Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Afghan leader warns NATO/ USA not to become "occupying force"

KABUL (Reuters) - Afghan President Hamid Karzai angrily warned NATO/USA forces fighting in his country they risked becoming seen as an "occupying force" if they did not stop attacking Afghan homes with air strikes as they hunt insurgents.
"If they don't stop air strikes on Afghan homes, their presence in Afghanistan will be considered as an occupying force and against the will of the Afghan people," Karzai told a news conference in Kabul on Tuesday.

But why? Yes, there are his obvious, rugged good looks and his hat-wearing aplomb. (Seriously, you try to pull off that hat.) But there's more to it than that.
The New York Times suggests that we are beginning a "new charm offensive."

Here is my message to the President :Mr. President, Congress, get US out of the hell hole! These turds are not interested in the democratic process, so why do we continue to insist. They hate us, our way of life, our freedom of speech and religion. How many vital valuable beautiful men and women must be sacrificed for an ideal only we embrace? We can be selfish when it comes to preserving our freedom right here at home. Stop wasting our precious resources on ingrates.  

Our soldiers have done their duty it is time for us to do ours.

Google the White house and your respective Senators and House Representatives. It only takes a few minutes..you can readily find the contact me stuff, fill out a simple form..no need for long comments..they just compile 'for' and 'against'

Tell them to bring our people home immediately. If enough of us write in, they will. Please pass this idea along.

What better way to show respect for our troops, past and present, this Memorial Day week than to tell our leadership we want our troops home.

We have done what we were there to do...we have killed Bin Laden. We have done more than that as, just like Iraq, we have given them a chance to live a better life. Neither place has taken advantage of that.
Instead of those Afghans laying out the bodies of their children how come they didn't alert our forces to the presence of insurgents before they killed our Marine? You know why. They WANTED these deaths. It suits their purposes.

It is time to go..now..before one more drop of blood is split. Write them now. do your duty as our soldiers have done theirs. Please. Pass this along. Please

Sunday, May 29, 2011

Palin and Bachmann , two women , same party and opposite ends .

Sarah Palin is back , and so it seems . All though she is not the only Republican female on the ticket . ENTER Michele Bachmann

Mrs.Bachmann  has some things that er lacking in Palin . 
I am assuming a brain ? 

Sarah Palin's Rolling Thunder Veteran's Group ride yesterday caused friction with some of the veterans who thought that Palin's presence was overshadowing the true meaning behind the event.


Sarah Palin started her bus tour off yesterday by jumping on the back of a bike and riding in the Rolling Thunder Veteran’s Group annual motorcycle run. While she was invited to this run, this did not sit well with all the motorcycle riding veterans.
Palin’s intentions behind this bus tour is not clear, which leaves the media hanging on every word in hopes that the next sentence will be the clue or even the announcement that she plans to become a presidential contender. This media circus around Palin is what caused the friction with some of the veterans participating in the Rolling Thunder motorcycle run.
According to the Atlantic Wire, some of the veteran bikers bickered over who invited Palin to the event. First reports said that the former Alaskan Governor was not invited to participate in the biker run. These reports were later updated to say that she was invited by an Alaskan veterans group.
The reason for the Rolling Thunder Veteran Group’s annual motorcycle run is to raise awareness of POW/MIA soldiers, according to the website TBD Washington. This is not a politically affiliated event and one of the concerns by having Palin at the event is that it would appear that the group endorses her as a candidate, which they do not.
The Rolling Thunder Group found out that Palin was coming through a press release, which again rubbed some of the members the wrong way. She was not invited to make a speech and it was decided before she arrived that she was not to take the stage and make a speech. Palin’s camp did say that she did not intend to speak at the event, days before the motorcycle run. Palin fit right in when she joined the group and at one point she conveyed on how the smell of the exhaust and the sound of the rumbling engines were something that she liked. She jumped on the back of the bike and off she went as detailed in a Huliq article.
Palin’s appearance yesterday may have backfired for the former governor of Alaska. Two distinct views came out of Palin’s ride with the veteran’s yesterday. One saying that it brought extra attention to a great cause and the other saying that her appearance overshadowed the intent of the veteran’s event. With all the news about Palin at this motorcycle event coming from the media this morning, the latter may be more of the actual description.
Taking part in the Rolling Thunder Veteran’s ride to make it look as if the veteran’s are supporting her as a candidate, may have been Palin’s intent all along. Ted Shpak of Rolling Thunder told MSNBC that they don’t endorse any candidate. Shpak said about Palin, “she's not invited to speak [on the stage after the rally]. We're not endorsing her."
Palin, who still does not have a campaign does have a PAC (Political Action Committee) to which you can donate money. Senator McCain spoke with Fox News this morning about his former running mate and he was asked what he thought Palin’s chances were if she did put her hat in the ring for a presidential run. McCain said that “she could win.” He said that Palin is “a major factor” in this political race.

We have had too much “cult of personality” in America for the last eighty years. Remember, we have to sell the whole slate of candidates, and that is easier if we sell the platform they run on. If we sell correct basic principles well, the candidates will sell themselves. Let’s get on message and stop worrying about the second coming of Ronald Reagan. He is not in the race.  Palin tried to gain support of the conservatives . Her giddiness .
made some what of a comical sport of her during the time she appeared on Saturday Night Live  , it seemed from then on that her 'seriousness' of being in politics was under fire . I fear on FOX NEWS could embrace her as a candidate at their own risk . I am also stunned that no feminists rallied behind her either . For Mrs. Palin her future is bleak She will never beat Obama . Republicans need somebody else . Perhaps , Buchannan , she would make a good vice President for Mitt Romney. However that ploy was tried before , I just can't see a women winning the Oval office . America can't over come as of YET some of ti's Gender stereotypes enough to elect a woman . It's going to interesting to see Palin and Michelle Buchannan ... face off during the GOP primaries . 
Republicans, not just conservatives, are at risk of a self-fulfilling, self-defeating prophecy that the field sucks and cannot beat Obama. It’s the economy, stupid. It always has been. It always will be. And America can do better than Barack Obama with any of the candidates we now have. 


Patriot Act Extension


When I heard that Obama was extending the Patriot Act .  I knew then that Obama has fallen through the cracks of trying to look like a strong leader. For the most part Obama was opposed to some , if not all of the Patriot Act while campaigning for President . It's also vary similar how he felt about NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT. He 'promised' to change it, and then took a 360 degree turn and made it more draconian with RACE TO THE TOP . I admit that the Patriot Act has kept America safe over the last years , and during the Bush years the media made the Patriot Act something like a monster . With Obama extending it , he may have done the nation some good .

It only shows that politicians can flip-flop under certain conditions .

The provisions at issue allow the government to use roving wiretaps on multiple electronic devices and across multiple carriers and get court-approved access to business records relevant to terrorist investigations. The third, a "lone wolf" provision that was part of a 2004 law, permits secret intelligence surveillance of non-U.S. individuals without having to show a connection between the target and a specific terrorist group.
From its inception, the law has been dogged by concerns that it represented a government power grab that could violate Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. The opposition came from an unlikely alliance of libertarian-leaning conservatives and liberal Democrats seeking to limit the law's power.

Even before the test vote, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., proposed an amendment that closely tracked a bill his committee passed earlier this year with bipartisan support. Co-sponsored by Paul, the amendment would require that the use of national security letters – documents that allow the government to collect financial and other records – expire on Dec. 31, 2013, if not renewed by Congress.
The amendment also would require more public disclosure and oversight on the government's use of the letters, and it would cancel the one-year waiting period before a recipient of a letter can challenge a government order to keep it secret.
The Democrats who voted to block the Patriot Act extension were Sens. Max Baucus and Jon Tester of Montana as well as Sens. Mark Begich of Alaska, Jeff Merkley of Oregon. The Republicans who voted with them were Sens. Dean Heller of Nevada, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Paul. Also voting no was Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.



Parents Hide Baby’s Gender From The World


I’m going to try to tread lightly on this one, but I will disclose for you up front that I’m mostly stuck in a what-the Heck?! frame of reference at this point. In other words, prepare to watch me talk myself into circles of YEAH! But, well, I mean, yeah…that, too. AND, GOD, I DON’T KNOW. You see, a couple in Canada gave birth to their third child on New Year’s Day. (AWW!) This, in itself, is not significant. The news, you see, is that, aside from the mother, father, the midwives, one friend, and the baby’s two older brothers, no one knows if the young baby is a boy or a girl. And the parents plan to keep things this way for as long as possible. On purpose.

Remember the OCTOMOM hype ? 

 sure you can guess the political ideology behind the parents’ decision to do this. Mom, Kathy Witterick, and Dad, David Stocker, have already been raising their older sons (Jazz, 5, and Kio, 2) to “challenge how they’re expected to look and act based on their sex.” The young boys have had the luxury of choosing when to cut their hair and what clothes they’d like to wear. Each have been shopping from both the girls and boys department since age one and a half.  Jazz has taken to admire fashion and colors that are traditionally associated with girls. Because of this, he’s often referred to as a girl by strangers. Witterick explains that, when this happens–say at the park or something–she doesn’t correct the person. Instead, she lets her son speak up if he decides it’s bothersome.

But this is where I see how this can get…well, kind of sticky.  I just can't wait to see a new TV show based on this NEWS STORY .

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Clinton Gets cold reception in Pakistan

Hillary politico has pleaded with Pakistan to verify "decisive measures" against Islamic militants mass the modification of containerful Laden, but his communication was nervelessly conventional in a land that sees itself as the bounds in the fisticuffs against extremists.

America always has strange bed fellows that it calls it's allies . While our nation has called for sanctions  against Iran for it's development of nuclear arms /power . Our Nation was strangely silent when it came to Pakistan . Sure it's OK for a rouge nation run by a 'dictator' to be our ally , and harbor Bin Laden . The United States believes that at least a dozen senior leaders of al Qaeda are in Pakistan-
YES, Uncle Sam believes still in giving away billions of Tax payer dollars to Pakistan , with out offending them ( our allies )  . YES Pakistan has Nuclear Weapons . Surprises  me that NO PAKISTANI NUKE has ended up in one of American cities . The predictability of Pakistan exploding is vary high . Who knows why Obama took covert action to take out Bin Laden. With all the connections , and WIKI leaks about Pakistani / government  and it's connection to extremists . Those people just love 'us'.So Mrs. Clinton goes on pleading with the enemy .

ISLAMABAD -- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton beseeched Pakistan to take "decisive steps" against Islamist militants in the wake of Osama bin Laden's death, at what she called a turning point for the fraying alliance's effort to fight terrorism and bring stability to Afghanistan.
But her message was greeted coolly in a country that was angered by the bin Laden raid and sees itself as stretched to the limit in fighting extremists that have sown terror within Pakistan.
Officials on both sides say relations are at the lowest point since before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The visit laid bare the growing divergence between the allies, who share the broader goal of countering Islamist militancy and stabilizing Afghanistan, but often differ on who and what groups constitute an enemy.
Mrs. Clinton was joined in a tense, daylong sweep through Islamabad by Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The two were the most senior American officials to visit the country since the May 2 U.S. raid that killed bin Laden and set off a wave of Pakistani anger at the U.S.
The dispatching of such a high-level duo signaled the importance placed by Washington on repairing the relationship in order to help sustain the momentum from bin Laden's death. Both officials praised Pakistan's efforts and noted the sacrifices it has made, losing thousands of its own civilians to terrorist attacks in recent years.
But the tension was clear at the start of the first meeting of the day, with Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari. There were few of the smiles and warm handshakes that usually open such sitdowns, and reporters were soon shooed out of the room.
President Zardari's office said the two sides agreed to work together against "high-value targets in Pakistan," and to promote peace in Afghanistan.
A senior Pakistani official with knowledge of the talks described them as "better than not talking."
Mrs. Clinton and Adm. Mullen also met military chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, who in practice wields more power than Pakistan's elected leaders. The chief of Pakistan's main spy agency, Lt. Gen. Shuja Ahmad Pasha, attended.
U.S. officials accuse the spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence, of aiding the Afghan Taliban and other militant groups to maintain Pakistan's influence in Afghanistan and for use against rival India. Pakistani officials insist they have cut their ties with militant groups.
Both Mrs. Clinton and Adm. Mullen were blunt in their comments to reporters after the meetings, appearing at the American Embassy without any Pakistani officials. Adm. Mullen described the talks as "candid."
"We have reached a turning point. Osama bin Laden is dead but al Qaeda and its syndicate of terror remain a threat to us both," Mrs. Clinton said. "We both recognize that there is still much more work required and it is urgent."
American officials say their priority now is to work with Islamabad to see more aggressive action taken against the Pakistan-based militant groups that are destabilizing Afghanistan.
Mrs. Clinton said Pakistan had agreed to take "some very specific actions" on its own and with the U.S. in the coming days. She didn't provide details.
A senior U.S. official involved in Mrs. Clinton's outreach effort said the trip was constructive, and that Pakistan has already delivered on some of the things that the U.S. has asked for since bin Laden's death -- including granting the Central Intelligence Agency access on Friday to his compound in Abbottobad to scour for clues.
But the proof will come in Pakistani action, the official said. "You might see a lot of activity by the Pakistanis, but it's unclear if that will lead to serious operations."
There is little disagreement between the U.S. and Pakistan on the threat posed by al Qaeda. But Islamabad says it is focusing out of necessity on fighting the Pakistan Taliban, which has launched a series of bloody revenge attacks in Pakistan the weeks since the al Qaeda leader's death
With those attacks Pakistan has also faced almost all of the fallout from the bin Laden raid.
Mrs. Clinton noted the attacks and praised what she called Pakistan's "tremendous" commitment to battling militancy. She also stressed that Washington doesn't suspect senior Pakistani officials knew of bin Laden's presence in Pakistan, and that Pakistan's leaders were also eager to find if any of their people helped shield him.
The raid that killed bin Laden, launched without Pakistan's knowledge, was widely viewed here as a violation of the country's sovereignty, and suggestions from U.S. officials that bin Laden may have been shielded by Pakistani soldiers or spies have only deepened the resentment.
Pakistani officials have indignantly denied bin Laden was given safe harbor. They point out that their security forces have captured many senior al Qaeda leaders and a third of Pakistan's army is deployed in the country's northwest to fight the Pakistan Taliban, an offshot of the Afghan insurgency.
A series of bloody offensives against the Taliban in the past two years have left nearly 3,000 Pakistani soldiers dead. Even some U.S. officials acknowledge that Pakistan is militarily stretched to the limit, and it is unrealistic to expect fresh offensives against militant havens in the near future.
The senior Pakistani official said Washington needed to fully understand "the ground realities" in Pakistan, where anti-Americanism is rife. "We have to be mindful of what our people want when we consider what we can do," the official said.
"You can't disregard public opinion," the official said. "You have to carry part of that in your policy."
Mrs. Clinton's trip had been kept secret for security reasons and lasted less than a day. The mission has been in the planning stage for more than two weeks, according to U.S. officials. But the Obama administration wanted to make sure that the visit would result in specific advances in the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban.
Jay Solomon in Washington contributed to this article.


Court sets stage for a California crime wave


I often wonder about the legal system . Release the violent offenders  . Keep the drug users in Prison for life . Justice is truly blind .


The U.S. Supreme Court effectively ordered California on Monday to release 33,000 inmates over two years from an in-state prison population that numbers about 143,000.
Kent Scheidegger of the tough-on-crime Criminal Justice Legal Foundation blogged that Californians shouldn't "bother investing much in a car. It will be open season on cars, given that car thieves (nonviolent offenders) will never go to prison no matter how many times they are caught."
The 5-4 Plata decision upheld a federal three-judge panel that in 2009 found that overcrowding in California prisons is "criminogenic" — likely to produce criminals — and ordered state prisons to run at 137.5 percent of design capacity. The state's prisons are designed to hold 80,000 inmates. (Be it noted, 100 percent capacity means one inmate per cell.)
Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy cited ugly stories of inmates waiting months for needed medical and mental-health treatment — a violation of Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment. And: "As many as 54 prisoners may share a single toilet." Kennedy argued, "Prisoners retain the essence of human dignity inherent in all persons."
Corrections head Matthew Cate chided the Big Bench for ignoring the many improvements in the system during the past five years. For example, the state has removed about 13,000 out of 20,000 nontraditional or "bad beds" — think large rooms stuffed with bunk beds to warehouse unprocessed inmates. (I don't think Kennedy liked those beds — he included two photos of them with his opinion.)
In his dissenting opinion, Justice Samuel Alito noted that the three-judge panel relied on old statistics and ignored more current (and favorable) data, such as the huge drop in "likely preventable deaths" from 18 in 2006 to 3 in 2007.
The worst part: Kennedy endorsed the three judges' finding that there was "substantial evidence that prison populations can be reduced in a manner that does not increase crime to a significant degree" and that reducing overcrowding "could even improve public safety." Yes, Virginia, a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court thinks Californians might be safer if it cuts the prison population by a quarter.
As Alito argued, his colleagues ignore history. When federal courts made Philadelphia release thousands of inmates in the 1990s, police re-arrested thousands over 18 months, resulting in 1,113 assault charges, 90 rape charges and 79 murder charges.
Justice Antonin Scalia called the decision "the most radical injunction issued by a court in our nation's history." He likened the decision to the granting of 46,000 criminal appeals. Scalia even wondered if Kennedy suggested a five-year time frame to achieve "a marginal reduction in the inevitable murders, robberies and rapes" likely to be committed by released convicts.
Gov. Jerry Brown correctly warned that the Big Bench might issue this ruling as he has tried to sell his plan to transfer about 37,000 state inmates to local jurisdictions. In turn, Kennedy wrote that Brown's proposed transfers — which the Legislature has yet to ratify — support the three judges' view that they can free thousands of inmates without "undue negative effect on public safety."
The ink's barely dry and already they're sharing the credit in preparation for the cruel awakening that will prod them to spread the blame.
Debra J. Saunders is a columnist for the San Francisco Chronicle, 901 Mission St., San Francisco, CA 94103. Send email to dsaunders@sfchronicle.com.


Thursday, May 26, 2011

Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Law

A few years ago........... I was driving to the bank . On the same street there is a Home Depot hardware store . The Parking lot was full of Day laborer's . Illegal's loitering on public grounds looking for a job. I noticed how the day laborer's were basically harassing any one that walked by . A women with a stroller was approached ,a Hispanic man was asking her for 'money' . The Day Laborer's congregated  everyday   hoping some one would pick them up to do some work and pay them some 'cash' under the table . It's did not bother me until one of the day laborer's jumped in front of my car preventing me from driving out of the shopping center parking lot . When I returned home I called the City Counsel . Yep the city did admit that there was a problem . People did start to complain about the illegals looking for work . I am glad that the Arizona law was uphold-ed by the courts . I am sorry about the poor exploited Mexican immigrant  who would work for 'cheap wages' hired by a bunch of shady whites .The Law should send a message TWO ways . Illegal's get LEGAL , and white carpetbaggers , 'don't hire and exploit people like slaves to keep competitive wages down '.

Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Law Penalizing Businesses For Hiring Illegal Immigrants

Supreme Court Arizona Immigration Law
Protesters in Phoenix rally against Arizona's new immigration law July 29, 2010. (AP) 
PHOENIX — The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld an Arizona law that penalizes businesses for hiring workers in the country illegally, buoying the hopes of supporters of state crackdowns on illegal immigration.
They predicted the ruling would lead to many other states passing laws that require employers to use the federal E-Verify system to check that workers aren't illegal immigrants. And some said the ruling bodes well for the prospects of a much broader and more controversial immigration law in Arizona, known as SB1070, to be found constitutional.
The state is appealing a ruling blocking that law from taking effect.
But others said it should not be read as a broad validation of such tactics. While they acknowledge that other states will now pass similar employer sanctions, they cautioned that the court did not make any sweeping endorsement of states' rights to enforce federal immigration laws.
"It's a very careful and narrowly reasoned opinion, so it doesn't really tip the court's hand one way or the other with respect to SB1070,' said Peter Spiro, a Temple University law professor who specializes in immigration law. "That being said, the court here is validating a state measure that implicates immigration enforcement. The court today has rejected an argument that the states have no business in immigration enforcement. That's off the table."
Arizona Senate President Russell Pearce, a Republican who was a prime sponsor of the legislation that became the 2007 employer sanctions law, said his reaction to the ruling was "jubilation."
"This is not only good for Arizona, it's good for America," Pearce told The Associated Press. "Finally, American workers are treated the way they ought to be. We're going to put the profits-before-patriotism crowd in the back seat."
Pearce said the ruling bodes well for an eventual Supreme Court decision on SB1070.
"I'm very confident we'll win a 5-4 or possibly a 6-3 decision," he said pre-empted from enforcing federal law." 
Both laws were written with the assistance of Kris Kobach, Kansas' secretary of state and a former law professor. He said they were constructed to only use federal immigration law definitions, and the ruling upholding the first could mean success for the second.
"That language will vastly assist the state in defending SB1070,' Kobach said.
Dozens of other states have taken up immigration-related measures since Arizona passed its first law. Most have gone nowhere, but several have passed laws similar to the one found constitutional on Thursday.
"So far Mississippi and South Carolina have followed Arizona in requiring E-Verify,' Kobach said. "Alabama is about to ... and I think you'll see many other states jumping on the bandwagon and requiring E-Verify."
Thursday's 5-3 ruling placed the court's five Republican-appointed justices on the side of the state and against the Chamber of Commerce, which challenged the law along with the American Civil Liberties Union.
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, said Arizona's employer sanctions law "falls well within the confines of the authority Congress chose to leave to the states."
Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, all Democratic appointees, dissented. The fourth Democratic appointee, Justice Elena Kagan, did not participate in the case because she worked on it while serving as President Barack Obama's solicitor general.
Breyer said the Arizona law upsets a balance in federal law between dissuading employers from hiring illegal workers and ensuring that people are not discriminated against because they may speak with an accent or look like they might be immigrants.
Employers "will hesitate to hire those they fear will turn out to lack the right to work in the United States," he said.
The Obama administration backed the challenge to the law. The measure was signed into law in 2007 by Democrat Janet Napolitano, then the governor of Arizona and now Obama's Homeland Security secretary.
The employer sanctions law has been infrequently used. It was intended to diminish Arizona's role as the nation's hub for immigrant smuggling by requiring employers to verify the eligibility of new workers through a federal database. Employers found to have violated the law can have their business licenses suspended or revoked.
Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, praised the high court's decision. "Not only is this law constitutional, it is commonsense. American jobs should be preserved for Americans and legal workers," Smith said.
Lower courts, including the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, previously upheld the law.
The ACLU's Cecillia Wang said the Supreme Court decision was disappointing, but narrow. "The decision has nothing to do with SB1070 or any other state and local immigration laws," said Wang, director of ACLU's immigrant rights project.
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer called the decision gratifying and said it upheld states' rights.
"Despite the Obama Administration's opposition at the U.S. Supreme Court, Arizona and all states are now free to take down the `Help Wanted' sign for illegal aliens in their states," she said in a statement. "Arizona's employer sanctions law allows the vast majority of businesses that want to play by the rules to comply with federal and state laws against hiring illegal aliens, and seeks to punish those employers who take advantage of the federal government's immigration failures."
Last month, a three-judge panel of that same appeals court upheld a trial judge's ruling blocking enforcement of parts of SB1070. The provisions that were blocked include a requirement that police, while enforcing other laws, must question a person's immigration status if officers have reasonable suspicion the person was in the country illegally.
Other provisions that are on hold include: requiring all immigrants to obtain or carry immigration registration papers; making it a state criminal offense for an illegal immigrant to seek work or hold a job; and allowing police to arrest suspected illegal immigrants without a warrant.
State officials have said they will appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court. Brewer said she is hopeful the latest ruling means the high court will also uphold SB1070.

So the state of California's most corrupt company wants to charge us more money to make up for the new meters that are supposed to make them more money. Look if YOU are trying to save energy DON'T DO IT !  The whole idea of the SMART MEETER was that you as a consumer could know how much energy you are using so YOU CAN reduce your energy intake  , and control your COSTS . Now PG&E is loosing money because YOU the consumer got SMARTER than the MEETER and just pulled the PLUG .
"allowing PG&E to charge its customers more for electricity to make up for profits lost"... Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this qualify as EXTORTION? I don't feel like I made enough profit last quarter, either.. Who can I 'squeeze' to pad MY wallet some?.. Sickening.
Once again the public is being taken for a ride. I am sure PG&E made a lot of money when they got rid of their meter readers. Where did these people end up? They probably are on unemployment while PG&E now is allowed to suck their customers dry by getting another rate increase to make money for their shareholders. This is, as the rest of you state, just "BS"! Perhaps there should be a public takeover of the "Public" Utilities. I am sure that the State Regulatory Comission is in the pockets of these "Public" utilities which are not "public" but private money makers for their shareholders!

Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s residential customers could be slapped with new monthly fees, and its most energy-efficient and lowest-income customers could face additional fee hikes.
The California Public Utilities Commission is scheduled to rule Thursday on the company’s proposal to charge all of its residential electricity customers a flat fee of at least $2.40 per month.
The company is also proposing to increase rates for customers who use the smallest amounts of electricity, in an effort to reduce the bills of big energy users, such as residents of energy-inefficient McMansions in the far stretches of the East Bay.
After California's energy crisis, when electricity prices skyrocketed early last decade, the state ordered PG&E to reduce prices for low-income residents and customers who use the least electricity. To subsidize the reduced prices, rates are higher for customers who consume a lot of electricity.
Now, after 10 years, PG&E is appealing to regulators to allow it to close that price gap.

Use Less, Pay More under PG&E's Proposed Rate Hike

Company wants to raise rates for those who use the least electricity to lower bills for biggest customers

Use Less, Pay More under PG&E's Proposed Rate Hike

Company wants to raise rates for those who use the least electricity to lower bills for biggest customers

The California Public Utilities Commission is poised to approve a rate proposal from Pacific Gas and Electric that would jack up rates for moderate energy users and the Central Valley's poorest and most vulnerable in order to give a handful of mainly wealthy customers a discount. Amazingly, this is being pitched with a straight face as something that will give valley residents a break.
The CPUC has issued draft decisions that propose to grant three out of four of PG&E's main residential rate proposals, each of which would raise electricity rates for low-income customers and customers with low or moderate levels of energy use. These rate changes could get final approval as soon as May 26.
One proposal would immediately add a $2.40 monthly customer charge to every low-income customer's bill and a $3 customer charge for all other customers. Perhaps most shocking is PG&E's proposal to create a brand-new higher-rate category, dubbed "Tier 3," for low-income customers who qualify for reduced rates under the CARE, or California Alternative Rates for Energy, program. Astonishingly, these new higher rates would target customers with moderate energy use, kicking in when they use roughly 30 percent less power than the average customer.
This proposed change would add an additional $18 monthly to the summer bills of customers in the valley who use a moderate amount of energy. That may not seem like much, but the CARE customers -- whose annual income must be no more than $44,400 for a family of four -- are already struggling. Since September 2010, more than 10 percent of PG&E's CARE accounts, more than 100,000 customers, were more than 90 days behind on their bills.
While an increase of $20.40 per month seems manageable to many of us, these families already struggle each month to choose between keeping the lights on or buying groceries, paying for medicines or having enough money to get to work. The new rates would make already difficult choices nearly impossible, inevitably leaving thousands of valley families without power during the hot summer months that are nearly upon us. Customers in cooler coastal areas wouldn't be hit as hard, but low-income customers in these areas would still see their monthly bills increase by at least $8. In contrast, all of PG&E's rate proposals would lower rates for customers who have the most extreme level of power usage. The Utility Reform Network has already given the CPUC empirical evidence showing that the high levels of energy use that would get a break under the new rates are related to maintaining large homes and the heavy use of energy-guzzling appliances, swimming pools and other luxuries.
These high-end users have already received big rate cuts. Last summer, as a result of another CPUC proceeding, these customers received a rate reduction of almost 10 cents per kilowatt-hour for their high-level usage (above 300 percent of the baseline usage level that covers essential energy needs).
Contrary to the spin, the proposed new PG&E rates won't provide relief for most electricity users in the valley, most of whom would actually face higher bills. They would literally rob Peter to pay Paul -- when Peter is saving energy and struggling to make ends meet, Paul sits back enjoying his swimming pool and 65-inch flat-screen TV -- and raise rates for the majority.
The CPUC should reject this proposal, which would discourage energy conservation and punish our most vulnerable neighbors.

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

John Edwards About To Be Indicted

With John Edwards being indicted . I draw a question . Does the Law apply to former Gov . Arnold Schwarzenegger ? Did he do the same and pay off his housekeeper with some campaign money too?

Federal authorities have been investigating the former North Carolina senator's campaign finances, focusing heavily on money from wealthy supporters that allegedly went to keep mistress Rielle Hunter and her out-of-wedlock baby in hiding in 2007 and 2008 to protect Edwards' White House campaign from a career-ending scandal.

Famous 2008 presidential sex-haver John Edwards is probably going to be indicted very soon for violating campaign laws in how he covered it all up, NBC News is reporting. “Son of a mill worker!” Edwards cursed to himself upon hearing this news, taking his lord’s name in vain. “We do not believe there is evidence that John has violated any election laws,” his attorney, Wade Smith, said, obviously very forcibly. Hey, you know who else was named “Wade”? John Edwards’ son who died. You know who else in John Edwards’ family died? His wife, the one that everybody loved. Those are the two reasons John Edwards should get whatever he wants, from staying out of jail to bedding all the floozies he wants to the presidency. What do you say, Iowa caucus-goers? John Edwards 2012: Campaigning From Jail Just Like His Close Personal Friend Martin Luther King.
To recap:
The money used to support Hunter and Young in hiding came from two wealthy Edwards donors: a reclusive heiress, Rachel “Bunny” Mellon, and Edwards’ former finance chairman, Fred Baron. Insiders say, each provided hundreds of thousands of dollars, for a total of more than $1 million.
So yes, it would appear the man with the haircut is very guilty. But it’s up to the Obama Justice Department to choose to prosecute or not. And certain members of the North Carolina elite think John Edwards should get off because he is special and this is merely a white-person crime.
“John is working everyday to be a good father and this is an inopportune time for this to occur, less than two months after the death of his children’s mother,” said a source close to the family.
Aww, he’s trying so hard not to bang random women and defraud the nation’s voters because the wife he cheated on has now died of the cancer she had while all this was going on. John Edwards, by the way, can pay a pauper woman to leave her own children to take care of his, then pay to kill her at the end of the day, and repeat this process for the rest of their lives. Meanwhile, the rest of the children in this nation who have imprisoned parents are forced to depend on the kindness of angels helping professional baseball players convince Danny Glover to take them in.
“There must not be much other crime in North Carolina,” said one former public corruption prosecutor. “What’s the point of pursuing this kind of case against a guy who’s already been thoroughly disgraced?”
Yeah, why do we prosecute people at all? Just let everybody break the law when they want and then tell the public about it when it happens. Seems fair. [MSNBC]

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Obama's Irish Luck .

 NOW we have an Irish President!!! Oh my Lord! The Kennedy's must love that!! Didn't' THEY come over here during the potato famine!??? I wonder what else is lurking in Obama's White ancestral tree!!

Obama might be the ' America's first multi-racial , ethnic ' President. You would pause  to think that the President would be looking towards Africa ? where his father was from . For the Birthrates in the Tea Party movement who decried to see the certificate , and towards their disbelief . The President may have some lucky charms in his bag . He should than his mother's list of affairs  , NEXT STOP should be INDONESIA I have a problem , why is the President touring Europe ? He sounds as if he is campaigning  , and preaching to them . Sorry to say he seems to me is far too interested in his global image, also why come to England when he despises us so much?..he had the gall to send back the bust of Winston Churchill that Tony Blair gave to America after 9/11.

American's  really don't care what's in Europe , whether  to send their President as a marketing agent . Maybe Obama is asking the Europe  for some money to bailout our nation debt ?  The Luck of Irish , the President  needs to get back home .........................

Obama finds his Irish roots


Published: Tuesday, May 24, 2011
U.S. President Barack Obama declared solidarity between the United States and economically struggling Ireland with a symbolic gulp of beer and a rousing speech, telling a huge Dublin crowd on Monday: "Your best days are still ahead."
Beginning a four-nation European tour with a celebration of his Irish roots, Obama came to Ireland as what one man called a "long-lost cousin."
Crowds packed the streets for both a stirring speech in Dublin and a visit to the tiny village of Moneygall, where an ancestor of Obama's lived before moving to the United States.
U.S. President Barack Obama raises a glass of Guinness in a pub Monday as he visits Moneygall in rural Ireland, the village from which his great-great-great grandfather hailedView Larger Image View Larger Image

U.S. President Barack Obama raises a glass of Guinness in a pub Monday as he visits Moneygall in rural Ireland, the village from which his great-great-great grandfather hailed

Introduced by Irish Prime Minister Enda Kenny as "the American Dream come home," Obama told the throng in central Dublin: "My name is Barack Obama, of the Moneygall Obamas."
For Ireland, Obama's arrival, and the visit of Britain's Queen Elizabeth last week, are a welcome distraction from the global attention paid to its financial woes and the ensuing international bailout.
Obama was also due to visit Britain, France and Poland during a weeklong trip whose agenda includes talks on issues as Afghanistan and Pakistan after the killing of Osama bin Laden, the world economy and the "Arab spring" uprisings.
Ireland's economic slump has led to a debt crisis and drastic government spending cuts. Apart from lifting the spirits of the Irish, the visit looked set to provide some powerful images back home for Obama's 2012 re-election campaign.
He brought back the signature phrase from his 2008 presidential campaign, "Yes we can," but said it in Gaelic.
"This little country that inspires the biggest things - your best days are still ahead," Obama said.
"And Ireland, if anyone ever says otherwise . . . remember that, whatever hardships winter can bring, springtime is always just around the corner and, if they keep on arguing with you, just respond with a simple creed, 'Is feidir linn', Yes we can."
At O'Neill's pub in Dublin, revellers cheered and some chanted "USA! USA!" as the president emerged on stage for his speech.
"I think it will give the country a great lift, the kind of lift we desperately need," said Jennifer Kearney, a mother of two who brought her two daughters aged 13 and 15 into Dublin's city centre for the event.
In Moneygall, Obama hoisted a glass of Guinness stout at Ollie Hayes's pub as fiddle music played, and his wife Michelle pulled pints at the bar.
Thousands of rain-drenched people lined the village's one street, festooned with American flags, and roared with delight as the motorcade rolled in.
The sleepy village of 300 was the birthplace of Obama's great-greatgreat grandfather, Falmouth Kearney, a shoemaker who left in 1850 to begin a new life in the United States.
This makes Obama, the son of a Kenyan father and Irish-American mother, one of 37 million Americans who claim Irish ancestry.
"I'm here to see Obama . . . our long-lost cousin," said Moneygall resident Rob Lewis, 28.
Inside the pub, which was lined with framed photos of Obama, the president met Henry Healy, a 24year-old distant cousin. He joked with the bartender to make sure the Guinness had settled properly before he and Michelle took sips.
"I don't want to mess this up," he said before saluting the bar with a "Slainte" - Irish for 'cheers' - and a long gulp.
"You look a little like my grandfaher," he said to one of the men inide.
Back out on the street, three babies were handed over a security barricade for pictures to be taken with Obama, and women hugged and kissed him under the watchful eye of his security detail.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Wake UP GOP!

Right Now the GOP is looking like a bunch of amateurs . They can't seem to get a good person to run on the Republican platform  . We have seen Sara Palin , we have had almost enough of Donald Trump heckle , with all the possible contenders  has the GOP run out of steam ?  I find it strange that the GOP won't embrace Mitt Romney . 
Mitt Romney has all the trappings of a GOP presidential front-runner except for one important thing: enthusiasm from party activists.Romney raised a remarkable $10.25 million on Monday; Republican officials from across the nation meeting the next day in Dallas mostly shrugged. In nearly two dozen interviews at the Republican National Committee's spring meeting, no one fully embraced Romney, and several said they'd like to see other candidates enter the race. ( hoping that now clowns show ) "Polls show Romney has to be considered the front-runner now," said New Hampshire state GOP chairman Jack Kimball, whose state plans to hold the first primary in early 2012. "But you'll see others gaining ground."
The 2012 presidential race officially started for the Republicans Thursday at the Peace Center in Greenville, S.C. The first debate of the election season was sponsored by Fox News and the South Carolina GOP. Unfortunately, most of the Republicans weren't there.
I was really surprised by the low turnout of candidates; the weak state of the economy makes Barack Obama a very beatable candidate in 2012. Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty was the big name of the night, accompanied by Texas Rep. Ron Paul, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, and businessman Herman Cain. Given the predictions of President Obama potentially raising $1 billion for his reelection campaign, I would expect the candidates to be out early and strong to get as much face-time with the public as possible.
Not to be to disrespectful, but the hopefuls in attendance were basically second-tier candidates, based on the low name recognition outside of their home states or districts. Republicans need to field a bold candidate unafraid to articulate a vision. Going on "listening tours" to decide whether or not to run is not going to do it. You know you are going to declare. The American people know you are going to declare. Declare, tell us how you are going to improve America, and then do it. And please, no distractions about birth certificates.
I'd heard of Herman Cain, but didn't really know much about the man. As former CEO of Godfather's Pizza, I had to learn more about him based on that alone. I came away impressed by what I saw. The man is articulate and good at thinking on his feet. I especially enjoyed his one line about his lack of electoral experience when he pointed out all the elected politicians in Washington and asked "How's that working out for ya?," as reported by Red State.
Personally, I like the fact that he's a political outsider. Someone who can successfully run a business deserves a good look. If you can balance the books and stick to a budget, I want to learn what you can do at the national level. It's refreshing to see someone from outside of Washington step up to the plate.
Again, based on the small number of candidates, it was hard to judge a true winner, but I thought Gary Johnson was the big loser of the night. He seemed overmatched against the other candidates, often asking for equal time from the moderator. When he stated he was against imposing tariffs on Chinese imports, he seemed to have a "deer in the headlights" look that indicated he wasn't really sure what he was saying.
This is no time to be timid. With the economic problems we currently face, we need a government that will give us value for what we pay for, not make us pay for things we don't need. This is no time to be timid. They  need a real leader, and They  need him now.


And even if Arnie hadn't gotten his tallywacker caught in the door, he's got no hope of ever being president because after all of the stink Republicans made about Obama being a foreigner, there will never be an amendment that will allow someone who isn't an NBC to run for president.

Sunday, May 22, 2011

American Money pays for West Bank Settements.

Yesterday's post I updated some comments . I dug up another Problem that President Obama just 'forgot' , or did not know . How American money has for years paid for Jewish Settlements in the West Bank . Money from conservative Christians , and mostly Uncle Sam has put conflict in place in that region.

Gambling with peace: how US bingo dollars are funding Israeli settlements

• California charity 'a barrier to West Bank resolution'
• Millionaire's foundation must be curbed, critics say

 For the winning punters chancing their luck at Hawaiian Gardens' charity bingo hall in the heart of one of California's poorest towns, the big prize is $500. The losers walk away with little more than an assurance that their dollars are destined for a good cause.
But the real winners and losers live many thousands of miles away, where the profits from the nightly ritual of numbers-calling fund what critics describe as a form of ethnic cleansing by extremist organisations.
Each dollar spent on bingo by the mostly Latino residents of Hawaiian Gardens, on the outskirts of Los Angeles, helps fund Jewish settlements on Palestinian land in some of the most sensitive areas of occupied East Jerusalem, particularly the Muslim quarter of the old city, and West Bank towns such as Hebron where the Israeli military has forced Arabs out of their properties in their thousands.

Over the past 20 years, the bingo hall has funnelled tens of millions of dollars in to what its opponents — including rabbis serving the Hawaiian Gardens area — describe as an ideologically-driven strategy to grab land for Israel, as well as contributing to influential American groups and thinktanks backing Israel's more hawkish governments.
But the bingo operation, owned by an American Jewish doctor and millionaire, Irving Moskowitz, has taken on added significance in recent weeks as President Barack Obama has laid down a marker to Israel in demanding an end to settlement construction, which the White House regards as a major obstacle to peace. "Moskowitz is taking millions from the poorest town in California and sending it to the settlements," said Haim Dov Beliak, a rabbi serving Hawaiian Gardens and one of the Jewish religious leaders in California who have campaigned to block the flow of funds to the settlers.
"The money Moskowitz puts in to the settlements has changed the game. Moskowitz has helped build a hardcore of the settler movement that may number 50-70,000.
"He's not paying for all of it but he puts the money up front for the vanguards that get things off the ground. That ties Israel's hands. That ties the hands of the Obama administration. If the administration wants to be serious about stopping the settlers it has to begin in Hawaiian Gardens."
Moskowitz is an 80-year-old retired doctor and orthodox Jewish millionaire who built a fortune buying and selling hospitals. In 1988 he also bought the faltering bingo hall in Hawaiian Gardens which, under California law, can only be run as not-for-profit operation so Moskowitz brought it under the wing of a charitable foundation he had established in his own name.
The foundation, which did not respond to requests for an interview, bills the bingo operation as of great benefit to the local community through donations to a number of groups, such as the Hawaiian Gardens food bank, as well as scholarships. It has also given money for disaster relief in Central America, Kosovo and parts of the US.
But tax returns show that the bulk of the donations go to what the foundation describes as "charitable support" to an array of organisations in Israel.
"The loss of many of Dr Moskowitz's relatives during the Holocaust strengthened his conviction that Israel must be maintained as a safe haven for Jewish people from all over the world. In Israel, the Foundation supports a wide array of religious, educational, cultural and emergency services organisations," the foundation says on its website.
What it does not say is that the focus of the donations is a number of Jewish organisations intent on claiming Palestinian territory for Israel and ensuring that occupied East Jerusalem remains in the Jewish state's hands.
Beliak calculates that the foundation has given Jewish settlers well over £100m, beginning with the construction 20 years ago of 133 houses on land confiscated from Palestinians by the Israeli government.
Beliak helped launch the Coalition for Justice in Hawaiian Gardens & Jerusalem to stop the flow of money from the bingo hall to the settlements. Its investigations of tax records show that the Moskowitz Foundation's donations include grants to Beit Hadassah, a militant Jewish settlement in the heart of the West Bank city of Hebron.
Thousands of Arabs have been forced from their homes and businesses around Beit Hadassah ostensibly for their own security after an American-born settler Baruch Goldstein murdered 29 Palestinians nearby in 1994. Goldstein was himself shot dead and his grave is regarded as a shrine by some settlers. Moskowitz has made excuses for Goldstein's actions by blaming Palestinians for pushing him too far.
The foundation has also given more than £3.5m to Ateret Cohanim, a right wing group that houses Jews in the Muslim quarter of Jerusalem's old city. In other parts of East Jerusalem, Moskowitz has funded Jewish colonies situated to box in or cut off Palestinian neighbourhoods that fits in with a broader government strategy to ensure total Israeli control over the city.
"What Moskowitz pioneered was trying to break up the continuity of the Arab population centres in Jerusalem," said Beliak. "The consequences are radically different from just mom and pop buying a little piece of land. These are political statements and facts on the ground, and every [US] administration has allowed him to do this."
Among the most contentious of the organisations backed by Moskowitz is the City of David Foundation in the heart of an Arab neighbourhood of Jerusalem, where about 1,500 Palestinians are facing expulsion ostensibly in the name of archaeological preservation of a site where the organisation says King David established a city 3,000 years ago.
Four years ago, the City of David Foundation director, Doron Spielman, told the Guardian that "the goal of our organisation is to increase the presence of Jews in the neighbourhood as much as possible … We cannot trust that if this is an Arab neighbourhood, Jews will be safe here".
To that end Palestinians have been driven from their homes, sometimes at gunpoint, while others are fighting in the courts to cling on to their properties.
Moskowitz has made no secret of his hostility toward the Palestinians. He opposed the Oslo peace accords, likening them to the appeasement of the Nazis. In 1996 he told the Los Angeles Times that peace talks represented a "slide toward concessions, surrender, and Israeli suicide".
He was also an outspoken opponent of Ariel Sharon's removal of Jewish settlers from the Gaza strip four years ago and provided the settlers with funds to fight the pullout.
Now Moskowitz is building a much bigger bingo hall in Hawaiian Gardens which will increase the flow of cash.
Beliak is particularly angered that the fundraising takes place without interference from the American authorities. In contrast, he says, Muslim charities which raise money to help Palestinians have been targeted for investigation, shut down and some of their administrators jailed because providing welfare to Gaza indirectly helps Hamas.
"After 2001 there was a whole discourse about how supposedly Muslims [in America] used these charitable donations to support violence.
"There was never ever in the US anything substantially that made that case. But here they did have a case where somebody was using money to support settlers, money that fosters extremism and violence, and they completely ignored it," said Beliak.

Saturday, May 21, 2011

The 1967 Line of Fire

 The WSJ had a vary interesting remark in it's 'Review & Outlook' this Saturday on Obama's shortsighted on the Middle -East speech . I like to raise some points . One. Its' too late for Israel to go back to it's 1967 boarders , and there are 'millions' of people tightly compacted on the West Bank , and the Gaza strip .Two. I think Pres. Obama should have spoken to Prime Minister Natanyahu regarding the Palestinian question before making any address public. Regardless of Hillary Clinton phoned Natanyahu giving him a heads up about Obama's address. The President also seems to have forgotten that American Money has for years been paying for Jewish settlements in the West bank. The Idea Palestinian statehood is an argument going back to the 'Day's' of Lawrence of Arabia who maybe credited for creating the Arab states and a Palestinian - Jewish homeland . Mr . Lawrence sat down with the British, and Arab shortly after the end of the Great War to take into consideration for a Jewish home land . However all of Mr. Lawrence ideas were controversial . Yet had they been taken seriously by the colonial occupying powers there would have been no ARAB - ISRAELI conflict. . In the Long run some damage was done .


The 1967 Line of Fire

Obama creates a needless furor over Israel's borders.

President Obama's address Thursday on the Middle East had much to recommend it, so it's a pity that he stepped all over his own headline by diving back into the Israel-Palestinian maelstrom.
Mr. Obama went to the State Department to offer a mostly inspiring vision of U.S. policy amid the political upheavals sweeping the region. But all attention is now focused on the coda he offered about the Arab-Israeli conflict, in which he said that "the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines." Though he immediately added that those lines should be adjusted "with mutually agreed swaps" of territory "so that secure and recognized borders are established for both parties," it's the 1967 line that is sticking.
And with good reason. At its neck, the distance from the Mediterranean coast to the West Bank is nine miles. Foreign analysts may imagine that strategic depth no longer matters, but Israelis know better thanks to the thousands of short-range rockets fired at their towns from Hamas-controlled Gaza. As candidate Obama said when he toured one such Israeli town in 2008, "If someone was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that, and I would expect Israelis to do the same thing."
Well, exactly. Which is why it was strange to hear Mr. Obama, in a speech otherwise devoted to urging change in the nature of Arab societies, suddenly revert to the tired land-for-peace formula that has so often failed. Since the rest of Mr. Obama's speech borrowed heavily from President Bush's Freedom Agenda, he might also have taken a cue from his predecessor's June 2002 speech, which conditioned Palestinian statehood on renouncing terrorism and liberalizing politics.
That concept is all the more appropriate now that Hamas has joined the Palestinian government, a point Mr. Obama acknowledged in his speech. Most Israelis would not object to a Palestinian state, even on the 1967 lines, if its politics resembled those of, say, Canada. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's problem is that political trends among the Palestinians lean more in the direction of Iran, despite some recent promising economic trends.
Nor does it help that Mr. Obama wants Israel to withdraw from Palestinian territory even before the two sides resolve the issues of the status of Jerusalem and of the 1948 Palestinian refugees, recently in the news with their attempt to force their way through Israel's borders. No Israeli leader is going to give up the West Bank without resolving those existential issues, since it would merely allow the Palestinians to pocket the territorial gains while perpetuating the conflict.
The President's team is explaining the speech as an attempt to restart the moribund Israeli-Palestinian talks, but it will accomplish no such thing. It's more accurate to say he obscured the important substance of his speech by needlessly raising an irrelevant and neuralgic subject. He provided Palestinian hardliners with a negotiating line that will become totemic to them and their sympathizers in the years ahead, no matter what happens on the ground.
He also alienated the leader of a key U.S. ally, as yesterday's chilly photo-op of the President with Prime Minister Netanyahu made clear. If this is what Hillary Clinton likes to call "smart diplomacy," we'd hate to see what qualifies as dumb.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Just Plain Stupid .

One of the most irritable things about today reminds me of a flea on someones back . Daily rants about Arnold's infidelity . The psychologists were called on news shows trying to explain Schwarzenegger's behavior how he keept his liaison  a secret for so long   . I just don't think Maria  Shriver just found out about it . There is so much inconsistency with Mrs. Shriver who stood by her husband for 8 years . I believe she knew , kept it hush hush all for political reasons till her husband left office . Right now I just don't care, There was a number of NEWS items I would like to add my sarcasm , and pick my brain as I write this . You all heard about the MAY 21st END of the WORLD prediction  .Just ask Family Radio, the evangelical nonprofit. Religion always has it's bedfellows with reaping coffers , when some bloke predicts, the faithful flock , and the money rolls . What good is all that money on Judgment Day ?

My Next sarcasm had to do with Pres . Obama's speech to the Middle- East . It blew my mind , NOW our NATION that is sinking in Debt and over taxation . Our Money is going there to support Egypt and Tunisia , how about sending a few billion to California ? All  this foreign  aide is bankrupting our nation , and our money is not food stamps we are giving these people , it always guns and ammunition .  Just to keep them as  allies on our side . The President expressed that Israel return to the pre-1967 boarders , giving a flicker to the Palestinian cause . The Obama speech was also misdirected . If the road to middle-east peace  must be paved it must lead to Israel first. Israeli prime minister is furious. I understand that Obama wants to find a PEACEFUL SOLUTION to the Arab and Israeli conflict  . Many Presidents have tried and tried , but lip service  to the Arabs whom involved in this conflict are considered terrorist groups by the Israeli . Hammas and Hezbollah .  President Obama is just shining up to the opportunity along the lines of the Arabic uprisings , which is overdue by an American President . Obama is no Jimmy Carter , and foreign aide poring into these nations is wasting American money . I resolve that we need to end the 'War on Terror' . With Bin Laden out of the way our nation has no excuse to be in , or any place near the middle -east . As a occupying power our government has to quit occupying Iraq , and Afghanistan .Send the troops home .

Oakland-based Family Radio sees donations soar as 'Judgment Day' approaches

By Matthias Gafni
Contra Costa Times
© Copyright 2011, Bay Area News Group
Updated: 05/19/2011 09:23:28 AM PDT

Click photo to enlarge
An evangelical group from Oakland has been putting up signs declaring that Judgment Day is...

Judgment Day is fabulous for business.
Just ask Family Radio, the evangelical nonprofit that has plastered billboards and driven vans across the Bay Area and the world proclaiming the end of the world will be Saturday. The Oakland-based nonprofit has raised more than $100 million over the past seven years, according to tax returns. It owns 66 radio stations across the globe and was worth more than $72 million in 2009.
As The End nears, donations have spiked, a board member says, enabling Family Radio to spend millions of dollars on more than 5,000 billboards.
But it is not about money, say President Harold Camping and board member Tom Evans. It's about spreading the Gospel and saving as many people as possible.
What will the nonprofit do with the millions of dollars left in the bank Saturday?
"When Judgment Day comes, if someone is a billionaire, how will they take their money with them?" said Camping, 89, during a phone interview Tuesday. "If we have any money left, and we will because we have to pay bills up to the very end "... it will all be destroyed because the world will be in a day of judgment.
"The money is not important at all. It's a vehicle to spread the judgment and a vehicle of the Lord."
Camping, a Bible scholar and former civil engineer, founded the 24-hour evangelical broadcasting network in 1959. The station with offices on Hegenberger Road in Oakland reaches listeners around the world in 7

languages -- locally on 610 AM and at www.familyradio.com.

For years, the stations have espoused Camping's belief that May 21, 2011, is the date of the rapture, when true believers will be taken up to heaven.
For those left behind, there will be a tremendous earthquake followed by six months of mayhem, disease and destruction until Oct. 21, when the world ends.
Camping used mathematical biblical calculations to determine the date. He erroneously predicted Doomsday before, Sept. 4, 1994, but says he has corrected his miscalculation.
The recent marketing blitz has drawn international media attention and the Day of Reckoning date trended as the hottest Google search Tuesday.
In September, Family Radio's board members made a final push, dedicating all "extra dollars" to billboards and the Caravan project, which sent volunteers across the country in RVs painted with Apocalypse warnings, Evans said. The outreach has paid off.
"Donations have picked up, but not enough to offset the amount of money we're spending," said Evans, adding that the organization's money comes only from listener donations, not corporate or church sponsors. "The only reason we had those assets in '09 was God had been very generous to Family Radio."
In 2009, in the last Family Radio tax return that was made public, the group collected $18.4 million in contributions, and earned more than $1 million in investment and other income. That year the group spent $36.7 million, and $41.2 million the previous year.
In 2009, Family Radio also reported employing 348 people earning more than $9 million in wages and benefits.
Camping, however, said he has been a full-time volunteer for five decades.
"I've never taken one nickel out of Family Radio," said its president, who lives with his wife in Alameda. "Many evangelists have become very rich, but my wife and I live very modestly."
In 2008 and 2009, he lent $175,516 to the organization, according to the tax returns.
Spreading the word of God also did not shield Family Radio from the 2008 stock market crash. The nonprofit reported $8.6 million in investment losses, dropping its stock portfolio to about $35.3 million that year.
It is sad, said a Pinole atheist, that Family Radio preys on fear, particularly during tough economic times.
"I'm concerned people will give their life savings to the organization and come Sunday, they'll say, 'Well, I'm still here and all I have is this Winnebago,' " said Larry Hicock, California director for the American Atheists, which is hosting post-rapture parties in Oakland and elsewhere this weekend. "This could be a Kool-Aid moment. It takes an incredible denial of reality to not have a Kool-Aid moment."
Camping bristles at talking about money or fundraising.
"We have no interest in talking about money. We never tell people what to do with their money, that's between them and God," he said. "We'll be paying all our bills to the last day and we're honest in everything we do."
Family Radio has no intention of giving away its money or assets before The End.
"There isn't going to be a Saturday. So certainly none of Family Radio's assets will be left because it won't matter," Evans said.
"The last thing people should be concerned with is what Family Radio is doing or what their assets are. They should be concerned with what I am doing and how I will stand before God."


Obama Walks Tightrope With Middle East Address

President Obama will unveil new aid to Egypt and Tunisia. 


With his long-awaited policy address on the Middle East on Thursday, President Obama is facing a difficult rhetorical assignment.
In the Arab world, his audience will be listening to hear how the president squares his backing of military action against Libya’s Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi while taking a far less aggressive posture in response to crackdowns by the regimes in Bahrain, Syria, and Yemen. Israelis and Palestinians wonder whether Obama will weigh in with thoughts on restarting peace talks. And Americans will be focusing on how Obama pivots from a tumultuous period in the Arab world to explaining his long-term vision for U.S. involvement in the region.
Administration officials say Obama's speech will be wide ranging but will also go into details about ongoing efforts at political reform in the region, outline what his administration is doing to support human rights, and offer his views on the United States’ broader interests in peace and security in the region.
“The president views the situation in the Middle East as a moment of opportunity … as a real moment of opportunity for America and for Americans,” said White House press secretary Jay Carney. “In the last decade, our focus in the region was largely on Iraq, which was a military effort, and on the hunt for Osama bin Laden and the fight against al-Qaida. That fight against al-Qaida continues, but there is an opportunity in that region to focus on advancing our values and enhancing our security.”
The president will also unveil a series of economic development proposals for Egypt and Tunisia—two nations that he will hold up as stalwarts in the aftermath of the Arab Spring. Administration officials say Obama will unveil plans to offer $1 billion in debt relief to the nations and another $1 billion in loan guarantees to help jump start economies that have been weighed by down corruption and high unemployment rates.
“We also know from our study of the past that successful transitions to democracy depends, in part, on strong foundations for prosperity,” a senior administration official said. “Reinforcing economic growth is an important way of reinforcing democratic transitions.”
The president sees this as a moment to take a deep breath and reflect. In the six months since a young Tunisian fruit vendor lit himself on fire in protest, pro-democracy uprisings have toppled two regimes and ignited popular revolts in Bahrain, Yemen, Libya, and Syria.
But he faces a skeptical audience in the Muslim world. A new Pew Research Center poll released on Tuesday that was conducted in six predominantly Muslim nations and the Palestinian territories showed widely-held negative views of the United States and a lack of confidence in Obama.
The survey was conducted in Egypt, Jordan, Indonesia, Lebanon, Pakistan, and the Palestinian territories from late March to April. Obama’s favorability and confidence numbers ranged from 13 percent in Jordan to 54 percent in Indonesia—a country where he spent four years as a child.


Tuesday, May 17, 2011

California Budget: Unexpected State Revenue Reaches $6.6 Billion

Is California heading for a rebound ? The State revenue increase was treated with 'unexpected news' by the media press . I have a theory , so I am going to set here. I believe that the state has been receiving  revenues for years  from the taxes that we have paid , but all because of mismanagement , and  obvious spending that is out of control some of the money as far as state intake of revenues has been misplaced some how . Basing that assumption of our taxation rate , sales tax , gas tax , parcel taxes , gaming taxes , tax , and more tax from property . There could be about a trillion dollars of money floating around if you where to count the last decade of California's overblown debt .

My second thought is , there is a great deal of hysteria created by the states failure on the budget . In regards to education spending . Many teachers were given pink slips all over the state based on 'speculation' how the  Governor's May revise would turn out  . I believe a lot of those teachers should get their job's back , and if any lay offs are to be made they should be done after the May revise .  Unexpected revenue from TAXES. This isn't the first story on this issue. A few weeks ago, as returns came in a $2.something billion more came in than was expected. Now, more returns have been counted so the figure has risen. Probably a sign that CA isn't quite as dead as many would like to paint and that "people and businesses­!" are not fleeing in the numbers so many have taken for granted.
Now that the state has 6 billion extra dollars . Let's see how it's put to good use.

California Budget: Unexpected State Revenue Reaches $6.6 Billion

California Budget

State revenue has rocketed far beyond projections, providing a $6.6 billion windfall that Gov. Jerry Brown  wants to use to boost education spending and help repair California's battered finances.

California’s economy is “on the mend,” driving revenue $6.6 billion higher than forecast through fiscal 2012, reducing the deficit of the most populous U.S. state and trimming the need for higher taxes, Governor Jerry Brown said.
The deficit estimate shrank to $9.6 billion from about $15.4 billion, Brown said in revising his budget proposal for the year that begins July 1. In addition to balancing the books, Brown said his plan will increase education funding, take aim at “gimmickry” that boosted debt to $34.7 billion over the past decade, and limit borrowing to reduce debt costs.
“This is not the time to delay or evade, but to put our finances in order,” Brown said today in a Sacramento press conference.
The 73-year-old Democrat, who pledged to fix the fiscal malfunctions that left California with the lowest credit rating of any state from Standard & Poor’s, previously sought a five- year extension on $11 billion in expiring income taxes, sales taxes and fees. Republicans blocked a referendum on the levies.
“They seem to be putting up front in this budget document the future payment obligations and highlighting the extent to which the state has borrowed,” said Gabriel Petek, senior director of credit market services at Standard & Poor’s in San Francisco. “The governor’s approach seems to be more structurally oriented and that could be favorable for the state’s credit.”

Limiting Debt Issuance

Brown’s budget calls for limiting the amount of general- obligation borrowing by California, the largest U.S. issuer of municipal bonds.
The state may sell a total of $4 billion of general- obligation debt in the fall and spring, as well as $2 billion of lease-revenue bonds, the state budget director, Ana Matosantos, told reporters at a briefing.
The extra yield that buyers want for 10-year bonds from California issuers compared with top-rated municipal debt rose to 116 basis points on May 13, from a one-year low of 107 on April 15. A basis point is 0.01 percentage point.
“Budget proposals don’t really impress the marketplace very much at this point,” said Bud Byrnes, the chief executive officer of Encino, California-based RH Investment Corp., which trades about $100 million par value in bonds each month. “We’ll take it seriously when and if something gets passed. In the meantime, traders tend to have a very short time horizon.”

Tax Extensions

California won’t need to extend a 0.25 percentage-point increase in personal income-tax rates until next year because of the better-than-expected revenue, Brown said. He also rescinded plans to scrap blight-fighting enterprise zones.
Brown’s revised budget relies on keeping in place a 1 percentage-point boost in the retail-sales levy, to 8.25 percent, and a 0.5 percentage point increase in auto registration fees to 1.15 percent of a vehicle’s value. It also seeks to extend a reduction of the annual child tax credit to $99 from $309. All were put in place temporarily in 2009 and are to expire by July 1.
Brown’s initial plan in January asked lawmakers to put those tax extensions directly before voters in June. His revised budget calls for lawmakers to extend the taxes and then ask voters in November to validate the move. Spending would be based on the higher revenue with a provision that triggers cuts if voters don’t go along.
Jim Nielsen, the top Republican on the Assembly budget committee, said he doesn’t expect Republicans to agree to the tax extensions. Brown would need at least four Republican lawmakers to consent. The governor said he’s in discussions with between four and 10 Republican lawmakers.

‘Spigot of Spending’

“As far as our caucus is concerned, tax increases are not something that we would agree to,” Nielsen said at a news conference today. “Raising taxes only continues the spigot of spending.”
California’s constitution requires lawmakers to approve a budget by June 15 and for the governor to sign it into law by July 1. A new law approved by voters in November allows the budget to be passed by a simple majority vote and strips lawmakers of their pay whenever a budget is late.


There another 'story' that is sure to boil into a storm . Former Gov. Schwarzenegger  fathered a 'Love child' with a live in House Keeper .If the Family Values thing needs to kick in , here is my take on this . First Remember John Edward's who ran for the highest office in the Land . Lucky for Edward's that he never did become Vice- President , he would have been impeached and John Kerry would have been disgraced as commander in chief . In Arnold s case we see that he has this child over ten years ago , which put him just about the time he entered politics and ran for Governor , yes there were stories of Arnold s urges , yet the right wing media worked hard to conceal , and to discredit most of the women who came forward with the accusations .
Right now it's all too late and the damage was done:

Insiders 'Not Surprised' By Arnold Schwarzenegger Love Child

Published May 17, 2011
| FoxNews.com

Political insiders and former colleagues of former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger expressed a variety of reactions to the news of Schwarzenegger's love child Tuesday, with several telling FOX411.com that the revelation did not come as a surprise.
Last week, Schwarzenegger and his wife Maria Shriver announced they were separating after 25 years of marriage. On Tuesday, he announced that he had fathered a child out of wedlock with a woman who worked for him for 20 years.
"There have been rumors swirling around for years, citing a number of incidents regarding Arnold Schwarzenegger's infidelity,” California-based publicist Angie Meyer, who works closely with the California GOP, told FOX411’s Pop Tarts. "This comes as a complete surprise to no one – especially those closest to the ex-Governor's innermost circles."
A Republican political insider on Capitol Hill concurred.
“So far, not much surprise here,” said our source. 

However, according to another staffer who previously worked with the California Republican Party, many others were indeed shocked when news broke of the former governor’s illegitimate child.
“It’s a total surprise to me, I'm seeing some pretty cold reactions regarding this,” said the staffer.
And even in Hollywood, where extramarital affairs and sex scandals are the norm, some experts weren’t convinced that his acting career would recover.
“It’s outrageous. I’ve represented 58 academy award winners its one of the most outrageous scandals since Woody Allen in 1992. I think it’s even worse than that. It’s almost Shakespearean in its tragic capacity,” said veteran publicist Michael Levine, who first met the “Terminator” star 25 years ago. “I think his Hollywood career will be injured by it, because when you go to see one of his films, half of the people in the audience are women.”
Two of Schwarzenegger and Shriver's grown children also weighed in. 
“Some days you feel like s**t, some days you want to quit and just be normal for a bit, yet i love my family till death do us apart,” his son Patrick, 17, wrote on the social networking site Twitter.
“This is definitely not easy but I appreciate your love and support as i begin to heal and move forward in life.I will always love my family,” daughter Katherine, 21, tweeted Tuesday afternoon.
Katherine Schwarzenegger recently wrote the book "Rock

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/05/17/political-insiders-surprised-arnold-schwarzenegger-love-child-news/#ixzz1MerCQWNq