No
1135 “En mi opinión” Enero 21, 2016
“IN GOD WE TRUST”
Lázaro R Gonzalez Miño Editor
Lázaro R González Miño para Alcalde
de Miami Dade
AMENPER: Miedo,
Terror y Pánico
Hay veces que no se establece bien la diferencia
entre miedo, terror, y pánico y
se utilizan estas palabras indistintamente pero hay distinción entre ellas, y
el estado que producen estas emociones descriptas en esas palabras influencia
en la manera de pensar y actuar de un individuo.
Se critica a las personas que cambian de opinión, pero
cambiar de opinión no es una falta, es una condición que puede ser influenciada
por diferentes factores que no tienen que ver con el carácter de la persona que
cambió de opinión.
En el caos político en que se encuentran los Estados
Unidos, los estados de miedo,
terror y pánico, pueden hacer variar el apoyo que una persona
le está dando a un candidato.
Miedo es algo con lo
convivimos con el cotidianamente, quien no tiene miedo a algo pero es manejable
se puede soportar, Tengo miedo de
que Donald Trump sea el candidato del partido republicano primero porque según
las encuestas recientes y como dice el editorial de hoy del Wall Street Journal
que les paso abajo Donald Trump perdería ante Bernie Sanders 54 a 39, la
diferencia va por arriba del margen de error. Una presidencia de
Donald Trump me produce miedo, si no cambia su manera de ser arrogante y
dictatorial. Sería un dictador tropical, sin el apoyo militar, por lo que
pudiera ser el primer presidente destituido por impugnación. Pero todo esto es
manejable, está dentro de lo previsto en la constitución.
La posibilidad de que salga Bernie Sanders, me
produce terror, sería
el primer comunista presidente de Estados Unidos, y los comunistas saben cómo
implantar el sistema dentro del sistema, no creo que sea impugnado porque
sabría como implantar el comunismo y esto me produce Pánico.
En el editorial de Journal verán el análisis que hacen
sobre las posibilidades de que sea el candidato Demócrata. Dado el
equipaje dañado de Hillary Clinton, hay muchas posibilidades de que sea el
candidato, entonces nos presenta lo que dicen las encuestas es que le ganaría a
Trump en las elecciones generales. Creo en las encuestas hasta
cierto punto. El margen de error puede ser de 5 a 10 puntos, pero
cuando suben de 15 puntos, creo que son incontestables, nunca he visto que
hayan fallado con ese margen.
La realidad es lo que veo, yo cómo cubano que ha
tenido que cambiar su vida por la ingenuidad de un pueblo ante un demagogo
socialista, tengo un ataque de pánico ante
la posibilidad que se repita la historia en este país.
Votaría por Donald Trump contra Bernie Sanders, pero
en una encuesta privada familiar, me encuentro que mis hijos y nietos que ya
votan y amigos cercanos me han dicho que se abstendrían de votar en caso de que
estos fueran los candidatos y no los pude convencer de lo contrario.
Creo que a cualquiera de mi generación le puedo poner
el ejemplo hipotético de unas elecciones de Batista contra Fidel.
Creo que entre nosotros no habría dudas, votaríamos
por Batista. Pero el americano promedio que no le gusta Trump, y que
no están acostumbrados a votar por alguien que no le gusta para evitar un mal
mayor, no lo haría.
Si Trump es el candidato del partido republicano, será
una batalla cuesta arriba para convencer a las personas de que hay que votar
por Trump, que no importa que tenganMiedo,
el Miedo es manejable,
pero el miedo desaparece ante el terror, si sentimos terror superamos el estado
del miedo, y si llegamos al pánico es cómo cuando sentimos vértigo de caer al
vacío, porque ahora no hay donde ir.
En otras palabras tengo MIEDO que Trump sea el candidato
republicano. Tengo TERROR de
que pierda las elecciones. Tengo PANICO de vivir bajo un sistema comunista.
Por eso votaría por Donald Trump en unas elecciones
generales porque el PANICO Y EL
TERROR SUPERAN AL MIEDO
Abajo
el artículo del editorial principal del Wall Street Journal de hoy:
Tomando
en serio a Sanders
El
socialista gana Trump por 15 puntos en una encuesta reciente.
19 de enero de 2016 7:09
PM ET
Es
hora de tomara Bernie Sanders seriamente. El senador de Vermont es líder en
Iowa y New Hampshire y en el debate del domingo sonaba por primera vez como un
candidato que piensa que puede ganar. Él todavía no es el favorito contra el
equipo de Clinton, pero no es imposible imaginar al socialista de 74 años de
edad como el candidato democráta.
Está
de moda para describir el Sr. Sanders como la versión progresiva de Donald
Trump, pero eso es cierto sólo en que está aprovechando la insatisfacción
pública con el status quo.
El
Sr. Trump tiene instintos populistas pero en pocos fija principios ideológicos.
Sr.
Sanders es un verdadero hombre de la izquierda. Él sería el candidato
democrático más izquierdista desde George McGovern en 1972, pero su programa
económico es más radical y no ha sido visto en Estados Unidos desde la década
de 1930.
Esta
semana lanzó su plan de Medicare para todos lo que pondría fin a un seguro
médico privado. Sr. Sanders puede ver la frustración pública con ObamaCare y
quiere girar a la izquierda.
El
senador de Vermont también quiere hacer beneficios de colegio y guardería en
univeridades como derechos pagados por el gobierno, gastar $ 1
trillón en obras públicas, subir el salario mínimo en todo el país a
$15 la hora (desde $7,25) y ampliar las prestaciones de Seguridad Social.
Sr.
Sanders también utilizaría gobierno para controlar los medios de producción,
como los socialistas suelen decir, a partir de los bancos. Rompería hasta la
más grande socialización a través de un "siglo XXI ley Glass-Steagall"
que sugiere algo mucho más ambicioso que simplemente dividir la inversión de la
banca comercial.
Dice
que el cambio climático es su principal preocupación de seguridad nacional, y
él ha pedido una investigación penal de los disidentes del clima.
Sus
muchos aumentos de impuestos incluiría una tasa considerablemente bajos alta
que él no especifica, aunque a menudo hablaba con cariño de los tipos
impositivos de la pre-Reagan (70%) y eras de New Deal (94%). Él introduciría un nuevo
impuesto de nómina para la clase media pagar la atención sanitaria universal y
eliminar la tapa de ingreso del impuesto de nómina de Seguridad Social (ahora
$118.500) sobre ingresos sobre $250.000.
También
quiere imponer un impuesto sobre el comercio de Wall Street, él lo llama
"especulación", de la clase que los socialistas franceses trataron
pero no pudieron hacerlo porque las operaciones pueden hacerse en cualquier
parte del mundo. Esto normalmente sería políticamente suicidio, pero el Sr.
Sanders está utilizando su franqueza sobre aumentar los impuestos como una
insignia de autenticidad progresiva.
Esto
puede sonar como la materia de los sueños socialistas, pero el Sr. Sanders ya
avanzó el debate democrático agudamente a la izquierda, obligando a Hillary
Clinton a perseguirlo.
Su
respuesta ha sido ser una parcial Bernie, que está a la izquierda
del Presidente Obama sobre cuestiones más domésticas.
Hillary
Clinton sigue siendo la favorita, y a diferencia de los republicanos realmente
hay un poderoso establecimiento democrático de sindicatos, grupos verdes y las
feministas que se unieron detrás de ella. Su argumento es que ella tiene la
mejor oportunidad de ganar en noviembre, pero este caso era más persuasivo hace
un año que ahora.
La
campaña de Clinton siente la amenaza los medios de izquierda ha hecho un giro
de la horquilla de Bernie. Él era como el viejo tío de izquierdas adorable,
pero acólitos de Hillary de repente lo encuentran demasiado,
bueno, el socialista. Bernie tiene la valentía de sus convicciones,
y su llamamiento es que es más honesto sobre esto.
Sr.
Sanders también ha comenzado a hablar, muy cautelosamente, a Hillary Clinton
sobre su ética y vulnerabilidades de Wall Street.
El
domingo, dijo "que has recibido sobre $600.000 en hablando de tasas
de Goldman Sachs en un año." ¿Y qué pasa si el FBI recomienda
algunas acciones legales como resultado de su mal manejo de información de
correo electrónico clasificados?
Otro
demócrata podría querer entrar a la carrera, pero podría ser demasiado tarde.
Muchos
republicanos afirman dar la bienvenida a una nominación de Sanders en la
suposición de que sería fácil de vencer. Pero no pueden estar tan
seguro, al menos no este año.
Como
se muestra en la pregunta cerca de la última encuesta de NBC/WSJ, favorito
republicano Donald Trump pierde frente a Sr. Sanders en 15 puntos
porcentuales entre los votantes registrados.
El
Sr. Trump pierde a la señora Clinton por sólo 10 puntos en la misma encuesta.
Estas
encuestas no son fiables hasta la hora y el día de la elección, pero pueden
influir las percepciones democráticas de elegibilidad. ¿Si parece que los
republicanos podrían nombrar a Sr. Trump o Ted Cruz, podrían estar los
demócratas más convencidos de que puede permitirse disfrutar de su verdadero
corazón y vota por Sr. Sanders?
También
es posible, incluso probable, que si los Sres. Sanders y Trump o Cruz sean los
nominados, entonces un candidato de tercera persona sería entrar en la carrera.
Tal vez el multimillonario ex alcalde de Nueva York Michael Bloomberg , o tal
vez un republicano más convencional.
Sanders
podría tener una mejor oportunidad de ganar en una carrera de multi-candidatos.
Y si el partido republicano se divide en dos, el control político de una casa
republicana también podría estar en peligro.
Nosotros
no estamos prediciendo esto. Pero en una campaña que ya ha roto convenciones
políticas americana normales, la posibilidad de un resultado electoral extrema
ya no es impensable.
AMENPER: Los Nuevos "Conservadores"
Cuando
vemos los nuevos conservadores que han tomado por la fuerza la doctrina
conservadora, adaptándolas a sus valores y principios, nosotros, los
conservadores que creemos en el conservadurismo tradicional y lo conocemos y
practicamos lo que es el real objetivo de la política conservadora, nos sentimos
separados de esta nueva ola.
La
dolorosa realidad es que no son conservadores.
Esta
es la razón de que vemos el apoyo de llamados líderes conservadores como Sarah
Palin, apoyando a un candidato que no tiene nada de conservador, como Donald
Trump, dándole la espalda a verdaderos conservadores que están aspirando a la
candidatura del partido.
En
política, se denomina conservadurismo al conjunto de doctrinas, corrientes,
opiniones y posicionamientos, generalmente de centro-derecha y derecha, que
favorecen tradiciones y que son adversos a los cambios políticos, sociales o
económicos radicales, oponiéndose al progresismo.
En
lo social, los conservadores defienden valores familiares y religiosos.
Generalmente el conservadurismo se asocia al nacionalismo y el patriotismo.
Conservadurismos
una idea liberal, no en el sentido de que la palabra tiene ahora, que es el
socialismo, pero en el con verdadero sentido la libertad individual.
El
conservadurismo comenzó en Inglaterra con Richard Hooker (1554-1600) como el
padre fundador del conservadurismo, junto con el Marqués de Halifax
(1633-1695), entonces tuvimos a David Hume (1711-1776) Edmund Burke
(1729-1797Adam Smith (1723-1790).
Estos
ingleses propusieron valores conservadores de su tiempo. En Francia, en paralelo
al conservadurismo en Gran Bretaña. el conservadurismo fue influenciado por los
trabajos de hombres tales como Joseph de Maistre y Louis de Bonald.
Winston Churchill, Harold Macmillan, Margaret
Thatcher, David Cameron fueron conservadores ingleses modernos. También un conservador moderno fue Friedrich
von Hayek F. A. Hayek, (1899 – 1991) un economista y filósofo
austriaco
En
los Estados Unidos, el conservadurismo tiene sus raíces en la revolución
americana y su compromiso con el republicanismo, soberanía de la gente y de los
derechos y las libertades.
Las
principales prioridades dentro de conservadurismo americano incluyen soporte
para el anticomunismo de la tradición, ley y orden, el cristianismo y una
defensa de la "Civilización de los desafíos de la cultura modernista y
gobiernos totalitarios." Los conservadores económicos favorecen gobierno
pequeño, bajos impuestos, regulación limitada y libre empresa. Algunos
conservadores sociales hoy en día ven los valores sociales tradicionales,
amenazados por el secularismo, para que soporte el rezo de la escuela y se
oponen a aborto y homosexualidad.
En
nuestro tiempo el presidente Dwight D. Eisenhower se declaró partidario del
conservadurismo, Ronald Reagan es considerado como el principal ejemplo de un
gobierno conservador.
Si
leemos las creencias y los valores de todos estos conservadores pudiéramos
extraer cuáles son sus valores.
Valores
conservadores son:
La
colocación de ideas y principios sobre el deseo personal, debilidades, miedos y
remordimientos-,
Una
interminable búsqueda de la verdad, a pesar de obstáculos basado en la emoción
y la experiencia personal y difundir esas verdades en beneficio de todos.
Reconocer
y utilizar los beneficios de la competencia y duro trabajo.
Hacer
hincapié en la caridad, con sus ventajas inesperadas, en lugar de obligatorios
programas de impuestos y gasto-
Enseñanza
de autoayuda en lugar de dependencia de gobierno y otros.
Una
devoción por el principio de justicia- Soporte defensa-
Reconocer
en los medios de comunicación su sesgo, intimidación, engaño.
Austeridad
y eficiencia, rechazar la deidificación de los funcionarios públicos.
Las
autoridades dándose a respetar, pero no hasta el punto de aceptar pedidos o
afirmaciones contrarias a la moral o lógica.
Minimizar
la importancia de la riqueza, las desigualdades en la riqueza y el materialismo
en general-
Hacer
hincapié en la autosuficiencia y poder mantener los frutos de su trabajo
No
quejarse y en su lugar tomar acciones concretas para mejorar la situación.
Hacer
hincapié en la moderación contra actividades perjudiciales-
Hacer
hincapié en la humildad y la apertura en vez de arrogante certeza acerca de las
vistas de cada uno-Reconocer el poder del libre mercado-
Entender
que una marea creciente levanta todos los barcos, por ejemplo, reducciones de
impuestos benefician de todos.
Autocontrol
frente a una búsqueda auto-indulgente de gratificación inmediata de los deseos.
Reconocer
que el mal existe en el mundo y hacer un esfuerzo para luchar contra esta
fuerza por todos los medios necesarios-
Respetar
la santidad de la vida-
En
resumen seguir los valores judeo Cristianos.
Pero
hoy en día vemos que si un candidato como Marco Rubio o Jeb Bush, siguen estos
valores al pie de la letra, pero tienen una variación en su solución al problema
migratorio, solamente por esto lo condenan como no conservador, y
apoyan a un candidato como Donald Trump que si leen los valores conservadores
está completamente apartado de esta doctrina política.
Si
Ronald Reagan fuera candidato hoy en día hubiera sido excomulgado de esta nueva
iglesia conservadora de la nueva ola y sería vilificado por Donald Trump..
¿En
qué libro de los conservadores tradicionales leyeron que por un problema de
inmigración una persona quedaba expulsada del pensamiento conservador?
Conservador
ideológico doctrinal es Ted Cruz, pero también conservador con diferente puntos
de vista es Marco Rubio y Jeb Bush que lo comprobó durante su tenencia de
gobernador de la Florida.
Si
quieren apoyar a Donald Trump, porque le es atractiva su retórica demagógica y
sus promesas, es su privilegio, pero, por favor, no nos digan que lo hacen a
nombre del conservadurismo.
AMENPER: ¿Tenemos que perdonar a Fidel Castro y sus
secuaces?
Los liberales nos
dicen que tenemos que perdonar, que tenemos que olvidar, que más de medio siglo
ha pasado y hay que olvidar y empezar de nuevo. Nos llaman intolerantes porque
pedimos justicia.
Hay algo que me
intriga. Quieren que perdonemos al mismo gobierno puso en prisión, y
que asesinó a todos los que se le opusieron, el mismo gobierno que tumbó los
aviones desarmados de hermanos al rescate, que se incautó de
todos los bienes de personas que habían trabajado para obtenerlos
Pero nos dicen que
hay que perdonar, que tenemos que ir a invertir el dinero que hicimos de nuevo
y llevarlo a Cuba.
Creo que el
perdonar es una doctrina cristiana, pero el olvidar es una doctrina de idiotas.
Lo que me intriga
son los que lo nos dicen esto, son estos liberales están financiados y
representados por la mayor parte de la colonia judía en los Estados Unidos, que
no es lo mismo que los judíos de Israel.
Estos judíos
militantes, no son cristianos, así que el perdón del cristianismo por un Mesías
en el que ellos no creen, no es válido.
Creen en ojo por
ojo y diente por diente, creen en el castigo sin compasión, sin importar el
tiempo en que se cometió el pecado ni la edad de los que cometieron el pecado.
El castigo al
delito es para evitar que la persona lo cometa de nuevo, para poner en prisión
al perpetrador para que no vuelva a cometer el delito a otros en la sociedad.
Por eso me parece
que en nuestro caso los que están en Cuba todavía fueron los que cometieron los
crímenes y que pueden volver a hacerlo. No han cambiado, no se han arrepentido.
Pero vamos a ver
unas noticias sobre personas que realmente no cometieron crímenes durante la
segunda guerra mundial, estamos hablando ochenta años atrás, personas que eran
empleados de oficina o enfermeros, que tenían todos menos de 20 años cuando
sirvieron en el ejercito alemán, y que habían sido puesto en libertad por falta
de pruebas, que por ochenta años han vivido una vida de ciudadanos complidores
de la ley. Pero ahora están con sus más de noventa años y sus
achaques, detenidos y sometidos a juicio.
Ahora aparecen
pruebas por asociación indirecta, simplemente por ser soldados
rasos empleados de un campamento, sin haber cometido ningún crimen, algo
que legalmente no es válido.
Pero no importa.
piden que los condenen a 30 años de cárcel, a personas de más de 90
años, sin compasión, la compasión es para los sicarios de Castro.
Vamos a ver unos
ejemplos de esto.
Un hombre de 95
años de edad quien fue el ayudante médico en Auschwitz en el campamento Nazi
irá a juicio en Alemania el mes próximo acusado de ser cómplice del asesinato
de más de 3.000 personas.
Hubert Zafke está
acusado de ayudar en el asesinato de por lo menos 3.681 personas durante un mes
en 1944, informa la BBC. El juicio está listo para comenzar el 29 de febrero en
Neubrandenburg.
El abogado de
Zafke insiste en que su cliente no hizo nada criminal en Auschwitz, simplemente
era un soldado raso que tenía la profesión de asistente de enfermero con
18 años de edad.
Otro ex hombre de
la SS, de 94 años de edad Reinhold Hanning, va a juicio el 11 de febrero en
Detmold en acusaciones que se desempeñó como un guardia de Auschwitz desde
1943-1944. la acusación fue que durante ese año fue, por ser un guardia de
19 años de edad, complice del asesinato de 350,000 personas. Estuvo bastante
ocupado el muchacho.
El año
pasado, Oskar Groening, de 93 años, quien era conocido como "el contador
de Auschwitz", un empleado de oficina cuando tenía 17 años de edad, fue
declarado culpable de 300.000 cuentas de accesorio para el asesinato y fue
condenado a cuatro años de prisión.
En septiembre de
2015, los fiscales alemanes acusaron a una mujer de 91 años que supuestamente
trabajó como empleada de limpieza en el campo de Auschwitz Nazi con
260.000 cuentas de accesorio de asesinato.
¿Por qué no nos
permiten usar esta misma compasión con Fidel y sus secuaces?
GET THAT
IDIOT OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
||
|
|||||
|
Dow Jones Industrial Average Index
15546.57 |
469.45 ▼ -2.93%
|
||||
Newsmax: Rudy Giuliani: Hillary Can't Avoid Indictment in Email Scandal
(Fox News/"Fox &
Friends")
By Sandy Fitzgerald | Wednesday, 20 Jan 2016 11:17 AM
Former New York City Mayor and U.S.
Attorney Rudy Giuliani said Wednesday he doesn't think there is any way Hillary
Clinton should be able to avoid facing an indictment for the "secretive and highly classified"government information
found on the private email server she used while secretary of state.
"[There are] 13 violations of federal law that she arguably committed," Giuliani told Fox News' "Fox & Friends" program. "This is about as clear as it gets. It is a crime to negligently handle top secret material."
"[There are] 13 violations of federal law that she arguably committed," Giuliani told Fox News' "Fox & Friends" program. "This is about as clear as it gets. It is a crime to negligently handle top secret material."
Giuliani said in his days in the
government, there were times he'd be at work until 2 a.m. because he never took
top secret materials out of his office.
"Now, how can she put all this out there and not get proceeded against by the government," said Giuliani, noting that there is currently a push to demote former Gen. David Petraeus' rank over his sharing of secret information with his biographer and mistress.
"They treated it — in the case of Petraeus — as a major crime, and his actions are a hundredth of hers," said Giuliani. "She misrepresented about it. She's lied about it. She said she had no top secret material. It's absurd."
"Now, how can she put all this out there and not get proceeded against by the government," said Giuliani, noting that there is currently a push to demote former Gen. David Petraeus' rank over his sharing of secret information with his biographer and mistress.
"They treated it — in the case of Petraeus — as a major crime, and his actions are a hundredth of hers," said Giuliani. "She misrepresented about it. She's lied about it. She said she had no top secret material. It's absurd."
Latest News Update
And as Clinton "destroyed 34,000 emails," Giuliani said that he would have argued, as a prosecutor, "that's evidence of a guilty knowledge . . . the destruction is evidence of guilty knowledge, evidentiary principle that you can use against someone when they're in a situation where who knows what's on those 34,000 e-mails."
Further, he denied that the probe is
politically motivated, as it is the FBI, part of the Obama administration, that
is doing the investigation.
In addition, Giuliani pointed out, the FBI has opened a second investigation into the Clinton Foundation, which he would find "really worrying" if he were her attorney.
Giuliani also commented on the news that Sarah Palin had decided to back Donald Trump's bid for the GOP nomination, saying it "hurts a lot" that she chose him over rival Ted Cruz, after supporting his winning Senate bid.
In addition, Giuliani pointed out, the FBI has opened a second investigation into the Clinton Foundation, which he would find "really worrying" if he were her attorney.
Giuliani also commented on the news that Sarah Palin had decided to back Donald Trump's bid for the GOP nomination, saying it "hurts a lot" that she chose him over rival Ted Cruz, after supporting his winning Senate bid.
The endorsement, said Giuliani, will
likely not only help in Iowa, but in New Hampshire and South Carolina as
well, as it will "generally mean shoring up part of that conservative base
that might have some doubts about."
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Rudy-Giuliani-Hillary-Avoid-Indictment/2016/01/20/id/710157/#ixzz3xtRnehN0
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance. Vote Here Now!
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Rudy-Giuliani-Hillary-Avoid-Indictment/2016/01/20/id/710157/#ixzz3xtRnehN0
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance. Vote Here Now!
‘13 Hours’: It’s Political By DANIEL
HENNINGER, WSJ Most Popular Today
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
‘13 Hours’: It’s Political
Hillary Clinton was complicit in Barack Obama’s Benghazi
tale.
Wonder
Land Columnist Dan Henninger on Michael Bay’s film and what it says about the
Democratic presidential candidate’s judgment. Photo credit: Getty Images.
By
DANIEL
HENNINGER
Jan. 20, 2016 7:26 p.m. ET
It is possible to identify how far down the mountain
American politics has fallen in one word—Benghazi.
Benghazi is no longer the place in Libya where U.S.
Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed by Islamist militias. “Benghazi”
is now just another neutralized buzzword in the bad-mouthing wars of American
politics. As a professional cynic aptly noted to Congress, “What difference, at
this point, does it make?”
Forget Benghazi. It’s time to move on to more
important matters.
Such as what?
The movie “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi”
opened last week, and the cold-water machines have been hosing it. No one cares
about Benghazi anymore, the conventional sniffing goes, because the box-office
is tepid. At 144 minutes, “13 Hours” is too long and, really, it’s just too
political.
ENLARGE
The
U.S. Consulate compound in Benghazi, Libya, Sept. 11, 2012. PHOTO: STR/AFP/GETTY IMAGES
I sat through it, and
these political faces and names appear nowhere in the movie: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice. But for the last 75 minutes,
I could think of only one thing: the Obama administration’s YouTube coverup,
the story—or “talking points”—about how an obscure anti-Islamic video made in
California caused Benghazi to happen.
“13 Hours” is a graphic, reasonably accurate depiction
of the events on Sept. 11, 2012: the consular assault, Chris Stevens’s death,
an escape under heavy fire to the CIA annex a mile away, and the successful, nightlong
defense of the annex. With apologies to the politically delicate, “13 Hours”
makes the memory of the government’s tall tale, which it insisted on repeating
for more than a week, hard to stomach.
And one other, impossible-to-flinch conclusion: There
ought to be a political reckoning over this with former Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton, who, her emails revealed, was complicit in a White House
concoction she knew the night of the attack was untrue. She is now asking the
American people to let her succeed Mr. Obama into the White House. Benghazi is
toward the top of the list of reasons they should say “no.” From the looks of
it, many are doing so already.
The CIA military contractors who fought there and
survived have said the story is not about politics but about valor and courage.
It is that. The director of “13 Hours,” Michael Bay, told Bill
O’Reilly this week it is wrong to call his film political. It is indeed mainly
the account of a hard running battle with heavily armed jihadists.
But the only reason
there is political controversy about Benghazi is that the Obama administration
persisted in the false story that a YouTube video caused a spontaneous assault
on the consulate. In fact, President Obama built his Sept. 25 speech to the U.N. around Chris
Stevens’s death, citing the video six times.
Had the administration told the truth, Benghazi would
have been a legitimate, if difficult, dispute over the nature of the terrorist
threat and consular security in northeastern Libya. But with the 2012
presidential vote less than two months away, the White House tried to displace
reality with the preposterous YouTube story.
Political? What those six CIA contractors and several
State Department security officers did by stopping a probable bloodbath of
American deaths or a hostage crisis in Benghazi was save Barack Obama’s
presidency.
Two months after the
election, this is what Sec. Clinton told Sen. Ron Johnson at a congressional hearing:
“The fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it
because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some
Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”
It was neither of those random thoughts. The plainest
account of what did happen that night may be read in the Nov. 1, 2013,
indictment by a federal grand jury in the District of Columbia of Ahmed Abu
Khatallah, commander of “an Islamist extremist militia.” In June 2014, U.S.
Special Forces captured Ahmed Abu Khatallah, and he now awaits trial in the
District of Columbia.
The indictment states that the purpose of the
conspiracy led by Ahmed Abu Khatallah was to violently attack the mission and
annex, to kill U.S. citizens there, to destroy buildings and to plunder
property and sensitive information from the buildings.
The indictment says that at about 11:15 p.m. on Sept. 11, Khatallah and the
militia forces “launched a violent attack on the Mission using firearms, to
include handguns, semiautomatic rifles, that is, AK-47-type rifles, and
destructive devices, that is, grenades and rocket-propelled grenades.”
At 12:30 a.m., they carried out the same armed
assault against the CIA annex a mile away. At 5:15 a.m., a mortar attack
killed Tyrone Woods, the team leader, and Glen Doherty, who had flown
from Tripoli with a small but successful rescue group.
Political? A Clinton campaign ad in Iowa says, “She’s
got what it takes to do the toughest job in the world.”
No, they did. She doesn’t.
Breaking: Obama Armed El Chapo Via Controversial “Fast And Furious”
Operation
Jan 20, 2016
image:
http://9953-presscdn-0-37.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/ochapo-700x394.jpg
Huge news out of Mexico today as reports say “El
Chapo” was in possession of guns from the Obama administration’s immensely
controversial “Fast And Furious” gun-running program…
According to
Fox News:
“A .50-caliber rifle found at Joaquin “El Chapo”
Guzman’s hideout in Mexico was funneled through the gun-smuggling investigation
known as Fast and Furious, sources confirmed Tuesday to Fox News.
A .50-caliber is a massive rifle that can stop a car
or, as it was intended, take down a helicopter.
After the raid on Jan. 8 in the city of Los Mochis
that killed five of his men and wounded one Mexican marine, officials found a
number of weapons inside the house where Guzman was staying, including the
rifle, officials said.
When agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives checked serial numbers of the eight weapons found in
his possession, they found one of the two .50-caliber weapons traced back to
the ATF program, sources said.
Federal officials told Fox News they are not sure how
many of the weapons seized from Guzman’s house actually originated in the U.S.
and where they were purchased, but are investigating.”
Read more at http://conservativeintel.com/2016/01/20/breaking-obama-armed-el-chapo-via-controversial-fast-and-furious-operation/
Read more at http://conservativeintel.com/2016/01/20/breaking-obama-armed-el-chapo-via-controversial-fast-and-furious-operation/
Pomboy to Barron's: Buy Gold, Oil as Stocks Overvalued
By F
McGuire |
Economic
forecaster Stephanie Pomboy contends that the U.S. stock market remains
overvalued despite the recent selloff and will continue to plunge even lower.
She maintains her long-held view that gold is one of the safest places to be, and that now is the time to invest in the tumbling oil market.
But just how much more will stocks fall?
“Well that’s a tricky question because you don’t know what rabbit [the Federal Reserve] is going to try and pull out of its hat,” Pomboy, the founder and president of MacroMavens, recently told Barron’s.
Global equities’ worst-ever start to a year deepened as oil continued its collapse and a slowdown in China weighs on sentiment. About $2.2 trillion has been wiped off the value of U.S. stocks this year through Wednesday, with the S&P 500 down 8 percent, Bloomberg reported.
“But I do think the stock market has further to fall. If you look at the [total market value] of the stock market to GDP, as well as other measures, we’re still at ridiculous extremes. Stocks have much further to go to be anywhere near normal, much less cheap," she said.
The S&P 500 closed Wednesday at its lowest since October 2014 after touching its weakest level in almost two years, Reuters reported.
However, some financial experts expect the index to fall even further before the downward trend can reverse. The S&P 500 ended just below 1,860, down 9 percent for the year and 12.7 percent from its record high. To confirm that it is a bona-fide bear market, it would have to fall 8.3 percent further to near 1,704.
Pomboy has been very bearish on the U.S. economy and markets since at least 2010. "I maintained throughout that quantitative easing, which was all that was left after the fiscal stimulus was exhausted, would fail to benefit the economy," said Pomboy, 47, whose institutional-investor clients include BlackRock, Fidelity Investments, and hedge fund Passport Capital.
"But as little love as I had for stocks way back in 2010, I got much more bearish when profit growth started to crumble at the same time the Fed began the Taper in 2014. With the era of the [Federal Reserve keeping rates at zero and buying bonds] now over, there’s absolutely no support left for stocks," she said.
She maintains her long-held view that gold is one of the safest places to be, and that now is the time to invest in the tumbling oil market.
But just how much more will stocks fall?
“Well that’s a tricky question because you don’t know what rabbit [the Federal Reserve] is going to try and pull out of its hat,” Pomboy, the founder and president of MacroMavens, recently told Barron’s.
Global equities’ worst-ever start to a year deepened as oil continued its collapse and a slowdown in China weighs on sentiment. About $2.2 trillion has been wiped off the value of U.S. stocks this year through Wednesday, with the S&P 500 down 8 percent, Bloomberg reported.
“But I do think the stock market has further to fall. If you look at the [total market value] of the stock market to GDP, as well as other measures, we’re still at ridiculous extremes. Stocks have much further to go to be anywhere near normal, much less cheap," she said.
The S&P 500 closed Wednesday at its lowest since October 2014 after touching its weakest level in almost two years, Reuters reported.
However, some financial experts expect the index to fall even further before the downward trend can reverse. The S&P 500 ended just below 1,860, down 9 percent for the year and 12.7 percent from its record high. To confirm that it is a bona-fide bear market, it would have to fall 8.3 percent further to near 1,704.
Pomboy has been very bearish on the U.S. economy and markets since at least 2010. "I maintained throughout that quantitative easing, which was all that was left after the fiscal stimulus was exhausted, would fail to benefit the economy," said Pomboy, 47, whose institutional-investor clients include BlackRock, Fidelity Investments, and hedge fund Passport Capital.
"But as little love as I had for stocks way back in 2010, I got much more bearish when profit growth started to crumble at the same time the Fed began the Taper in 2014. With the era of the [Federal Reserve keeping rates at zero and buying bonds] now over, there’s absolutely no support left for stocks," she said.
Latest News Update
Special: Halle Berry Shocks
World With New Look and 27 Year old Man
She does like gold and U.S. Treasury bonds, however.
"I view gold as becoming a currency rather than a commodity. And the dollar is being debased," she said. "The dollar is wildly over-owned. I think there is zero chance that the Fed continues to raise rates this year and as those expectations come out of the market, that will work to the detriment of the dollar and to the benefit of gold," she said.
She is bullish on Japan and owns shares of the WisdomTree Japan Hedged Equity fund (DXJ). She also has been bullish on Russia and owns shares of Market Vectors Russia exchange-traded fund (RSX).
Her only U.S. equity position is through gold mining stocks and gold. She touts SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) and Market Vectors Gold Miners ETF (GDX) among her gold investments. She also owns shares of Bond ETF (TLT).
As for how the current market volatility will influence this year’s presidential election, Sen. John McCain said that the ongoing plunge in U.S. stock markets would hurt the Democrats’ chances of winning the White House in November, just as a market crash did his 2008 bid for the presidency, The Wall Street Journal reported.
“In our daily tracking, we went from three points up to five points down in 24 hours,” the Arizona Republican said of his standing in the polls when markets went into a free-fall in 2008. In September 2008, McCain suspended his campaign against then-Sen. Barack Obama, saying he needed to get back to Washington to work on a bailout package.
"McCain said that he bore the brunt of public outrage because voters blamed Republicans, since a Republican, George W. Bush, then occupied the Oval Office, But he said that now it is Democrats who are likely to suffer, since Mr. Obama now occupies the White House and is a Democrat," WSJ reported.
“We have a Democrat president,” McCain told WSJ. “People hold presidents responsible.”
(Newsmax wire services contributed to this report).
Read more: Stephanie Pomboy to Barron's: Buy Gold as Stocks Continue to Plunge
Important: Can you afford to Retire?
She does like gold and U.S. Treasury bonds, however.
"I view gold as becoming a currency rather than a commodity. And the dollar is being debased," she said. "The dollar is wildly over-owned. I think there is zero chance that the Fed continues to raise rates this year and as those expectations come out of the market, that will work to the detriment of the dollar and to the benefit of gold," she said.
She is bullish on Japan and owns shares of the WisdomTree Japan Hedged Equity fund (DXJ). She also has been bullish on Russia and owns shares of Market Vectors Russia exchange-traded fund (RSX).
Her only U.S. equity position is through gold mining stocks and gold. She touts SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) and Market Vectors Gold Miners ETF (GDX) among her gold investments. She also owns shares of Bond ETF (TLT).
As for how the current market volatility will influence this year’s presidential election, Sen. John McCain said that the ongoing plunge in U.S. stock markets would hurt the Democrats’ chances of winning the White House in November, just as a market crash did his 2008 bid for the presidency, The Wall Street Journal reported.
“In our daily tracking, we went from three points up to five points down in 24 hours,” the Arizona Republican said of his standing in the polls when markets went into a free-fall in 2008. In September 2008, McCain suspended his campaign against then-Sen. Barack Obama, saying he needed to get back to Washington to work on a bailout package.
"McCain said that he bore the brunt of public outrage because voters blamed Republicans, since a Republican, George W. Bush, then occupied the Oval Office, But he said that now it is Democrats who are likely to suffer, since Mr. Obama now occupies the White House and is a Democrat," WSJ reported.
“We have a Democrat president,” McCain told WSJ. “People hold presidents responsible.”
(Newsmax wire services contributed to this report).
Read more: Stephanie Pomboy to Barron's: Buy Gold as Stocks Continue to Plunge
Important: Can you afford to Retire?
Florida
Latinos Say Trump Hurts the GOP Brand By ARIAN CAMPO-FLORES
|
Florida
Latinos Say Trump Hurts the GOP Brand
Older
Cuban-Americans in the state offer support to the presidential candidate;
others see him as divisive
ENLARGE
Demonstrators
at Donald Trump’s first Florida campaign event in October at his Doral Golf
Resort near Miami. Unlike these protesters, older Cuban-Americans tend to like
the Republican candidate. PHOTO: PEDRO PORTAL/EL NUEVO
HERALD/ASSOCIATED PRESS
By
ARIAN CAMPO-FLORES
Jan. 20, 2016 7:55 p.m. ET
MIAMI— Dennis Freytes, an Army veteran and
Puerto Rican activist in Orlando, has voted for every Republican presidential
candidate going back to Ronald Reagan in 1980. That streak may end
if Donald Trump secures the GOP nomination—an outcome he said could prompt him to
bolt the party and become an independent.
Mr. Trump “is a divisive figure,” said Mr. Freytes, a
supporter of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. He said he has been repelled by many of the businessman’s
comments about immigrants and Hispanics, such as calling Mexicans criminals and
rapists. “That guy will be the ruin of the Republican Party,” he said.
Recent polls
show that Mr. Trump is far ahead of his GOP rivals in Florida. Older
Cuban-Americans who came to the U.S. soon after the Cuban Revolution appear
especially open to his message, according to some Miami Republicans.
READ MORE ON CAPITAL JOURNAL
“He has a rough
way of saying things, but it comes from the heart,” said Julio Martinez,who
came from Cuba in the 1950s and was mayor of Hialeah, a city west of Miami with
a large number of Cuban-American voters. “He’s here to protect the U.S., which
is in danger right now.” Mr. Martinez said he is working to turn out the vote
for Mr. Trump in the area and recently signed up scores of Hispanic volunteers
at a gun show where the campaign set up a table.
Florida’s March 15 primary will present the
first big test of what effect, if any, Mr. Trump’s rhetoric has had on GOP
efforts to court all Latino voters, who made up 14% of the state’s GOP primary
electorate in 2012. Though Nevada also has a sizable Hispanic population, that
state’s Feb. 23 contest involves caucuses with
typically low turnout.
Latinos are
projected to make up 11.9% of eligible U.S. voters in this year’s presidential
election and could sway outcomes in key swing states like Colorado and Nevada,
according to a Pew Research Center study released Tuesday.
Interviews with Florida Hispanic Republicans suggest
that while Mr. Trump benefits from pockets of support, many regard him with
unease, or even hostility. Some said they worry he was pushing other GOP
candidates such as Florida Sen. Marco Rubio to adopt harsh rhetoric and more-extreme positions on immigration
and other issues.
“Everyone is fed
up with politicians, and I can see how he appeals to that audience,”
said Nicole Gomez, the 31-year-old president of the North Dade
Republican Club in Miami. But “he really exploits that visceral anger” and “his
whole demeanor is very repulsive.”
Mr. Trump has
repeatedly dismissed concerns about his standing with Latino voters, saying he
has a great relationship with them and believes he will win their support because
of his ability to create jobs.
Yet many Republican strategists fear Mr. Trump would
perform even worse than Mitt Romney’s poor showing in 2012, when he garnered 27% of the U.S. Hispanic
vote.
A postelection
analysis by the Republican National Committee in 2013 blamed the result in part
on Mr. Romney’s call for “self-deportation” as a solution to illegal
immigration, a comment that turned off many Latinos. Mr. Trump’s positions,
including calls for deporting 11 million people and building a wall on the
Mexican border, have been tougher.
“The Republican
brand is hurt,” said Alfonso Aguilar, president of the Latino
Partnership for Conservative Principles, an advocacy group. Mr. Trump’s
“language has been so offensive, the proposals so draconian, that the damage is
big.”
A coalition of
Hispanic GOP groups, including his, called a news conference last October on
the eve of the GOP debate in Boulder, Colo., to rule out support for Mr. Trump.
In December, they held a similar event on the eve of the Las Vegas GOP debate
to criticize Texas Sen. Ted Cruz for his immigration stances, including
opposition to any form of legalization for undocumented immigrants.
A December MSNBC/Telemundo/Marist Poll found that 65%
of Latino registered voters viewed Mr. Trump negatively, compared with 21% who
saw him positively, by far the poorest showing of any candidate. He fared worse
than any other GOP contender against Democrat Hillary Clinton. And 65% of Hispanics said he was hurting the GOP brand.
Many Latino
Republicans have expressed misgivings. The GOP has undertaken “all these great
attempts to attract the Hispanic community, and he will undo it,”
said Anthony Suarez, 62, president of the Puerto Rican Bar
Association of Florida in Orlando. He predicted Democrats would seize on Mr.
Trump’s language and positions to galvanize the booming Puerto Rican population
in central Florida.
Jenny Montes
De Oca, a 35-year-old Miami physician born in Venezuela, said this will be
her first chance to vote for president after becoming a U.S. citizen in 2012.
She registered as a Republican because she identified more with the party’s positions.
But if Mr. Trump is the nominee, she said she won’t vote for him. “I don’t know
what I’m going to do if that happens,” she said.
IT'S NOT OVER
UNDER THE OBAMACARE ADMINISTRATION!
|
It's not over: Veterans waiting months for appointments
By Scott
Bronstein, Drew Griffin, Nelli Black and Curt
Devine
JUST WATCHED
Some vets waited up to 6 months for
doctor appointment
Some vets waited up to 6 months for doctor appointment 06:14
Story highlights
·
Document shows veterans at VA's largest hospital
facing months-long waits for appointments
·
Last month, VA official said average wait time was
four days
·
Sources say not much has changed despite reaction
after last year's VA scandal
Los
Angeles (CNN)Thousands of veterans who are patients at the VA
Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System have been waiting months just for an
appointment, CNN has learned.
CNN Investigations
Email
your story ideas and tips to CNNtips@cnn.com.What's more, administrators in charge of the massive VA facility in greater Los Angeles may have been hiding wait times, and may have misled Congress on the delays and exactly how long veterans are being forced to wait for care, according to new information obtained by CNN.
This revelation means that the scandal over delays in care and wait times for veterans, which embroiled the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs last year and even led to the resignation of VA Secretary Eric Shinseki, is apparently not over. And the changes promised by the VA and the Obama administration may not be working.
The detailed new evidence comes from the Los Angeles VA's own internal documents obtained by CNN, and numerous medical and administrative sources confirmed the information.
It is particularly significant as the Greater Los Angeles Veterans Medical Center is the nation's largest VA health care system, caring for hundreds of thousands of U.S. veterans.
Read More
The VA
documents show more than 12,700 appointments, which the VA calls consults, had
been waiting more than 90 days to be addressed, as of mid-January.Even new patients seeking care at the Los Angeles VA for the first time can wait months to see a doctor there.
Records show on January 15, more than 1,600 veterans who were new patients were waiting 60 to 90 days for appointments. Another 400 veterans have waited up to six months, and 64 veterans had been waiting six months to a year for their appointments.
The documents provided to CNN show the lengthy wait times are still happening, within the last several months, and sources say the backlog is happening even now.
And yet last month, the VA's acting director for the Western region overseeing the Los Angeles VA told Congress that veterans who are new patients there only have to wait a few days for appointments.
"The average wait time for a new patient right now is about four days," Dr. Skye McDougall, the acting director of the Desert Pacific Healthcare Network, Veterans Health Administration, testified before the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
But McDougall's statement is simply not true.
According to the Los Angeles VA's documents dated January 15, the actual average wait time for new patients at the VA was 48 days. A half-dozen medical and administrative sources inside the LA VA system corroborate these waits.
The wait times since then have not changed significantly -- coming down slightly to a wait time of 44 days for new patients as of March 1, according to another VA document -- and are still roughly 10 times what McDougall testified they were.
The delays in appointments are even taking place at Los Angeles clinics for mental health, where documents show more than 300 veterans have been waiting more than 30, 60, even 90 days for treatment.
At the congressional hearing, McDougall was specifically asked about mental health wait times for new patients, a growing national concern as hundreds of veterans are committing suicide every year.
The uncounted: War's true toll
Asked how long the wait time is for mental health at the Los Angeles VA, McDougall testified that the same number -- a four days' wait for new patients -- applies for mental health.
But that is also not true, according to the documents and sources inside the VA who spoke with CNN.
A new LA VA chart shows as of March 1, new mental health patients in Los Angeles are waiting an average 36 days just to get an appointment.
Los Angeles VA officials would not talk to CNN about the discrepancies but instead sent a statement saying that the "Greater Los Angeles and VA nationwide continues to work very hard to get Veterans off waiting lists and into clinics to get the care they have earned and deserve."
The VA sent CNN new "retrospective data" showing primary care average wait times of four days, specialty care wait times of 7.5 days, and mental health wait times of 2.5 days, as of January. The VA explained that the chart for new patients obtained by CNN "does not include same day appointments or in some cases same week appointments for those Veterans who need care quickly...."
New patients, the VA told CNN, "typically account for less than 10% of all Veteran appointments and are not representative of the whole patient population."
Despite the "retrospective data," the real truth, say the sources CNN has interviewed, is reflected in the internal LA VA documents obtained by CNN -- that wait times for many patients at the Los Angeles VA Medical Centers extends into weeks and months and are a serious problem.
This news of continuing delays in Los Angeles comes a year after reports of cover-ups and turmoil at the VA, which became a national scandal, where wait times, veterans' deaths and even secret waiting lists were revealed at VA hospitals across the country.
Congress even passed a new law last fall to help veterans get care more quickly, as a direct result of the scandal. And since the scandal, Congress has approved $16 billion extra for the VA in an attempt to hire more doctors and nurses and to build more facilities. The VA removed its 14-day scheduling goal to discourage engaging in "inappropriate scheduling practices," and President Barack Obama also appointed a new VA secretary, Robert McDonald, last summer.
Vets not impressed with VA reforms
Sources in the Greater Los Angeles VA say despite the scandal last year, the new secretary, the new laws and all the attention, not much has changed
Elecciones en
noviembre, 2016
LAZARO R GONZALEZ
Para Alcalde del Condado Miami 2016
Escriba el nombre de Lázaro R González en
el espacio de la boleta electoral en blanco
Hágalo para acabar el relajo, el robo, el abuso, el descaro, la mala
administración y haga que el gobierno le
responda a usted y no que sea un feudo de los políticos ladrones y descarados inescrupulosos,
no permita más abusos.
Envie nuestros mensajes a sus amigos y conocidos.
“NO Donaciones de Dinero”
Lázaro R
González, Candidato a Alcalde
del Condado
Miami en la boleta en blanco.
“Que DIOS nos
ilumine en este empeño”
lazarorgonzalez@gmail, 305 898 4146
“FREEDOM IS NOT FREE”
No comments:
Post a Comment