Saturday, February 28, 2015

This Year's CPAC Poll

DEVELOPING: Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul won the 2015 Conservative Political Action Conference straw poll for potential White House candidates for the third consecutive year.
He finished with 26 percent of the vote, ahead of Wisconsin GOP Gov. Scott Walker, who finished with 21 percent of the vote.

The poll was conducted over the conference’s three days of seminars and speeches by most the leading potential Republican candidates.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, consider a top-flight candidate since the 2012 presidential elections, finished last with 2.8 percent of the vote.

His would-be candidacy has since been plagues by the political scandal known as BridgeGate, an up-and-down state economy and his reputation of being a hot head.

Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz finished in third place with 11.5 percent of the vote, followed by retired neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson in fourth with 11 percent of the vote.

Friday, February 27, 2015


Solar Energy Delivers Too Little Bang For Billions Invested


Mr. Williams is president of Taxpayers Protection Alliance, which also operates

Americans deservedly take pride in our ability to tackle and surmount the most daunting technical challenges: the Manhattan Project, the Apollo Program, the Hoover Dam, the interstate highway system. These are among the engineering bold strokes we point to as evidence that anything is possible with the right application of American ingenuity and persistence.

Maybe you noticed that missing from this list is the federal government’s 40-year effort to make “renewable energy” mainstream and market ready. Why? Because when objectively weighed against many other U.S. achievements, this has been a costly and frustrating flop in which massive federal expenditures, over an extended period of time, have resulted in laughably meager results.

The Manhattan project produced the bomb; the Apollo program put men on the moon; the Hoover Dam tamed the Colorado and let a desert bloom; the interstate highway system unleashed America’s mobility. What is there to show for the decades of effort, and trillions of dollars spent, trying to make “renewables” a major part of the nation’s energy portfolio?

Last year, two tirelessly-touted workhorses of the “renewables revolution,” wind and solar, combined generated roughly 2.2% of America’s electricity. Wind accounted for just over 1.6% of that share—and solar just 0.6%. And the tiny share of power they did produce was unreliable, impractical and still not really “cost competitive” if you subtract the direct and indirect subsidies, coming from all levels of government, that keep this teetering house of cards from falling over.

The Government Accountability Office not long ago counted 345 different federal initiatives supporting solar energy. The programs are managed by nearly 20 agencies and support more than 1,500 individual projects. Over the past five years alone, the federal government spent $150 billion on solar energy and other renewable energy projects. Preferable tax treatment given to solar and other alternative electricity initiatives cost Americans nearly $9 billion annually, according to the IRS. Billions of dollars have been blown on solar boondoggles—Solyndra being just one of them—and more boondoggles are in the pipeline (so to speak), since nothing encourages the venture capitalists at the Department of Energy like failure.

But our solar welfare program has gone international now, too. Washington offers the U.S. industry trade protections, in the form of tariffs recently slapped on Chinese solar imports, and President Obama has committing billions of dollars to boosting solar projects in India and Africa.

And that’s just what the federal government offers in support. Personal tax credits related to solar products are available in 20 states; 18 states have corporate tax credits or deduction programs, and 14 states and Puerto Rico offer taxpayer-funded grants to support solar electricity.

Virtually all these programs and giveaways were sold to the public as “temporary” assistance for a technology that would transform the energy sector and soar on its own if given a little help. But a little help almost always turns to a little more help, then a lot of help, for a technology that today delivers very little bang for the billions.  Initiatives initially sold on one premise are now being sold on another—that they create (subsidized) jobs and (subsidized) “stimulus” the economy—in a classic example of “mission creep.” Access to such a massive money pot naturally creates a new interest group. The lobbying is always intense to make these “temporary” diversions a permanent drain on the Treasury.

Americans of a certain vintage may recall that most federal alternative energy initiatives aren’t new, but date back to energy crises of the 1970s. They may also recall the bold ambitions and predictions that backers of these efforts made—most of which aren’t close to being realized today. All we’ve really gained for the effort and expense, if you look past the hype, is the creation of a solar energy establishment, made-up of bureaucrats, academics and rent-seeking corporations, whose primary interest isn’t generating power, but pocketing public resources.

After decades of massive “investments” and disappointing results, Americans need to take a critical second look at whether our failed or faltering federal solar initiatives deserve continued support. With so little to show for so many costly initiatives, it should be clear to the objective observer that federal solar power efforts haven’t been a productive or prudent use of precious tax dollars.

Solar energy’s day in the sun may yet come. But taxpayers have done enough. It’s time for Big Sun to stand on its own, powered exclusively by private investment and initiative.

Thursday, February 26, 2015

The Dangerous Candidacy of Scott Walker

The Dangerous Candidacy of Scott Walker


Let’s stipulate up front that Scott Walker, the governor of Wisconsin, is an odious politician whose ascension to the Presidency would be a disaster.
Set aside, for a moment, his repeated refusal, in the past few days, to say whether he believes that President Obama loves America, or whether he believes that the President is a Christian, and look instead at Walker’s record running what used to be one of America’s more progressive states. Having cut taxes for the wealthy and stripped many of Wisconsin’s public-sector unions of their collective-bargaining rights, he is now preparing to sign a legislative bill that would cripple unions in the private sector. Many wealthy conservatives, such as the Koch brothers, who have funnelled a lot of money to groups supporting Walker, regard him as someone who’s turning his state into a showcase for what they want the rest of America to look like.
But just how threatening is he? If you’ve been following the political news during the past week, you may well have the impression that he’s stumbling in his campaign for the 2016 G.O.P. nomination. Among the political commentariat, the consensus of opinion is that Walker’s repeated refusal to distance himself from Rudy Giuliani’s incendiary comments about Obama, and his subsequent encounter with the Washington Post’s Dan Balz and Robert Costa, during which he appeared to question Obama’s religious faith and took some shots at the media for asking him silly questions, weren’t merely reprehensible: they were serious gaffes that raised questions about Walker’s political abilities.
It wasn’t just liberal columnists who piled on. In a column at the Daily Beast, Matt Lewis, who also writes for the Daily Caller, said that Walker’s comments raised the question of whether he “might not be ready for prime time on the national stage.” Lewis went on: “Conservatives should be worried that Walker hasn’t proven capable of navigating these land mines.” MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, who is a former G.O.P. congressman, wrote at Politico: “Good candidates know how to make dumb questions look, well, dumb.”
Rather than deflecting the reporters’ queries about Obama’s beliefs, as other Republicans had done, Walker used them to send a none-too-subtle message to Republican voters. His refusal to say whether Obama was a Christian wasn’t merely a shot at a hostile media. As Dana Milbank, of the Washington Post noted, it allowed Walker to “wink and nod at the far-right fringe where people really believe that Obama is a Muslim from Kenya who hates America.” Milbank also wrote that Walker was “refusing to grant his opponent legitimacy as an American and a Christian.”
In a more just world, Walker’s indecent and craven antics would disqualify him from playing any further role in the Presidential race. But in the current political environment, his tactics, far from hurting him, may well bolster a candidacy that is already thriving.
Having cemented his reputation as an economic conservative, Walker is busy making a concerted effort to win over social conservatives and evangelical Christians, some of whom apparently believe that Obama is the Antichrist (or perhaps the Seventh King). Earlier this month, during a trip to London, he refused to say whether he believed in evolution, commenting: “That’s a question a politician shouldn’t be involved in, one way or the other.” In addition to making that hat tip to the Book of Genesis brigade, Walker has been reiterating his opposition to gay marriage and taking a notably harder line on abortion than he did during his gubernatorial reëlection campaign, last year. In a recent meeting with Iowa Republicans, the Times reported earlier this week, he stressed his support for a “personhood amendment” that would define life as beginning at conception and effectively outlaw the termination of pregnancies.
Evaluated in this context, Walker’s comments, or refusals to comment, about Obama’s beliefs look less like gaffes and more like carefully considered elements of a larger plan—and one that’s working for him. On Tuesday, the research firm Public Policy Polling released the results of a new national survey of Republican voters, which showed Walker leading the G.O.P. race, with twenty-five per cent of the vote. He was seven percentage points ahead of the candidate in second place, Ben Carson, the author and neurosurgeon, and eight percentage points ahead of Jeb Bush. “Walker is climbing fast in the polling because of his appeal to the most conservative elements of the Republican electorate,” said P.P.P. “Among ‘very conservative’ voters he leads with 37% to 19% for Carson, 12% for Bush, and 11% for Huckabee.”
This is just one poll, and the sample size was small—three hundred and sixteen—but recent state-level polls also show Walker near or in the lead. In California, according to the highly respected Field poll, he’s favored by eighteen per cent of Republicans. Bush is in second place with sixteen per cent, and Rand Paul is in third place with ten per cent. In Texas, a survey carried out by the University of Texas at Austin shows Walker running second, but he’s trailing local boy Ted Cruz by just one percentage point. When a previous poll was taken, in October, only two per cent of Texan Republicans favored Walker; now, he’s standing at nineteen per cent. In South Carolina, according to another P.P.P. survey, he’s also running second, just one point behind Bush, and leading Lindsey Graham, the state’s senior representative in the U.S. Senate.
It’s still early, very early, of course. But Walker is an ambitious and determined politician who has already been through one tough race—his 2012 recall election—that subjected him to a great deal of media attention and hostility from Democrats. Thanks to his ties to the conservative plutocracy, he’s almost certainly going to have some serious money behind him, and he is trying to pitch his campaign in the sweet spot of G.O.P. primaries, where conservatism and antagonism toward coastal élites meets electability. He has the advantage of youthfulness, at age forty-seven, and, finally, as he pointed out to a convention of Christian broadcasters on Monday, he is, “unlike some out there,” a self-made fellow who “didn’t inherit fame or fortune from my family.” That jab was presumably aimed at Jeb Bush, but if Walker were to get the G.O.P. nomination, it could be modified and directed at Hillary Clinton, assuming that she wins the Democratic nomination.
For all his awfulness, Walker is a serious contender. We’d better get used to it.

Wednesday, February 25, 2015

Where Are The "Birthers"?

"Birthers" questioned Obama's right to be President because they said he wasn't born in the U.S.  This in spite of the fact that his mother was a U.S. citizen. Their argument was that being born in a foreign country, he wasn't a "natural born citizen". Now Ted Cruz is showing signs of running for President and he admits not being born in the U.S. so his country of birth is indisputably Canada. My question is, where are the birthers? Why are they not rising up in opposition to Ted's candidacy?

Monday, February 23, 2015

My Presidential Dream Ticket

Bernie Sanders has announced over the weekend that he is thinking of running for President. When I read that it occurred to me, what if Bernie ran as a Democrat and won the nomination? Then Rand Paul won the Republican nomination. What a great election that would be. For once the voters would have a really clear choice.

Governors Defend Tax Increases

This article from Bloomberg Politics:  (Bloomberg) -- Republican governors meeting in Washington this weekend said financial conditions in their states have deteriorated so much that they must raise taxes, even if it means crossing their own party.

In the face of a historical antipathy deepened by the Tea Party movement, chief executives in Alabama, Nevada and Michigan among other states are proposing increases this year to address shortfalls or to spend more on faltering schools and infrastructure. They advocate higher levies on businesses, tobacco, alcohol and gasoline, in some cases casting the increases as user fees.

The governors are at a crossroads. They are choosing between the path of Governor Sam Brownback in Kansas, who has refused to change course even after tax cuts provoked furious opposition, and that of Alabama’s Robert Bentley, who has said the state’s perennially precarious budget has reached the breaking point.

Friday, February 20, 2015

The problem today:

Friday, February 20, 2015
President Obama’s immigration plan and his national health care law both face legal challenges this year that could bring them to a halt. But one-in-four voters think the president should be able to ignore the courts if he wants to, and Democrats believe that even more strongly.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 26% of Likely U.S. Voters think the president should have the right to ignore federal court rulings if they are standing in the way of actions he feels are important for the country. Sixty percent (60%) disagree and say the president should not have the right to ignore the courts. Fifteen percent (15%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
But perhaps more unsettling to supporters of constitutional checks and balances is the finding that 43% of Democrats believe the president should have the right to ignore the courts. Only 35% of voters in President Obama’s party disagree, compared to 81% of Republicans and 67% of voters not affiliated with either major party.
Fifty-two percent (52%) of all voters believe, generally speaking, that court challenges of actions approved by the president and Congress help protect the rights of U.S. citizens. Thirty percent (30%), however, consider such challenges mostly nuisances that stand in the way of good policy. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure.
Thirty-one percent (31%) think it is more important for government to operate efficiently than it is to preserve our system of checks and balances. Nearly twice as many (59%) place more importance on maintaining checks and balances. Eleven percent (11%) are undecided.

People now believe the president should be above the law.  At least in a partisan basis.

Matterhorn and The Frackers

Recently completed readings. "Matterhorn" is a Vietnam masterpiece that delves into politically limited warfare. "The Frackers," while poorly written in my opinion, describes the technological advances of fracking, horizontal drilling, and well casing segmentation.

Both correlate directly with what we are currently faced with in the Middle East, and how our governmental/military complex deals with such highly charged political/economic conflicts.

Max has mentioned Rand Paul and his views on the reality of what we as a nation are facing. I believe Rand is the only candidate on either side that has a handle on these complex issues. When you read The Frackers you will discover that we no longer need energy sources from the Middle East, Canada, or any OPEC member for that matter. It is hard to describe the national wealth our country is blessed with from resource and technological perspectives.

Enjoy the reads.

Thursday, February 19, 2015

The latest weapon in the War on Terror: jobs

The whole world is laughing at the Obama administration’s latest weapon in the War on Terror: jobs for jihadists. State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf unveiled this new policy on Sunday. “We cannot kill our way out of this war,” Harf explained on MSNBC. “We need, in the longer term, medium to longer term, to go after the root causes that leads [sic] people to join these groups.” She continued: “We can work with countries around the world to help improve their governance. We can help them build their economies so they can have job opportunities for these people.” Amid ensuing global giggles, Harf doubled down on this initiative. “We’ll take direct military action against these terrorists,” she told CNN yesterday. “We have done that. We are doing that in Iraq and Syria. But longer term, we have to look at how we combat the conditions that can lead people to turn to extremism.” I added this morning to the guffaws over this fascinating new way of treating the people who just beheaded 21 Egyptian Christians and burned alive 46 people in the last few weeks. I decided, nonetheless, to test the Harf Hypothesis. Does poverty equal militant Islamic terrorism . . . er, I mean, extremism?  
The Global Terrorism Index is the work of Statista, a statistical portal that aggregates more than 18,000 data sources. As Statista explains, it “systematically ranks countries of the world according to their terrorist activity. Iraq ranked first on the global terrorism index with a score of 10 points, making it the country most affected by terrorism on Earth.” 
For 2014, here are the top 10 nations affected by terrorism, as well as their Global Terrorism Index scores: 
 1. Iraq (10) 
2. Afghanistan (9.39) 
3. Pakistan (9.37) 
4. Nigeria (8.58) 
5. Syria (8.12) 
6. India (7.86) 
7. Somalia (7.41) 
8. Yemen (7.31) 
9. Philippines (7.29) 
10. Thailand (7.19)
Meanwhile, the Central Intelligence Agency publishes and regularly updates The World Factbook. Among other things, it ranks 228 nations around the world, from top to bottom, according to per-capita GDP, estimated on a purchasing-power-parity basis.
Here are the ten poorest nations on that list, along with their respective statistics. 
 219. Tokelau ($1,000) 
220. Madagascar ($1,000) 
221. Malawi ($900) 
222. Niger ($800) 
223. Liberia ($700) 
224. Central African Republic ($700) 
225. Burundi ($600) 
226. Somalia ($600) 
227. Zimbabwe ($600) 
228. Democratic Republic of the Congo ($400) 
The Harf Hypothesis would suggest that Earth’s ten most terrorized nations would be the ten poorest on the planet — or at least, these two lists largely should overlap. In fact, only Somalia appears on both rankings. 
Team Obama: 
Their theory is 10 percent correct. This means that the Harf Hypothesis is only 90 percent ridiculous. 
 Continue the laughter!

The Big Lie: 5.6% Unemployment

Jim Clifton

Here's something that many Americans -- including some of the smartest and most educated among us -- don't know: The official unemployment rate, as reported by the U.S. Department of Labor, is extremely misleading.
Right now, we're hearing much celebrating from the media, the White House and Wall Street about how unemployment is "down" to 5.6%. The cheerleading for this number is deafening. The media loves a comeback story, the White House wants to score political points and Wall Street would like you to stay in the market.
None of them will tell you this: If you, a family member or anyone is unemployed and has subsequently given up on finding a job -- if you are so hopelessly out of work that you've stopped looking over the past four weeks -- the Department of Labor doesn't count you as unemployed. That's right. While you are as unemployed as one can possibly be, and tragically may never find work again, you are not counted in the figure we see relentlessly in the news -- currently 5.6%. Right now, as many as 30 million Americans are either out of work or severely underemployed. Trust me, the vast majority of them aren't throwing parties to toast "falling" unemployment.
There's another reason why the official rate is misleading. Say you're an out-of-work engineer or healthcare worker or construction worker or retail manager: If you perform a minimum of one hour of work in a week and are paid at least $20 -- maybe someone pays you to mow their lawn -- you're not officially counted as unemployed in the much-reported 5.6%. Few Americans know this.
Yet another figure of importance that doesn't get much press: those working part time but wanting full-time work. If you have a degree in chemistry or math and are working 10 hours part time because it is all you can find -- in other words, you are severely underemployed -- the government doesn't count you in the 5.6%. Few Americans know this.
There's no other way to say this. The official unemployment rate, which cruelly overlooks the suffering of the long-term and often permanently unemployed as well as the depressingly underemployed, amounts to a Big Lie.
And it's a lie that has consequences, because the great American dream is to have a good job, and in recent years, America has failed to deliver that dream more than it has at any time in recent memory. A good job is an individual's primary identity, their very self-worth, their dignity -- it establishes the relationship they have with their friends, community and country. When we fail to deliver a good job that fits a citizen's talents, training and experience, we are failing the great American dream.
Gallup defines a good job as 30+ hours per week for an organization that provides a regular paycheck. Right now, the U.S. is delivering at a staggeringly low rate of 44%, which is the number of full-time jobs as a percent of the adult population, 18 years and older. We need that to be 50% and a bare minimum of 10 million new, good jobs to replenish America's middle class.
I hear all the time that "unemployment is greatly reduced, but the people aren't feeling it." When the media, talking heads, the White House and Wall Street start reporting the truth -- the percent of Americans in good jobs; jobs that are full time and real -- then we will quit wondering why Americans aren't "feeling" something that doesn't remotely reflect the reality in their lives. And we will also quit wondering what hollowed out the middle class

Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Aboonju (Malik) Obama, Islamic Dawa Organization, IDO.

Obama, Clintons accused in Egypt of aiding terrorists

Documents leaked ahead of trial of Muslim Brotherhood leaders

NEW YORK – Two new, classifed documents leaked by Egyptian security implicate President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton in the aiding and abetting of terrorists.
The documents have been entered as evidence in the criminal trials of former Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi and other top Muslim Brotherhood leaders, scheduled to begin next month in Cairo.
Obtained by Arabic-speaking former Palestinian Liberation Organization-member Walid Shoebat and posted Thursday on his website, the two leaked documents provide evidence Egyptian security forces have monitored the movements and activities of Obama’s half-brother, Malik Obama, and his Islamic Dawa Organization, or IDO. The security forces also have kept an eye on the dealings with the Muslim Brotherhood of Essam El-Haddad, the father of Gehad El-Haddad, a senior adviser to the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States and a former employee of the William J. Clinton Foundation.

Malik Obama’s alleged terrorist ties
Shoebat referenced the publication of the leaked documents in Arabic by the Al-Masry Network in Egypt as evidence Malik Obama’s organization is the main sponsor of the effort to Islamize the Nuba area, Aswan and Luxor.
“The Aswan region is a territory in southeastern Egypt that borders northern Sudan, which includes a long stretch of the Nile River,” Shoebat wrote. “During the Mohammed Morsi regime, both Egypt and Sudan (under Omar al-Bashir) would have presented an opportunity to work toward the slow erasure of the border between the two nations. Such negotiations in Aswan would have predictably caused Egypt’s Security Forces great concern.”
Shoebat noted the Al-Masry report indicated that Malik Obama’s role with the Sudanese branch of IDO is much more significant than previously thought.
According to Shoebat’s translation from the original Arabic, the article says in part:
“Authorities within Egypt’s security apparatus have warned over the past two and a half years of the movements of the Islamic Dawa Organization (IDO), based in the Sudanese capital of Khartoum, headed by businessman Kenyan owner Aboonju Obama (Malik), the elder brother of U.S. President Barack Obama, according to security authorities who are privy to the details of the investigation. One official said the organization and its president, a close friend of the President of Sudan Omar al-Bashir, support the Muslim Brotherhood with money, as well as the international organization of the group.”
Shoebat further notes the Al-Masry report suggested that Malik has headed not only the Kenyan branch of IDO but the Khartoum-based organization that is “overseen by Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir.” Malik Obama’s role allegedly includes assisting and regulating the global Muslim Brotherhood agenda.

In November, WND reported Egyptian lawyers had filed criminal terrorist charges in the International Criminal Court against President Obama in addition to the criminal terrorism charges previously filed in Egyptian courts against Malik Obama.

WND reported in August that Tehani al-Gebali, the vice president of the Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt, gave a speech and participated in an interview broadcast on Egyptian television, identifying Malik Obama as “a major architect” managing investments for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
On Sept. 7, 2011, two years before the IRS targeting of conservative groups became a national scandal, WND reported the Barack H. Obama Foundation, a 501(c)3 tax-exempt raising operated by Malik Obama in Kenya, appears to have received IRS approval one-month from the application submitted in May 2011. The IRS determination letter dated June 11, 2011, granted a highly irregular retroactive tax-exempt approval only after the group came under fire for operating as a 501(c)3 foundation since 2008 without ever having applied to the IRS for a tax determination.
“Malik Obama’s prominent role as Executive Director of the IDO, at minimum, implicates his brother in a serious conflict of interest matter relative to national security,” Shoebat said.
“That Malik was given illegal tax-exempt status by Lois Lerner may implicate his brother, President Barack Obama, as an accessory to terror funding, which is why Lerner should be granted immunity for her testimony,” he said. “So far, members of Congress who sit on such committees have shown no desire to do this.”
Problems in Egypt for Hillary and Bill
In September 2013, Gehad el-Haddad, openly known to be a senior Muslim Brotherhood official who had worked for five years at the William J. Clinton Foundation, was arrested in Cairo and charged with inciting violence. Until the arrest, el-Haddad was one of the Muslim Brotherhood’s top communications officials in Egypt as well as a top adviser to Morsi.
In December, Shoebat documented that el-Haddad’s father, Essam el-Haddad, was also in custody in Egypt for his close association with the Muslim Brotherhood while serving as an aide to Morsi.
Both father and son are now in Al-Agrab, a high-security prison in Egypt, with their assets seized by Egyptian government, while they await trial on espionage charges. The charges include working with Clinton while she was secretary of state to coordinate between the Morsi government and the Obama administration, allegedly in the interest of inciting violence in Egypt to solidify political control for key Muslim Brotherhood leaders active in Egypt as terrorist operatives.
“Further evidence that Gehad el-Haddad is not just an innocent victim of circumstance has to do with the family he married into,” Shoebat noted.
“His wife is the daughter of Dr. Mahmoud Abu Zeid, who is a leader within the Muslim Brotherhood Guidance Bureau. Gehad is also the nephew of Mohammed Ibrahim, who is a member of the leadership within the Guidance Bureau. This all adds up to mean that the longtime Bill Clinton employee is one of the primary players within the Muslim Brotherhood regime.”
Shoebat has further reported that in August, when U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns went to Cairo with U.S. Sens. John McCain and Lindsay Graham, it was Gehad who helped Burns arrange a secret 90-minute meeting with then-imprisoned Khairat el-Shater, a top-ranking Muslim Brotherhood member who had served as a deputy to the Morsi government.
“Without reading too much between the lines, that ‘major espionage involving foreign countries’ most likely includes the Obama administration when Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State,” Shoebat concluded.

 WND reported in August that Tehani al-Gebali, the vice president of the Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt, gave a speech and participated in an interview broadcast on Egyptian television, identifying Malik Obama as “a major architect” managing investments for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
On Sept. 7, 2011, two years before the IRS targeting of conservative groups became a national scandal, WND reported the Barack H. Obama Foundation, a 501(c)3 tax-exempt raising operated by Malik Obama in Kenya, appears to have received IRS approval one-month from the application submitted in May 2011. The IRS determination letter dated June 11, 2011, granted a highly irregular retroactive tax-exempt approval only after the group came under fire for operating as a 501(c)3 foundation since 2008 without ever having applied to the IRS for a tax determination.

“Malik Obama’s prominent role as Executive Director of the IDO, at minimum, implicates his brother in a serious conflict of interest matter relative to national security,” Shoebat said.
“That Malik was given illegal tax-exempt status by Lois Lerner may implicate his brother, President Barack Obama, as an accessory to terror funding, which is why Lerner should be granted immunity for her testimony,” he said. “So far, members of Congress who sit on such committees have shown no desire to do this.”

Egypt has officially charged both Obama and Clinton with conspiring with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Here Are the Criminal Charges Egypt Is Pursuing Against Hillary and Obama

Friday, December 19th, 2014

President Barack Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took great care of the Muslim Brotherhood while the terrorist group was briefly in charge of Egypt following the Arab Spring.
Though the group is no longer in power, as they were ousted by the Egyptian military, Egypt hasn’t forgotten the aid and comfort Obama provided the terrorist group during their short reign.

Egypt has officially charged both Obama and Clinton with conspiring with the Muslim Brotherhood. These serious charges aren’t a stretch, as Obama has been seen protecting the group in various ways, including placing them on a “hands off” list to allow entrance into the United States and even an invite into his own administration.
While the group controlled Egypt, Obama made sure that they had plenty of weapons, including tanks, light and heavy arms and even planes — to the tune of billions of dollars.
The Muslim Brotherhood is all about implementing Shariah law in Western countries, and the United States is no exception. They wouldn’t hesitate to harm or kill any Christian or Jew who aren’t willing to accept or share their radical faith. We’ve already seen several examples of Shariah spreading to the West — and it’s only getting worse.

Egyptian lawmakers charged Obama and Clinton in two separate complaints with the conspiracy charge.
For the first complaint, Obama was officially named as “an accessory to crimes committed by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.” The charge is serious, with specific details about his accessory role, that said he, “cooperated, incited, and assisted the armed elements of the Muslim Brotherhood in the commission of crimes.”
The other charge, against Clinton, accuses her of working with Naglaa Mahmood, the wife of the ousted Muslim Brotherhood president Mohammed Morsi, in an attempt to overthrow General Abdel Fatah Al-Sisi, the current leader of Egypt (H/T Western Journalism).
Mahmood has since admitted that she’s worked closely with the Clintons, dating back to the 1980s — including numerous phone calls between the two since then, hundreds of which she has recorded.
Perhaps the most serious charge against the two involves their attempted bribe to the tune of $8 billion which was an attempt to sway the Brotherhood to open up part of the Sinai Peninsula to Hamas groups to make it easier to attack Israel.
That’s also not a stretch — as Obama isn’t exactly known to be a supporter of Israel.
While there are numerous reasons to impeach Obama at this point, news like this serves to further strengthen the case to do so. He continuously takes sides with terrorist groups and has managed to destroy America’s reputation with his ridiculously idiotic foreign policy decisions.
In fact, many would say his actions are grounds for him to be charged with treason.

Morsi’s Wife Says She Has PROOF Hillary Worked With Muslim Brotherhood

Sunday, August 17th, 2014

 The Muslim Brotherhood is a radical Islamic organization that originated as an ally to Nazi-style fascism in the Middle East.  They have spawned or inspired numerous other terrorist organizations, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad, ISIS, and even Al-Qaeda.
Amazingly, they have not yet been officially designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization in the United States, and they are taking advantage of this gross oversight.  The MB has infiltrated our government at high levels, and has even set up a US political party, in an attempt to portray themselves as peaceful and politically involved.

But in truth, they would subjugate the United States to Islamic rule, instituting Sharia Law, and forcing Christians and Jews to convert to Islam, pay a tax, or die, if given the opportunity.
There has long been accusations of connections between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Obama administration.  In fact,  Egypt has charged both President Obama and Hillary Clinton with conspiring with the Muslim Brotherhood, during their brief time holding power in Egypt.
Now, in response to political maneuvering by Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration, attempting to distance themselves from the Brotherhood and cozy up to the new Egyptian government, the wife of former MB President Mohammed Morsi is threatening to expose her “special relationship” with Hillary, according to Gateway Pundit.
Nagla Mahmoud, wife of Morsi, is reportedly angry at comments Hillary Clinton recently made, including calling Morsi “naive” and “unfit for the Egyptian Presidency”.
As reported by an Arabic news source, Nagla “is threatening to expose the special relationship between her husband and Hillary Clinton, after the latter attacked the ousted [president], calling him a simpleton who was unfit for the presidency. Sources close to Nagla confirmed that she has threatened to publish the letters exchanged between Morsi and Hillary.”
Similar accusations were made last year by a high-ranking Muslim Brotherhood official who was arrested by the new Egyptian government, who claimed he had information that would “undermine his [U.S. president Obama’s] political future and land him in prison.”
There are no doubts at all that there are connections between Hillary Clinton, Obama, and the Muslim Brotherhood.  It bears noting that Hillary’s top aide, adviser, and confidant Huma Abedin, has very close familial ties to the Brotherhood leadership.
This is just one of many reasons why Hillary Clinton should never be elected President.  Instead, she should be fully investigated and prosecuted for the crimes she has committed, including lying under oath and treason.

Tuesday, February 17, 2015

Yet another plan comes together. Perhaps we can export jobs to the middle east instead of Asia.

A top State Department spokeswoman suggested when asked in a TV interview Monday night about what the U.S.-led coalition is doing to stop the slaughter of civilians by Islamic State militants across the region. 
"We're killing a lot of them, and we're going to keep killing more of them. ... But we cannot win this war by killing them," department spokeswoman Marie Harf said on MSNBC's "Hardball." "We need ... to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups, whether it's lack of opportunity for jobs, whether --"
At that point, Harf was interrupted by host Chris Matthews, who pointed out, "There's always going to be poor people. There's always going to be poor Muslims."
Harf continued to argue that the U.S. should work with other countries to "help improve their governance" and "help them build their economies so they can have job opportunities for these people."
She acknowledged there's "no easy solution" and said the U.S. would still take out ISIS leaders. But Harf said: "If we can help countries work at the root causes of this -- what makes these 17-year-old kids pick up an AK-47 instead of trying to start a business?"

Keeping America Safe

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — A Montana legislative panel moved to kill an indecent exposure bill Wednesday after the lawmaker who introduced it said he thinks yoga pants should be illegal.
Members of the House Judiciary Committee voted unanimously to table House Bill 365, which Rep. David Moore introduced Tuesday.

The proposal would have expanded the definition of indecent exposure to include garments that give the appearance of a person's buttocks, genitals, pelvis or female nipple.
The Republican from Missoula said he wouldn't have a problem with people being arrested for wearing such provocative clothing such as tight-fitting beige garments. Moore also said yoga pants should be illegal.

Monday, February 16, 2015

A big problem for the diva.

Bill’s libido threatens to derail Hillary — again

Bill’s libido threatens to derail Hillary — again

She hasn’t even announced, but the question has already resurfaced: Will Bill Clinton’s baggage derail Hillary Clinton’s presidential hopes?
Just a few weeks ago, reports broke that Bill Clinton had flown at least 11 times on “The Lolita Express” — a private plane owned by the mysterious financier and convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. According to Virginia Roberts, who claims to have been one of Epstein’s many teenage sex slaves, Clinton also visited Epstein’s private Caribbean retreat, known as “Orgy Island.”
Modal Trigger
Is Bill Clinton’s baggage going to derail Hillary Clinton’s presidential hopes?Photo: WireImage
“I remember asking Jeffrey, ‘What’s Bill Clinton doing here?’” Roberts said in 2011. The former president, she added, was accompanied by four young girls during his stay — two of whom were among Epstein’s regular sex partners. “And [Jeffrey] laughed it off and said, ‘Well, he owes me a favor.’ He never told me what favors they were.”
Clinton also spent years traveling and partying with Ron Burkle, a billionaire bachelor with a penchant for very young girls. Clinton spent so much time on Burkle’s private plane that it came to be known in Burkle’s circle as “Air F—k One.”
And that is to say nothing of Bill’s solicitation of mystery donors, the concerns about financial malfeasance at the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, Bill’s racially charged verbal gaffes during Hillary’s 2008 bid and the alleged longtime, serious mistress who diverted Hillary’s presidential campaign from larger problems.
To be clear, none of this is ancient history, affairs and misbehaviors that the nation has absorbed and seemingly forgiven. These are ongoing compulsions, tugs toward self-destruction that look to destroy his wife instead.
Bill never stopped being Bill.

‘I can’t control him’

Modal Trigger
Bill and Hillary at a St. Louis campaign rally in 1992.Photo: Getty Images
“Bimbo eruption” entered the lexicon in 1992, coined by then-candidate Bill Clinton’s aide Betsey Wright, who’d long seen Bill’s other women come and go. Yet during his first presidential campaign, Bill and Hillary shrewdly navigated the reports of his longtime infidelity, just as they would during the Monica Lewinsky scandal and resulting impeachment.
In the years since Bill left the White House and Hillary’s own stature has soared, the subtext of their narrative has been successful: Whatever the true nature of their marriage, that’s between them — which is fair when the issue is monogamy between consenting adults.
Modal Trigger
Monica Lewinsky in 1998Photo: Getty Images
But when you’re running for office as the first female president of the United States — who, by the way, has spent her entire life advocating for women’s and children’s rights — and your husband has spent years consorting with at least one known pedophile who ensnared girls as young as 14 into his private sex ring, it’s a potentially insurmountable liability.
As it is, Bill supposedly was the reason Hillary initially declined then-President-elect Obama’s offer to be secretary of state.
According to John Heilemann and Mark Halperin’s 2010 book “Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime,” Hillary told Obama that she was most worried about the damage Bill could do.
“You know my husband,” she said. “You know I can’t control him, and at some point he’ll be a problem.”
Also reported in the book was the existence of a “war room within a war room” during Hillary’s campaign. It was devoted solely to tracking down reports of Bill’s womanizing. What did they learn? Here, in the midst of his wife’s historic campaign, Bill was involved in a serious relationship with another woman.
This, according to “Game Change,” was Hillaryland’s nightmare: “What everyone who signed up with Hillary feared each waking day.”
Hillary took another hit when Claire McCaskill, the prominent Democratic senator from Missouri, weighed in on Bill’s reputation on “Meet the Press.”
“I think he’s been a great leader, but I don’t want my daughter near him,” Sen. Claire McCaskill told “Meet the Press,” to which Hillary reportedly responded, “F—k her.”Photo: AP
“I think he’s been a great leader,” McCaskill said, “but I don’t want my daughter near him.”
“F—k her,” Hillary said.
McCaskill endorsed Obama.
It was Bill’s close relationships with Burkle and Epstein, however, that were Hillary’s true threat. In an exposé published in Vanity Fair’s July 2008 issue, Todd Purdum — husband of Bill’s former White House press secretary Dee Dee Myers — wrote of the former president’s depraved, “motley crew” of wealthy hangers-on and enablers.
Clinton had been close with Burkle, a self-made billionaire, for well over a decade. Burkle, 62, had long kept his private plane stocked with girls as young as 19, and according to author Mark Ebner, Burkle was well-known as a longtime patron of high-end prostitutes. In an excised chapter from his biography of Paris Hilton, which he later posted online, Ebner wrote that Burkle and billionaire Ted Field hired Hilton, among others, to fly to Vegas for sex.
“We would party pretty hard,” a source told Ebner. “Paris got naked, and the girls would get naked . . . There were times when you would have Ted or Ron come down, and they would pretty much pay for girl-on-girl action . . . They’d pay to watch girls going at it.”
Another member of their circle was Steve Bing, a wealthy playboy with a private jet. (Bing is best known as the father of Elizabeth Hurley’s child, and Hurley was later linked to Clinton by her ex-boyfriend Tom Sizemore. Hurley has denied an affair.)
Modal Trigger
Billionaire Ron Burkle (above) and Steve Bing (below) were two known playboys whom Bill Clinton ran around with. Burkle’s private plane came to be known within his circle as “Air F—k One.”Photo: Getty Images
One former Clinton aide told Purdum that Bill’s seedy social circle was, at best, perplexing. “I just think those guys are radioactive,” the aide said. “I stay far away from them.”
Modal Trigger
Bing is a businessman and film producer.Photo: Getty Images
In the run-up to Hillary’s 2008 bid, other aides and associates were alarmed by even more rumors: that Clinton had hooked up with actress Gina Gershon on Burkle’s jet; the sightings with a powerful Canadian businesswoman; the random one-night stands while traveling. Purdum wrote that an executive ran into Clinton, Bing and a gaggle of gorgeous young women in an elevator in Manhattan. He was shocked to see an ex-president in such company. “I don’t know what the guy was doing,” he reportedly said, “but it was so clear that it was just no good.”
By 2010, Bill’s friendship with Burkle was publicly done. Though Bill had made an estimated $15 million while working as Burkle’s pitchman, he’d begun distancing himself in 2007 and formally severed the relationship after Hillary was up for secretary of state.
In the aftermath, three of Bill’s aides went to the press — presumably with his assent — to claim that Burkle still owed Bill $20 million but that Bill had chosen to take the high road and walk away. Burkle, who rarely gives interviews, sat down with Bloomberg Businessweek to make his feelings about the former president clear.
“When Clinton left the presidency, he had to make money, and there were certain limits on how he could do it,” Burkle told the magazine. “In [some] ways, it was the dumbest thing I ever did.”
He also said that of the two of them, Bill was the liability. “If someone wanted to embarrass him,” Burkle said, “I got thrown in too. I got all that for free.”

Flights with Epstein

Modal Trigger
Court documents against Epstein show that he once had 21 private email addresses and phone numbers for Clinton and an aide.Photo: PatrickMcMullan; Getty Images
Why would a man with Bill Clinton’s history cultivate friends like these? This is, after all, the candidate whose campaign was nearly derailed by the emergence of his longtime mistress, Gennifer Flowers, in 1992. Then came Paula Jones (claiming sexual harassment), Kathleen Willey (same), Juanita Broaddrick (rape) and, most famously, Lewinsky, the White House intern whose liaisons with Clinton led to his impeachment.
Modal Trigger
Paula Jones (right) accused Bill of sexual harassment. And Gennifer Flowers came out as his longtime mistress during his campaign in 1992.Photo: DMI; Reuters
According to Lewinsky’s testimony in the Starr Report, Clinton told her that he’d had “hundreds of affairs” early on in his marriage, but now he was trying to be faithful. That, she said, was the reason he gave for ending their relationship.
The former president has also been rumored to have had affairs with Barbra Streisand, Eleanor Mondale, Sharon Stone and most recently with a woman code-named “Energizer” by his Secret Service detail.
Bill’s decision to befriend Epstein, however, seems uniquely self-destructive.
Epstein, 62, is often called a self-made billionaire, though his actual net worth remains undocumented. He began his career as a teacher at Dalton before leaving for Bear Stearns and then going into business for himself as a financial adviser. According to a 2002 profile in New York magazine, Epstein only took clients who invested at least $1 billion and gave him complete control of the money.
Modal Trigger
Bill poses with Nevada prostitutes Barbie Girl (left) and Ava Adora at a charity event in Los Angeles in March.Photo: Facebook
Epstein is also a career collector of mega-rich, mega-powerful friends: In addition to Bill Clinton, Epstein has socialized with Stephen Hawking and Prince Andrew.
Virginia Roberts, who filed an affidavit in Florida federal court, claims that she was groomed by Epstein’s longtime companion Ghislaine Maxwell, daughter of the late media mogul Robert Maxwell, to become one of Epstein’s many underage “sex slaves” when she was 15 years old.
Now 31, married and a mother of three, Roberts claims in court documents that Epstein later forced her to have sex with Prince Andrew three times, once as part of an 11-person orgy.
“Epstein and Maxwell trained me to do what they wanted, including sexual activities and the use of sexual toys,” she says in court documents. “The training was in New York and Florida, in Epstein’s mansions. It was basically every day and was like going to school. I also had to have sex with Epstein many times. I was trained to be ‘everything a man wanted.’ ”
Prince Andrew has denied Roberts’ claims. Roberts also stated she never saw Bill Clinton having sex with anyone.
According to the 2002 New York profile, Epstein became friendly with Bill when the former president was shopping around for a free private plane ride to Africa. Along for the trip were the actors Kevin Spacey and Chris Tucker.
Modal Trigger
Flight logs show that Bill Clinton flew on Epstein’s private plane at least 11 times, including once when a soft-core porn star was on board.Photo: Gregory P. Mango
Flight logs show that Bill Clinton would later fly on Epstein’s private plane at least 11 times — several with Maxwell on board, and at least once with a soft-core porn star. Roberts has also said that Clinton visited Epstein’s private “Orgy Island” several times. Court documents show that Epstein had 21 private email addresses and phone numbers for Clinton and an aide.
In 2005, Palm Beach police responded to a complaint filed by a woman who claimed her 14-year-old daughter was lured to Epstein’s mansion. There, the girl was forced to undress and massage Epstein and was paid $300.
In all, it’s believed Epstein had 40 victims in Palm Beach alone. The Daily Beast reported that some of Epstein’s victims claimed he imported girls from Europe and South America, and that three were 12 years old. They were a treat to himself for his birthday.
Epstein hired a team of lawyers — among them Ken Starr, Bill Clinton’s old nemesis. In the end, Epstein pleaded guilty to just one count of soliciting an underage girl for prostitution. He served a year under nominal house arrest.

Surviving again?

Modal Trigger
Photo: Getty Images

Bill Clinton cut ties with Epstein 10 years ago, but the emergence of these flight logs raises serious questions. Since leaving the White House, Bill, now 68, has repositioned himself as a humanitarian, distinguished elder statesman and supportive husband, softened by a quadruple bypass in 2004, his daughter’s marriage and the birth of his granddaughter last year. The old Bill, the quaint letch, was meant to be left behind in the 1990s. But clearly, that was never the case. If anything, Bill seems to have become more reckless.
In 1998, at the height of the Lewinsky scandal and looming impeachment, he managed to save his own presidency in large part because Hillary stood by him. In return, he was meant to do what it took when it was her turn to run.
If, on some level, he wanted her to lose the nomination, he did a great job. What became clear to Hillary’s camp through the 2008 campaign, according to “Game Change,” was that Bill Clinton would do whatever he wanted to do. His blow-up right before the South Carolina primary, in which he called Obama’s anti-war stance “a fairy tale,” led to her crushing defeat.
“On garish display,” the authors wrote, “was Clinton violating the cardinal rule that was supposed to govern his conduct from the start of Hillary’s campaign: Don’t overshadow your wife.”
And so it begins, again.

Friday, February 13, 2015

Oregon's Governor Resigns

This report appeared in today's Miami Herald: 

The resignation of Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber instantly promoted the liberal Democrat who is next in line to succeed him: the 54-year-old secretary of state who has long been thought to have her eye on Oregon's top elected position.

Kate Brown, who is widely considered to be to the left of the departing Democratic governor, will also become the first openly bisexual governor in the nation. She will not assume office until Wednesday, when Kitzhaber's resignation takes effect. He is stepping down amid suspicions that his fiancee used their relationship to land contracts for her green-energy consulting business.

"This is a sad day for Oregon. But I am confident that legislators are ready to come together to move Oregon forward," Brown said Friday. "I know you all have a lot of questions, and I will answer them as soon as possible. As you can imagine, there is a lot of work to be done between now and Wednesday."

Read more here:

King vs. Burwell. How will SCOTUS rule.

The main question in the King case is whether Congress intended for states using the federal exchange to have access to tax credits, or if the credits were meant to be a reward for creating a state-based exchange. Over the last few years, and especially in recent months, we’ve seen evidence from both sides attempting to prove what lawmakers intended.

Here are the facts: The Affordable Care Act amended the IRS tax code to provide subsidies for plans “which were enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State under 1311.” Section 1311 lays out guidelines for states to create their own exchanges, and doesn’t mention a federal exchange. The Obama administration argues that this is a drafting issue and that it was never Congress’s intent to deprive states of subsidies. A later section gives the Health and Human Services secretary the power to “establish and operate such Exchange within the State.” The conservative groups and people suing the administration, led by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, argue that Congress wanted to use the subsidies to reward states that built their own exchanges.

Each piece of evidence speaks to lawmakers’ intent, which is why the Gruber video was so powerful—here was the guy who helped create Obamacare saying the subsidies were a reward, or a threat to build an exchange, or else lose out on millions of federal dollars. But while Gruber got the most attention, there are also plenty of other things—e-mails between reporters and staffers, past statements from lawmakers, and votes in Congress—that give credence to the idea the bill was just sloppily written.

Thursday, February 12, 2015

interchangeable parts and mass-production techniques

The Marketing Genius of Samuel Colt

Why You Should Care

Because America’s love affair with guns was kindled by one very talented matchmaker.

July 18, 2014

By Sean Braswell Follow @seanbraswell

“God created men,” goes the famous frontier saying, “Colonel Colt made them equal.”  

So how did one man, even a legendary arms-maker, accomplish a task generally reserved for constitutions, wars and philosophers? Well, the saying itself says it all: truly sensational PR.

More than any other man, he is responsible for fanning the flames of America’s passion for privately owned firearms.

If the name Samuel Colt, born 200 years ago on July 19, 1814, has become synonymous with guns, it’s no accident. It was precisely his intention. The bearded industrialist may not have invented the revolver whose design he perfected, but he was a pioneer in everything from production lines to political lobbying to mass marketing and celebrity endorsements, and, more than any other man, he is responsible for fanning the flames of America’s passion for privately owned firearms.

Like many top American entrepreneurs, Colt eschewed traditional pathways to success, like attending college or rising through the company ranks, in favor of convincing wealthy friends and family members to capitalize his 22-year-old’s dreams. After a brief stint at Amherst Academy went up in smoke thanks to a pyrotechnic prank, the audacious Hartford, Conn., native was sent by his father on the 1830s equivalent of an unpaid internship: a job on a cargo ship bound for India.

“The husky, fast-talking industrialist from Connecticut,” Jack Kelly writes inThe Invention of the Revolver, “embodied every European stereotype of the American: He was charming and abrasive, self-made and overbearing … as imaginative as he was mercenary, an opportunist, a liar, and a genius.”During the lengthy boat ride, Colt whittled a revolving pistol prototype out of wood, and after a spell as a traveling showman touting the benefits of laughing gas, the young huckster persuaded his family and friends to give him the $230,000 he needed to give the gunmaking business a shot.

Mad Man at Arms

SOURCE Matthew Brady

He was also relentless. Colt’s quarter-million dollar venture, indeed his first three ventures, all went under. While the revolver provided a pivotal new advantage to American soldiers and settlers — the ability to fire five to six shots without reloading, a task that required 20 seconds with single-shot firearms — its $50 price tag (equivalent to $3,000 today) was prohibitive for the average buyer.

Riding to Colt’s rescue was the savior of many a weapons manufacturer: the federal government. Colt’s revolvers were held in such esteem by Captain Sam Walker and his Texas Rangers during the Seminole War that when the Mexican-American War flared up in the 1840s, Walker helped convince the U.S. War Department to order 1,000 revolvers from Colt “to keep the various warlike tribes of Indians and marauding Mexicans in subjection.”

Colt was back in business — with a new appreciation for both combat testimonials and government largesse. The budding industrialist may have despised the federal hand that first fed him — “To be … under the pay and patronage of Government is to stagnate ambition,” he once said — but in a few years he was writing the book on political lobbying, running up gigantic liquor tabs entertaining politicians and military officers, while earning celebrity endorsements from the likes of Sam Houston, the Republic of Texas’s former president.

Colt capitalized on Americans’ romanticized view of the rugged frontier.

And trailblazer that he was, Colt did not stop at U.S. politicians. He bestowed complementary arms on world leaders from Czar Nicholas of Russia to the king of Siam, and won endorsements from the likes of Giuseppe Garibaldi and Brigham Young. But Colt saved his most effective marketing ploys for convincing average Americans to pay a month’s wage for a device that required frequent maintenance and was known to malfunction.

Colt capitalized on Americans’ romanticized view of the rugged frontier to sell pocket revolvers and other pistols — mostly to those who, like himself,lived in Eastern towns and cities. And to do so, Colt deployed a marketing and sales arsenal unlike any before.

Colt gave a custom-engraved and fold inlaid revolver to the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire Abdülmecid I

He created a national network of sales reps, ran ads in newspapers with artwork by famous Western artist and adventurer George Catlin and even paidUnited States Magazine to run a 29-page illustrated spread profiling his factory, which used interchangeable parts and mass-production techniques more than half a century before Henry Ford’s first Model T rolled off an assembly line.  

Colt was also well ahead of his time in giving his products patriotic names like the Colt Navy Revolver, and, long before the iPod and iPhone, he was whetting consumer appetites with slightly modified models with customizable elements. He even coined the expression “new and improved,” and got himself an honorary military commission and title of “colonel” to further boost marketing efforts.

By the start of the U.S. Civil War in 1861, Colonel Colt’s revolvers were perhaps the best-known firearm in the world, and when he died a year later from rheumatic fever at the age of 47, he was one of the wealthiest men in the country. Yet Colt would not live to see the explosion in private gun ownership following the war nor the triumph of the iconic Colt .45 Peacemaker, “the gun that won the West” and was used by every gunslinger from Jesse James to Billy the Kid to Wyatt Earp.

But if he had, you can bet there would have been some endorsement deals and free product coming their way.

Read more: OZY - Smarter, Fresher, Different 

Tuesday, February 10, 2015

a wise man

"We already have the reputation of a progressive company, having been one of the first retailers to offer affordable comprehensive health coverage to all full time and eligible part time employees and their families, as well as stock grants for all. we have a big push in workforce training having trained more then 700 disadvantaged young Americans in retail and customer service. We have pledged to help employees earn their bachelor degrees a commitment that will likely cost tens of millions of dollars. We have pledged to hire returning vets. Making the company a preferred employer keeps turnover costs low and service quality high. Corporations have a duty to help people realize the American Dream. The private sector needs to take a larger role. Our responsibility goes beyond the P&L and the price of our stock. We have to take care of the people in the communities we serve. If half the country or at least a third of the country doesn't have the same opportunities as the rest going forward then the country cannot survive. That's not socialism, that's practical reality".......

Howard Schultz CEO Starbucks Corporation.

Unfortunately, very few CEO's or corporations will follow Schultz's lead.

And in a related question..................

Pope Francis must answer questions about church’s financial dealings with Hitler

A new book, ‘God’s Bankers,’ sheds light on the Vatican Bank and the Nazis



Pope Francis

It’s time for Pope Francis to confess.
His Holiness has said he wants to bring a new era of openness and light to the Roman Catholic Church.
Good for him.
He can start by at last throwing open the Vatican’s secret records about its shady dealings with Hitler, Mussolini and their allies before, during and after World War II.
What did the Vatican know about the Holocaust and other atrocities taking place? How much did it cover up? And, most of all, how much did it profit from them?
Those issues have been given new life by the publication of Gerald Posner’s new book, “God’s Bankers: A History of Money and Power at the Vatican,” which details for the first time all that we do know about the financial shenanigans in the Holy See from that time. But it is tantalizing how much remains buried in the Vatican’s so-called “Secret Archive,” hidden from prying eyes.
These are not private or confidential Roman Catholic Church matters that have no business being aired in public. These relate directly to the church’s conduct during and after the war — as a moral authority in the world, a sovereign state, an investor and as an offshore bank.
Here are the questions that Posner’s book raises and which the pope should answer if he seriously wants to be considered “the People’s Pope.”

The scale of the Vatican’s financial entanglements raises too many questions for us to ignore.

How much money did the Vatican receive each year from Hitler in the guise of the so-called “Kirchensteuer,” or church tax, which he levied on its behalf in the Reich? (Posner finds that this tax came to $1.7 billion — in today’s money — in 1943 alone.) How far did that influence Pope Pius XII’s infamous policy of silence about the rising atrocities against Jews and others throughout occupied Europe — atrocities of which the Vatican received the first direct, eyewitness evidence as early as 1941?
How much money did the Vatican make by investing in Italian munitions manufacturers in the 1930s at the start of Mussolini’s wars of conquest and slaughter, wars that the church (initially) blessed?
Why did the Vatican choose to invest in big Italian insurance companies after Mussolini purged them of Jewish owners and board members (but not Jewish customers)? And how much did senior figures at the church know about those companies’ policy of denying life-insurance claims for Holocaust victims during the 1940s on the grounds that the families couldn’t produce a body?
How much gold looted by Nazis and fascists from occupied Europe made its way into the vaults of the Vatican Bank at the end of the war? What happened to that gold afterward? Did any of it go to South America to support the lifestyles of death-camp commanders and gas-chamber operators who had been helped to escape by the so-called “ratline” run by sympathetic priests? Were U.S. intelligence reports, which described a convoy of trucks loaded with gold arriving in St. Peter’s Square, accurate or not?        
And why did the Vatican refuse to join with the Swiss banks and others in making settlements with survivors’ groups and heirs in the 1990s?
Maybe there are innocent explanations for many of these questions. But they can’t be dismissed with a wave of the hand.
The scale of the Vatican’s financial entanglements raises too many questions for us to ignore. And these involve moral imperatives. As early as March 1942, a guilt-ridden SS officer went to the Catholic bishop of Berlin and gave him the first, detailed account of systematic, industrialized death-camp operations, at Belzec. The shocked and horrified bishop sent the information to the Vatican both by diplomatic pouch and by encoded telegram. Yet the information apparently wasn’t broadcast, or shared with other countries. If not, why not?
The Vatican had a gigantic network of priests in every town across Poland, ground zero for the death squads and the Holocaust. How much was reported back and when?
The Vatican has steadfastly refused to answer those questions. I tried again last week, with both the office of the Nuncio in Washington and the media-relations department in Rome, but received no response. (If that changes, I will update this article.)
Pope Francis will be visiting America in September. The president, the media and other public figures ought to stand shoulder to shoulder with Jewish groups and insist that if he wants to be hailed for his openness and candor, he has to be open and candid first.


Remarks by the President at National Prayer Breakfast

Since one side wants to only tell about 1 paragraph of the President's remarks, let's post the whole speech which was of course a very fine one.

Washington Hilton

Washington, D.C.

9:13 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Well, good morning. Giving all praise and honor to God. It is wonderful to be back with you here. I want to thank our co-chairs, Bob and Roger. These two don’t always agree in the Senate, but in coming together and uniting us all in prayer, they embody the spirit of our gathering today.

I also want to thank everybody who helped organize this breakfast. It’s wonderful to see so many friends and faith leaders and dignitaries. And Michelle and I are truly honored to be joining you here today.

I want to offer a special welcome to a good friend, His Holiness the Dalai Lama -- who is a powerful example of what it means to practice compassion, who inspires us to speak up for the freedom and dignity of all human beings. (Applause.) I’ve been pleased to welcome him to the White House on many occasions, and we’re grateful that he’s able to join us here today. (Applause.)

There aren’t that many occasions that bring His Holiness under the same roof as NASCAR. (Laughter.) This may be the first. (Laughter.) But God works in mysterious ways. (Laughter.) And so I want to thank Darrell for that wonderful presentation. Darrell knows that when you’re going 200 miles an hour, a little prayer cannot hurt. (Laughter.) I suspect that more than once, Darrell has had the same thought as many of us have in our own lives -- Jesus, take the wheel. (Laughter.) Although I hope that you kept your hands on the wheel when you were thinking that. (Laughter.)

He and I obviously share something in having married up. And we are so grateful to Stevie for the incredible work that they’ve done together to build a ministry where the fastest drivers can slow down a little bit, and spend some time in prayer and reflection and thanks. And we certainly want to wish Darrell a happy birthday. (Applause.) Happy birthday.

I will note, though, Darrell, when you were reading that list of things folks were saying about you, I was thinking, well, you’re a piker. I mean, that -- (laughter.) I mean, if you really want a list, come talk to me. (Laughter.) Because that ain’t nothing. (Laughter.) That’s the best they can do in NASCAR? (Laughter.)

Slowing down and pausing for fellowship and prayer -- that’s what this breakfast is about. I think it’s fair to say Washington moves a lot slower than NASCAR. Certainly my agenda does sometimes. (Laughter.) But still, it’s easier to get caught up in the rush of our lives, and in the political back-and-forth that can take over this city. We get sidetracked with distractions, large and small. We can’t go 10 minutes without checking our smartphones -- and for my staff, that’s every 10 seconds. And so for 63 years, this prayer tradition has brought us together, giving us the opportunity to come together in humility before the Almighty and to be reminded of what it is that we share as children of God.

And certainly for me, this is always a chance to reflect on my own faith journey. Many times as President, I’ve been reminded of a line of prayer that Eleanor Roosevelt was fond of. She said, “Keep us at tasks too hard for us that we may be driven to Thee for strength.” Keep us at tasks too hard for us that we may be driven to Thee for strength. I’ve wondered at times if maybe God was answering that prayer a little too literally. But no matter the challenge, He has been there for all of us. He’s certainly strengthened me “with the power through his Spirit,” as I’ve sought His guidance not just in my own life but in the life of our nation.

Now, over the last few months, we’ve seen a number of challenges -- certainly over the last six years. But part of what I want to touch on today is the degree to which we’ve seen professions of faith used both as an instrument of great good, but also twisted and misused in the name of evil.

As we speak, around the world, we see faith inspiring people to lift up one another -- to feed the hungry and care for the poor, and comfort the afflicted and make peace where there is strife. We heard the good work that Sister has done in Philadelphia, and the incredible work that Dr. Brantly and his colleagues have done. We see faith driving us to do right.

But we also see faith being twisted and distorted, used as a wedge -- or, worse, sometimes used as a weapon. From a school in Pakistan to the streets of Paris, we have seen violence and terror perpetrated by those who profess to stand up for faith, their faith, professed to stand up for Islam, but, in fact, are betraying it. We see ISIL, a brutal, vicious death cult that, in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism -- terrorizing religious minorities like the Yezidis, subjecting women to rape as a weapon of war, and claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions.

We see sectarian war in Syria, the murder of Muslims and Christians in Nigeria, religious war in the Central African Republic, a rising tide of anti-Semitism and hate crimes in Europe, so often perpetrated in the name of religion.

So how do we, as people of faith, reconcile these realities -- the profound good, the strength, the tenacity, the compassion and love that can flow from all of our faiths, operating alongside those who seek to hijack religious [sic] for their own murderous ends?

Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ. Michelle and I returned from India -- an incredible, beautiful country, full of magnificent diversity -- but a place where, in past years, religious faiths of all types have, on occasion, been targeted by other peoples of faith, simply due to their heritage and their beliefs -- acts of intolerance that would have shocked Gandhiji [sic], the person who helped to liberate that nation.

So this is not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us, a sinful tendency that can pervert and distort our faith. In today’s world, when hate groups have their own Twitter accounts and bigotry can fester in hidden places in cyberspace, it can be even harder to counteract such intolerance. But God compels us to try. And in this mission, I believe there are a few principles that can guide us, particularly those of us who profess to believe.

And, first, we should start with some basic humility. I believe that the starting point of faith is some doubt -- not being so full of yourself and so confident that you are right and that God speaks only to us, and doesn’t speak to others, that God only cares about us and doesn’t care about others, that somehow we alone are in possession of the truth.

Our job is not to ask that God respond to our notion of truth -- our job is to be true to Him, His word, and His commandments. And we should assume humbly that we’re confused and don’t always know what we’re doing and we’re staggering and stumbling towards Him, and have some humility in that process. And that means we have to speak up against those who would misuse His name to justify oppression, or violence, or hatred with that fierce certainty. No God condones terror. No grievance justifies the taking of innocent lives, or the oppression of those who are weaker or fewer in number.

And so, as people of faith, we are summoned to push back against those who try to distort our religion -- any religion -- for their own nihilistic ends. And here at home and around the world, we will constantly reaffirm that fundamental freedom -- freedom of religion -- the right to practice our faith how we choose, to change our faith if we choose, to practice no faith at all if we choose, and to do so free of persecution and fear and discrimination.

There’s wisdom in our founders writing in those documents that help found this nation the notion of freedom of religion, because they understood the need for humility. They also understood the need to uphold freedom of speech, that there was a connection between freedom of speech and freedom of religion. For to infringe on one right under the pretext of protecting another is a betrayal of both.

But part of humility is also recognizing in modern, complicated, diverse societies, the functioning of these rights, the concern for the protection of these rights calls for each of us to exercise civility and restraint and judgment. And if, in fact, we defend the legal right of a person to insult another’s religion, we’re equally obligated to use our free speech to condemn such insults -- (applause) -- and stand shoulder-to-shoulder with religious communities, particularly religious minorities who are the targets of such attacks. Just because you have the right to say something doesn’t mean the rest of us shouldn’t question those who would insult others in the name of free speech. Because we know that our nations are stronger when people of all faiths feel that they are welcome, that they, too, are full and equal members of our countries.

So humility I think is needed. And the second thing we need is to uphold the distinction between our faith and our governments. Between church and between state. The United States is one of the most religious countries in the world -- far more religious than most Western developed countries. And one of the reasons is that our founders wisely embraced the separation of church and state. Our government does not sponsor a religion, nor does it pressure anyone to practice a particular faith, or any faith at all. And the result is a culture where people of all backgrounds and beliefs can freely and proudly worship, without fear, or coercion -- so that when you listen to Darrell talk about his faith journey you know it’s real. You know he’s not saying it because it helps him advance, or because somebody told him to. It’s from the heart.

That’s not the case in theocracies that restrict people’s choice of faith. It’s not the case in authoritarian governments that elevate an individual leader or a political party above the people, or in some cases, above the concept of God Himself. So the freedom of religion is a value we will continue to protect here at home and stand up for around the world, and is one that we guard vigilantly here in the United States.

Last year, we joined together to pray for the release of Christian missionary Kenneth Bae, held in North Korea for two years. And today, we give thanks that Kenneth is finally back where he belongs -- home, with his family. (Applause.)

Last year, we prayed together for Pastor Saeed Abedini, detained in Iran since 2012. And I was recently in Boise, Idaho, and had the opportunity to meet with Pastor Abedini’s beautiful wife and wonderful children and to convey to them that our country has not forgotten brother Saeed and that we’re doing everything we can to bring him home. (Applause.) And then, I received an extraordinary letter from Pastor Abedini. And in it, he describes his captivity, and expressed his gratitude for my visit with his family, and thanked us all for standing in solidarity with him during his captivity.

And Pastor Abedini wrote, “Nothing is more valuable to the Body of Christ than to see how the Lord is in control, and moves ahead of countries and leadership through united prayer.” And he closed his letter by describing himself as “prisoner for Christ, who is proud to be part of this great nation of the United States of America that cares for religious freedom around the world.” (Applause.)

We’re going to keep up this work -- for Pastor Abedini and all those around the world who are unjustly held or persecuted because of their faith. And we’re grateful to our new Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, Rabbi David Saperstein -- who has hit the ground running, and is heading to Iraq in a few days to help religious communities there address some of those challenges. Where’s David? I know he’s here somewhere. Thank you, David, for the great work you’re doing. (Applause.)

Humility; a suspicion of government getting between us and our faiths, or trying to dictate our faiths, or elevate one faith over another. And, finally, let’s remember that if there is one law that we can all be most certain of that seems to bind people of all faiths, and people who are still finding their way towards faith but have a sense of ethics and morality in them -- that one law, that Golden Rule that we should treat one another as we wish to be treated. The Torah says “Love thy neighbor as yourself.” In Islam, there is a Hadith that states: “None of you truly believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself.” The Holy Bible tells us to “put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony.” Put on love.

Whatever our beliefs, whatever our traditions, we must seek to be instruments of peace, and bringing light where there is darkness, and sowing love where there is hatred. And this is the loving message of His Holiness, Pope Francis. And like so many people around the world, I’ve been touched by his call to relieve suffering, and to show justice and mercy and compassion to the most vulnerable; to walk with The Lord and ask “Who am I to judge?” He challenges us to press on in what he calls our “march of living hope.” And like millions of Americans, I am very much looking forward to welcoming Pope Francis to the United States later this year. (Applause.)

His Holiness expresses that basic law: Treat thy neighbor as yourself. The Dalai Lama -- anybody who’s had an opportunity to be with him senses that same spirit. Kent Brantly expresses that same spirit. Kent was with Samaritan’s Purse, treating Ebola patients in Liberia, when he contracted the virus himself. And with world-class medical care and a deep reliance on faith -- with God’s help, Kent survived. (Applause.)

And then by donating his plasma, he helped others survive as well. And he continues to advocate for a global response in West Africa, reminding us that “our efforts needs to be on loving the people there.” And I could not have been prouder to welcome Kent and his wonderful wife Amber to the Oval Office. We are blessed to have him here today -- because he reminds us of what it means to really “love thy neighbor as thyself.” Not just words, but deeds.

Each of us has a role in fulfilling our common, greater purpose -- not merely to seek high position, but to plumb greater depths so that we may find the strength to love more fully. And this is perhaps our greatest challenge -- to see our own reflection in each other; to be our brother’s keepers and sister’s keepers, and to keep faith with one another. As children of God, let’s make that our work, together.

As children of God, let’s work to end injustice -- injustice of poverty and hunger. No one should ever suffer from such want amidst such plenty. As children of God, let’s work to eliminate the scourge of homelessness, because, as Sister Mary says, “None of us are home until all of us are home.” None of us are home until all of us are home.

As children of God, let’s stand up for the dignity and value of every woman, and man, and child, because we are all equal in His eyes, and work to send the scourge and the sin of modern-day slavery and human trafficking, and “set the oppressed free.” (Applause.)

If we are properly humble, if we drop to our knees on occasion, we will acknowledge that we never fully know God’s purpose. We can never fully fathom His amazing grace. “We see through a glass, darkly” -- grappling with the expanse of His awesome love. But even with our limits, we can heed that which is required: To do justice, and love kindness, and walk humbly with our God.

I pray that we will. And as we journey together on this “march of living hope,” I pray that, in His name, we will run and not be weary, and walk and not be faint, and we’ll heed those words and “put on love.”

May the Lord bless you and keep you, and may He bless this precious country that we love.

Thank you all very much. (Applause.)