owns OpinionSavvy, said of Trump's White House run. "This is not something to be mocked.
"This guy is for real. He has hit something big time in this region of the country," Towery said. "I've not seen anyone have this sort of effect — to be quite blunt — since Ronald Reagan."
"I don’t recall anyone having a lead this far out," he told Newsmax. "It was building, not simply sitting there — particularly that was so regionally strong."
The exclusive Newsmax poll results come as Trump leads the field heading into the first Republican presidential debate with the 10 top-polling candidates on Thursday at the Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland. Seven others will square off in a one-hour forum to be held before the prime-time event.
The debate is sponsored by Fox News Channel and the Republican National Committee. Fox averaged five national polls of GOP primary voters, including Real Clear Politics, to make its selection.
"Many of the upper-tier candidates are from the South, yet Donald Trump is doing better in this poll of the South than he is doing nationally," Towery said.
Here are the other GOP candidates fared in the Newsmax poll:
· Cruz: 9 percent
· Huckabee and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker: 6 percent
· Rubio: 4 percent
· Ohio Gov. John Kasich: 3 percent
· Jindal, Paul, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, and former Hewlett-Packard Co. CEO Carly Fiorina: 2 percent
· Graham, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry: 1 percent
· Former New York Gov. George Pataki finished below 1 percent
In addition, 2 percent responded that they would vote for someone else, while 3 percent said they were undecided.
The Newsmax results reflected poor name recognition for Walker in the South, Towery said.
The second-term governor has regularly followed Trump and Bush in national polls — and he won a match-up against Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire last month, according to a Dartmouth College poll.
And only last week did Trump supplant Walker in Iowa in a Gravis Marketing survey for the One American News Network. Iowa holds its caucuses on Feb. 1, in the first contest of the 2016 presidential cycle.
"He's not well known — and a lot of this has to do with name ID right now," Towery told Newsmax of the Badger State governor. "He's known to people who are active in political circles, but to the average voter in a Republican primary in these Southern states, they've hardly ever heard of Scott Walker.
"He has a long way to go — and with Trump dominating the headlines, he's not able to get much traction," the pollster added. "It doesn't mean that Walker couldn't have stronger numbers down the road, it's simply not being able to get his name known enough right now."
While Iowa and New Hampshire are also critical for Trump, victories in the South could send him sailing into the Florida primary on March 15 if he doesn’t win in those states, Towery said.
"If Trump can just stay in the game in Iowa and New Hampshire, then he goes into South Carolina and some of the other states and he keeps moving, he would be competitive with Bush and Carson."
The Southern states are especially critical in this Republican presidential season, as many will hold their primaries before Florida's. In the past, Florida held its primary earlier in the season.
This cycle, however, 14 mostly Southern states will hold primaries between South Carolina's, on Feb. 20, and Florida's.
They are Arkansas, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Louisiana, Alabama, Idaho, Mississippi, and Michigan. Colorado and Hawaii will hold caucuses during the period.
Seven of those Southern primaries are part of the first "Super Tuesday" onMarch 1.
The change will have a huge effect on the race, most likely favoring popular candidates over establishment choices. Florida also has held a "winner-take-all" primary, with all of its 99 delegates going to the winner.
A Trump win in the Sunshine State could readily sink the Bush and Rubio campaigns, since they would be losing in their home state, Towery told Newsmax.
But this strong Southern showing poses two challenges for the businessman, he said.
"If Trump can hold or build on that lead in the South, he is going to go to the big dance, as they say in 'March Madness' terms," Towery said.
Also, "can he transfer this popularity to non-Southern states where he is running a little bit lower, like Iowa and New Hampshire? If he can get his numbers up to the mid-30s, then he can really blow the doors off this thing.
"Trump's running in the mid-20s nationally, 30s and above in a lot of these Southern states," Towery concluded. "He's the winner right now in the first run for the heart and soul of the South.
"I'm sure that if anyone told Donald Trump years ago that Mr. New York City would be so popular in Alabama, he would've believed it. I wouldn't."
© 2015 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Wow: Senator Catches Obama Red-Handed Violating The Law He JUST Signed
"That is one of the most mind-blowingly stupid things I can ever remember."
The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act specifically provides that Congress must receive “all nuclear agreement documents, including any related to agreements ‘entered into or made between Iran and any other parties.’ It expressly includes ‘side agreements.’ This requirement is not strictly limited to agreements to which the U.S. is a signatory,” Sen. Cotton and Rep. Mike Pompeo wrote in a joint op-ed in the Wall Street Journal last week.
· ‘Duck Dynasty’ Star Shares Urgent Life-Or-Death Crisis With The World, Asks For Prayer – ‘We Need A Miracle…’
Cotton and Pompeo recount that they traveled to Vienna a few weeks ago to meet with officials of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). There, they learned “that certain elements of this deal are—and will remain—secret.” They further discovered that those involved with the talks, including the Obama administration, specially allowed the IAEA and Iran to have two side deals.
The first has to do with the IAEA’s inspection of the controversial Parchin military complex. The site is a suspected location of Iran’s long range missile and nuclear development. The second side deal has to do with what the nation must reveal about its nuclear program to date.
The legislators argue that both are vital issues if the deal will have any chance of success. They also make clear that the administration has been inconsistent in its responses regarding the existence of these agreements and whether Congress will have access to review them.
· ‘Duck Dynasty’ Star Shares Urgent Life-Or-Death Crisis With The World, Asks For Prayer – ‘We Need A Miracle…’
The two sent a letter to the Obama administration requesting access to all relevant information, so the agreement can be adequately reviewed.
To ensure there is enough time for this review, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, introduced a resolution last Thursday calling for the clock to not start until all relevant “side deals” are made available to Congress, according toThe Hill.
His resolution reads, in part:
The 60-calendar day period for review of such agreement in the Senate cannot be considered to have begun until the Majority Leader certifies that all of the materials required to be transmitted under the definition of the term ‘agreement’ under such Act, including any side agreements with Iran and United States Government-issued guidance materials in relation to Iran, have been transmitted to the Majority Leader.
Dan Calabrese, writing for CainTV, called into question the whole premise of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, noting it runs contrary to the Constitution. Congress has a way to approve treaties–and it is not by majority vote in both Houses, which the president can veto. “It’s called treaty ratification, and it requires two-thirds of the Senate. For congressional Republicans to give Obama an alternative [only requiring him to sustain a veto] to that is one of the most mind-blowingly stupid things I can ever remember them doing. And that’s saying something.”
Do you believe the Iranian nuclear deal should have to go through the normal treaty ratification process? Please leave your thoughts below.
Bebés abortados: "por piezas podemos sacar más dinero"
No sé si has podido ver el tercer video de Planned parenthood. Te confieso que a mi me ha costado verlo. Es repugnante. Hablan de bebés abortados como si fueran pollos de corral. Bufff…
Te cuento: aparece un bebé descuartizado. Se ven perfectamente los brazos y las piernas. Los empleados de Planned Parenthood se muestran contentos: "son piezas 5 estrellas”.
Van a sacar mucho dinero con él. Un "médico” dice que pueden obtener por cada pieza entre 50 y 75 dólares y que en cada bebé pueden sacar como 3 ó 4 piezas. "O sea, unos 200 ó 300 dólares por uno entero; con eso estamos contentos”.
Una tercera persona interviene y dice que es mejor venderlos por piezas en lugar de entero porque se puede sacar algo más de dinero. ¡Como los pollos!
El "médico” dice que todavía se mantiene la espina dorsal que da unidad a todas las piezas y que eso permite transportarlo entero…
Se me hiela la sangre cuando lo escribo, Lazaro R. Es repugnante. ¿Cómo puede haber gente con tanta sangre fría?,¿cómo pueden hablar de piezas humanas como si fueran piezas de un coche?, ¿cómo es posible que siga habiendo empresas que sigan financiando esta barbarie?
Es horrible. La maldad humana parece que no tiene final. Hasta se permiten hacer bromas delante del cadáver.
Por eso no entiendo cómo Pepsi, Unilever o Starbucks pueden seguir financiando la industria del terror.
¿Crees que puedes seguir consumiendo shamoo Dove (Johnson & Johnson), comprar un jugo Ades a tu hijo, aderezar un sandwich con mayonesa Hellmans (productos de Unilever) o tomar una Pepsi, o ir a un Starbucks sabiendo que están financiando a una empresa que lucran con el comercio de órganos de bebés abortados.
Paradójicamente Johnson & Johnson tienen productos para bebés. Es increíble…
Yo desde luego no tengo estómago para seguir consumiendo los productos de quien no tiene inconveniente en mantener una industria ilegal, inhumana, inmoral y espantosa.
Sé que es una gota en el océano. Pero como decía santa Teresa de Calcuta, sin muchas gotas el océano se quedaría seco. ¡Podemos!
Diles a los presidentes de las compañías que retiren inmediatamente la financiación de una empresa que se ha revelado como lo más antihumano que existe sobre la tierra:
Gracias, Lazaro R, por apoyar esta campaña. Si no nos movemos ante una barbarie así, ¿Cuándo? Si no eres tú, ¿quién?
Un fuerte abrazo,
Luis Losada Pescador y todo el equipo de CitizenGO
PD. No podemos permitir que los que comercian con los trozos de bebés abortados sigan siendo percibidos como "hermanitas de Caridad”, sin contingencias legales y recibiendo fondos públicos y privados. ¡STOP la financiación de Planned Parenthood! http://www.citizengo.org/es/27342-starbucks-pepsi-y-johnson-johnson-siguen-financiando-planned-parenthood
PD2. De momento ya hemos conseguido que la Fiscal General diga que va a abrir una investigación después de que Justicia recibiera muchas quejas. ¡¡Enhorabuena!!
“FREEDOM IS NOT FREE”
“En mi opinión”