WhatUwish4 Forum Posts (7,986)

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

This is kind of interesting. I don't think it has any significance one way or another, but it's just one of those interesting little facts that make you say, "Gee Whiz."

"How many Commanders-in-Chief can you get in one family tree? When it’s former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney’s family tree, the answer is six.

According to Ancestry.com, the world’s largest online family history resource, Romney’s family tree connects him to Franklin D. Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge, Franklin Pierce, Herbert Hoover, and both George H.W. and George W. Bush.

Romney is connected to Presidents George W. Bush (10th cousins, twice removed), George H. W. Bush (10th cousins, once removed) and Franklin D. Roosevelt (8th cousins, twice removed) through Ann Marbury Hutchinson, a key figure in the development of religious freedom in America and early settler of Rhode Island and New York.

Romney is related to Presidents Calvin Coolidge (10th cousins), Herbert Hoover (10thcousins) and Franklin Pierce (6th cousins, 4 times removed) through Thomas Richardson, a landowner in the late 1500s in Hertfordshire, England."

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

Good grief. Obama just can't seem to stop borrowing!

The Obama campaign has taken out a $15 million loan from Bank of America, according to a published report.

Citing the Obama campaign’s October monthly FEC filings, the Washington Free Beacon also reports that the loan was taken out on Sept. 4 and comes due eight days after the Nov. 6 election.

Obama For America will pay an interest rate of 2.5 percent plus the current Libor rate, according to the report, which noted that billionaire Warren Buffett invested $5 billion in the bank last year.’

RE: "BOUND" to be funny!

I was at a luncheon Saturday with Rick Scott's lieutenant governor. A woman, an immigrant, an "African American" and a very bright, articulate speaker. She would tell you different about how conservatives treat women.

This is a silly argument by team Obama. Once again he demeans the office he holds.

RE: "BOUND" to be funny!

You took the words right out of my mouth, Alberta.

It's very small and petty to campaign around a word, just because they have no other argument. Romney has a proven track record here. He didn't settle for the status quo. Instead, he saw there was a gap in the number of women who were employed and he did something about it.

The Obama administration can't allow this to go without finding something to attack on the national stage - especially since he has such a miserable track record with women himself. In addition to paying them 18 percent less - there have also been all sorts of allegations about his inner circle being "hostile to women."

The facts speak louder than words, IMHO

RE: Give me a Plain Jane any time to Have for life and ever More =

Or as my kids would say... "Awww. You guys made me ink."

RE: Obama Out Rai$e$ Romney---------> AGAIN

Agreed. As far as corrupt organizations go, the UN rivals even the current Democratic Party.

(No disrespect to the democrats of old, who represent something totally different that what we have in office today).

RE: Obama Out Rai$e$ Romney---------> AGAIN

Obama ‘Punting’ on New EPA Rules Until Post-Election

A new report from Senate Committee on Environmental and Public Works' - “A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013,” points to a “slew of job-killing EPA regulations that the Obama-EPA has put on hold until after the election but will be on the ‘to-do’ list for 2013.”

“As the economy has continued to falter over the past year, team Obama has been delaying rule after rule that will eliminate American jobs, drive up the price of gas at the pump even more, impose construction bans on local communities, and essentially shut down American oil, natural gas, and coal production. They don’t want this economic pain to hit American families just before the election because it would cost President Obama votes.”

The report goes on to state: “It’s pretty clear that if President Obama secures a second term, the Obama-EPA will have a very busy next four years, moving full speed ahead to implement numerous major rules and regulations that he has delayed or punted due to the upcoming election.

“The radical environmental left may not need to worry, but what about American families, who are working hard in tough economic times, trying to make ends meet?

“As the nation struggles to recover from a lagging economy in the coming year, Americans could also be grappling with a regulatory onslaught from the Obama-EPA that will strangle economic growth, destroy millions of jobs, and dramatically raise the price of goods, the cost of electricity, and the price of gas at the pump.”

The “punted” regulations include:

Greenhouse gas rules that will “virtually eliminate coal as a fuel option for future electric power generation,” and inflict new permitting costs on more than 37,000 farms.

New ozone standards that would cost $90 billion a year.

Regulations on hydraulic fracturing that will have “serious impacts on domestic energy production.”

Expansion of federal control “over virtually every body of water in the United States, no matter how small.”


Storm water regulations that could include “mandates on cities to change existing buildings, storm water sewers, and streets.”


Reductions in the sulfur content in gasoline that could boost prices by 9 cents a gallon.


Clean Water Act rules that “could require expensive new construction at power plants to lower fish deaths.”

Other regulations would affect coal ash, farm dust, oil and gasoline spill prevention, and more.


“This report is a wake-up call on the economic pain that the ‘abusive’ Obama-EPA plans to inflict next year,” said Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, ranking member on the committee.

“It reveals a president who is more concerned about saving his own job than the millions of Americans who are looking for one today.”

RE: Obama Out Rai$e$ Romney---------> AGAIN

SNEAKY, SNEAKY, SNEAKY OBAMA!

Just like all the hidden Obamacare taxes and problems that will not come to light until after the election - team Obama is currently holding on a VAST array of new EPA Rules until just after the election.

He knows both these initiatives would cost him the election.

You have to wonder about a candidate who deliberately waits until after the election to "go to work."

If his plans were so good or so popular, he would be crowing from the rooftop. But not our Obama. He waits till nobody is looking and quietly signs his executive orders, or he waits until after election to show his true colors - JUST AS HE DID IN 2008.

How could anyone seriously trust him again???

RE: Obama Out Rai$e$ Romney---------> AGAIN

Thankfully the internet is changing the way we get our news which forms our voting opinions. Mainstream media can no longer dominate as our primary source of information. Just like the debates, which are now available all over the world - voters and interested people alike can watch for themselves and make their own comparisons. Romney shattered the carefully crafted image the media worked so hard to create about him, which is, of course, why he is now in the lead.

Also, new watchdog groups and the candidates themselves can now distribute their information for all the world to see. This is bad for politicians but good for Americans.

If all people had to go by was what the mainstream media was spouting, the lies would be off the charts. Well, actually, they already are!!! But at least now we KNOW they are lies.

RE: Obama Out Rai$e$ Romney---------> AGAIN

"After four decades as the minority party in both houses of Congress, Republicans finally gained control in 1994, a direct result of the Newt Gingrich “Contract with America” which promised to balance the federal budget for the first time since 1960 under Eisenhower. Six years later, in 2000, Republicans delivered on that promise with the first balanced budget in 40 years.

In other words, the federal government operated in the red (deficit spending) for 40 years under a Democrat dominated Congress. This alone makes any claim that Democrats are in any way concerned with deficit spending, disingenuous at best."

RE: Don't hand over your details

This is a little off topic but I'm posting because it's another type of scam few people know about until it's too late. It's also possibly the lowest form of predatory theft out there...

The Obituary Scammer.

Scammers gather information from obituaries for names and addresses, then they buy Social Security numbers and other personal data, such as credit histories of the recently departed on
the internet. Knowing it takes a couple of weeks for the death certificates to be processed, the family of the deceased can't "lock down" his or her accounts, so the scammer uses that time to get the new accounts processed. Finally they sell this information along with fake driver’s licenses to people with bad credit. Then credit accounts, large purchases, or car loans are made in the name of the deceased.

Either that, or they scope out your home for a month or two since they now know you are home alone and then come rob you.

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

It's highly dangerous in all of those institutions.

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

ORLANDO SENTINAL ENDORSES ROMNEY AFTER BACKING OBAMA IN 2008

Four years after throwing its support behind then-presidential candidate Barack Obama, the Orlando Sentinel is saying it's time to change course.

In an editorial announcing the paper's endorsement of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, the editorial board of the large Florida daily delivers some harsh criticisms of the president, while admitting that they're not entirely satisfied with Romney's positions.

"We have little confidence that Obama would be more successful managing the economy and the budget in the next four years," the editorial board writes, after outlining their displeasure with nagging deficits and a slow economic recovery. "For that reason, though we endorsed him in 2008, we are recommending Romney in this race."

The editorial goes on to accuse Obama of not pursuing sufficient bipartisan efforts to tackle the debt and deficit, while praising Romney for making entitlement reform a prominent campaign issue. The paper also makes clear that its opposition to Obama doesn't stem from conspiracy theories or fringe arguments about his supposed lack of patriotism, and that its support for Romney doesn't come without some reservations

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

Agreed - but as one who holds a degree in Journalism, I can tell you this is not how the subject is (WAS) taught. The emphasis was on objectivity and how to construct a story in ways to AVOID media bias.

That all went out the window when George Soros started buying up the medis.

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

166 pages of internal State Department documents released Friday show that slain U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and the security officers assigned to protect him repeatedly sounded alarms to their superiors in Washington about the intensifying lawlessness and violence in Eastern Libya, where Stevens ultimately died...

Roughly a month earlier... on Aug. 8, the ambassador noted that in just a few months' time, "Benghazi has moved from trepidation to euphoria and back as a series of violent incidents has dominated the political landscape." He added, "The individual incidents have been organized," a function of "the security vacuum that a diverse group of independent actors are exploiting for their own purposes."

"Islamist extremists are able to attack the Red Cross with relative impunity," Stevens cabled. "What we have seen are not random crimes of opportunity, but rather targeted and discriminate attacks." His final comment on the two-page document was: "Attackers are unlikely to be deterred until authorities are at least as capable."

By Sept. 4, Stevens' aides were reporting back to Washington on the "strong Revolutionary and Islamist sentiment" in the city.

Scarcely more than two months had passed since Stevens had notified the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice and other agencies about a "recent increase in violent incidents," including "attacks against western interests." "Until the GOL (Government of Libya) is able to effectively deal with these key issues," Stevens wrote on June 25, "the violence is likely to continue and worsen."

After the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi had been damaged by an improvised explosive device, earlier that month, Stevens had reported to his superiors that an Islamist group had claimed credit for the attack, and in so doing, had "described the attack as targeting the Christians supervising the management of the consulate."

"Islamic extremism appears to be on the rise in eastern Libya," the ambassador wrote, adding that "the Al-Qaeda flag has been spotted several times flying over government buildings and training facilities ..."

The documents also contain evidence that the State Department's denials of requests for enhanced security in Benghazi in the months leading up to the attack may have contributed to the ability of the attackers to plan their assault on the consulate and annex grounds without being detected.


"Multiple warnings about security threats were contained in Ambassador Stevens' own words in multiple cables sent to Washington, D.C., and were manifested by two prior bombings of the Benghazi compound and an assassination attempt on the British ambassador," the congressmen wrote. "For this administration to assume that terrorists were not involved in the 9/11 anniversary attack would have required a willing suspension of disbelief."

State Department spokesman Mark Toner said, in response to the latest documents: "An independent board is conducting a thorough review of the assault on our post in Benghazi. Once we have the board's comprehensive account of what happened, findings and recommendations, we can fully address these matters."

At the State Department briefing Friday, spokeswoman Victoria Nuland declined to comment on published reports alleging that an official working for the Central Intelligence Agency had informed the Obama administration on Sept. 12 that the Benghazi murders were an act of terrorism.


Read more:

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

P.S. It's an "occupational" hazard of mine to watch the media and read for spin. It bugs me that they have completely dropped all pretense of OBJECTIVITY in favor of PERSUASION.

RE: Obama Out Rai$e$ Romney---------> AGAIN

Republicans are simply not inclined to open up the nearest window and throw their money out. Until the government learns to cut it's spending, that's all we would be doing.

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

Stalking a little early today, are ya?

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

But don't you see? Much of what shaped your opinions was the biased media pumping out information that was deliberately cherry-picked to persuade Americans to think that way.

In the meantime, they deliberately cherry-picked the Obama coverage (or LACK of coverage) to get him elected.

If a conservative with no background and serious questionable ties to terrorists and other criminals ran for president, the biased media would have been all over the candidate and would have never let him see the light of a voting booth.

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

Jean - you seem like a nice person and a reasonable one, so let me ask you an honest question..

We now know the Ambassador send numerous cables in the days and weeks leading up to his death where he stressed the increase in danger and repeatedly asked for some security.

Being the nice, reasonable person that I think you are, how can you not be angered that his pleas were completely ignored?

And how can you not be angerd that this administration deliberately, intentionally and undeniably lied to the world?

I'm genuinely curious about how any reasonable person could excuse this, which is why I'm asking you. What kind of president does this?

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

Sorry Jean... But that works both ways. We've had to sit listening for YEARS to a blatently biased media shape public opinion by distorting the facts - AND an administration that has been pumping out lies and misinformation.

I did not say ALL Americans... I said few Americans. I do not make large sweeping statements presenting them as "facts" the way our friend Dude does.

I am not very interested in confronting anyone here or anywhere else. But I will not sit back and let this liberal spin machine continue to sweep BIG problems and BIG lies under the rug.

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

Nor can they respect the obvious cover-up.

It's time for this liar to go.

RE: THE President Actually! Preisdent Obama or President Romney?

Obama has been "outed" for his big debate lie, Dude. For two weeks the world listened to him telling us the Ambassador died because of a video, only to learn that was not the case at all.

On top of that we now know poor Ambassador wrote cable after cable warning of increased dangers and al qaeda flags being raised... and the administration left them there with no security to die.

Few Americans will forgive such a cold, heartless blunder.

RE: The Top 5 Most Ridiculous Gov’t Expenses Found in This Year’s ‘Wastebook’

"It is my view that centralisation is occuring as a result of the diminishing sense of organic community, what we might call neighbourliness, individuals becoming so self-involved that they fail to tend to their own backyard"


Absolutely. They are also being forced on the defensive because any "perceived" slight ends up in a lawsuit so people now have to think twice about lending a helping hand, lest it get bitten.

RE: The Top 5 Most Ridiculous Gov’t Expenses Found in This Year’s ‘Wastebook’

Thanks for listening. Federal programs do sometimes start with the best of intentions - but usually fail miserably in the end. It's just too big and burdonsome to handle CRITICAL individual problems and there's not much accountability in the end. Politicians bury their theft and mis-use of funds under mountains of regulation... I just individual states would be better off parceling out the money to individual counties where the accountability is much greater. These public servants are your friends and neighbors. When there is a problem, you actually have a person to go to and you have the ability to boot them out if they fail in theri responsibilities.

RE: The Top 5 Most Ridiculous Gov’t Expenses Found in This Year’s ‘Wastebook’

So anyway, I ran into the mother at the grocery store yesterday which is when I learned about her plight. I've been through this twice before with other friends so her story was not unfamiliar. My neighbor was also there and she was one of the people who this also happened to... We both immediately pitched in $50 bucks and are going to go to work today contacting the local food bank and the churches to see what kind of support we can get these people.

Generally speaking, this is where the majority of "one-on-one" assistance comes from in Amercan communities. Local churches and business... mainstream America is far, FAR kinder than big government.

RE: The Top 5 Most Ridiculous Gov’t Expenses Found in This Year’s ‘Wastebook’

Not my view either. Back to this case I'm working on now with the family who just had four children uncermoniously dropped in their lap in the middle of the night.

Imagine not having a lot of money on your own - but you just barely manage to pay the bills and you get by well enough. Then suddenly the government comes to your door with four desperately needy children (with behavioral problems). Ok...that's a good service on the face of things because these children have been taken from deplorable conditions and DO need all the help they can get.

But what happens next is that they say...Oh by the way, you and your husband have to be at OUR offices fifty miles away by 5:00 tomorrow to be finger-printed and have a background check. We don't care if you're working...we don't care that it would be much easier for you to go down to the local sheriff's office...we don't care if you need gas money...Just be there.

Then they say, "Oh yes! Federal assistance is available in the form of food stamps, etc...but you have to come back and APPLY for that and it takes six weeks to process..."

Excuse me? These children need food TOMORROW. They need clothes TOMORROW... They don't have six weeks for help and we don't have the money either.

Then they say, oh by the way...nobody can come near these children unless they have also had a criminal background check...so you can't have any help. No babysitters, no family members, no friends can come over to visit...nothing...until we approve the visitors.

This is the kind of "assistance" that our government should be doubling down on. They should have FIRST priority, not get caught up in "the system." Local agencies should control the funding - and I would suggest they would manage the money far better than the feds.,

RE: The Top 5 Most Ridiculous Gov’t Expenses Found in This Year’s ‘Wastebook’

Better to GIVE....Grrr!

More

RE: The Top 5 Most Ridiculous Gov’t Expenses Found in This Year’s ‘Wastebook’

Totally agree. The problem is that the Federal Government has become too big and too far-reaching. They can't manage their way out of a paper bag. Better to five more authority back to the individual states and let them govern in accordance with their specific needs. Of course, they should have a FEW guidelines set in place, but otherwise, give them a little independence to spend the money and run the programs in a manor that is more custom-tailored to their needs!@!!