SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : How Quickly Can Obama Totally Destroy the US? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: longnshort who wrote (18)11/8/2012 3:14:49 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation  Respond to of 16547
 
With Election Over, ABC Wonders About Obama's Benghazi 'Cover-Up,' 'Refusal' to Talk about Libya

By Scott Whitlock | November 07, 2012
newsbusters.org


Now that the 2012 presidential election is over and Barack Obama has been safely reelected, the journalists at ABC's Good Morning America woke up to the fact that the President has "refused" to provide details the terrorist attack in Libya and that the administration "didn't want to talk about it." [See video below. MP3 audio here.]

Fill-in host Elizabeth Vargas blithely announced, "In the meantime, the Libya issue has been overhanging this election. Allegations of a, quote, massive cover-up, by Senator John McCain about this administration's, really, refusal to really put to rest this issue before voting day." Martha Raddatz, who moderated the vice presidential debate, agreed, saying, "They didn't want to talk about it. Everybody tried to pin them down on that. They did not want to talk about it." "Everybody" tried to pin them down on Libya?



Raddatz predicted, "I think a lot of those questions will probably get cleared up with an investigation that's now going on."

During the October 10, 2012 debate between Joe Biden and Paul Ryan, Raddatz asked, "The State Department has now made clear there were no protesters there. It was a pre-planned assault by heavily armed men. Wasn't this a massive intelligence failure, Vice President Biden?"

However, the network as a whole aided and abetted the administration.

A Media Reality Check by Rich Noyes revealed:

On October 23, the CBS Evening News exclusively reported that State Department e-mails sent during the September 11 attack refer to how the terrorist group Ansar al-Sharia claimed responsibility — more evidence that the Obama administration knew at the earliest stages that this was likely a terrorist attack.

The next morning, however, NBC’s Today show ignored the new report, while ABC’s Good Morning America logged just 35 seconds of coverage.

...

Yet ABC’s World News limited its coverage that night to a 20-second item noting that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had dismissed the significance of the e-mails. Anchor Diane Sawyer’s entire item: "And the White House also weighed in today on e-mails sent while the attack was underway. The e-mails informed them that a radical Islamic group was claiming responsibility, but Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says those e-mails were not hard evidence, and all the incoming information had to be evaluated."

World News offered no further coverage of the Libya e-mails, but Sawyer did carve out time that week for stories about the capture of a monkey in Florida (1 minute, 42 seconds) and whether dogs yawn when they see people do the same (1 minute 47 seconds).

It was Rice who went on the Sunday talk shows, September 14, to insist that the attack was due to a "video." However, Newsweek's Eli Lake revealed that officials knew of an al Qaeda connection 24 hours after the September 11th incident. ABC waited 40 hours before the story was publicized on the September 27 World News.

A transcript of the November 7 exchange can be found below:

ELIZABETH VARGAS: Who are the two top contenders to replace her [Hillary Clinton]?

MARTHA RADDATZ: Well, I would say right now, it's Senator John Kerry from Massachusetts. But there are some issues there. Do the Democrats want to give up that Senate seat? So, we'll have to stay tuned for John Kerry. And also, U.N. ambassador Susan Rice, who got into some trouble over Libya and some explanations with what happened on Libya. So, that's also in question. So, those are the two top candidates, I'd say. But we have to wait and see how those issues play out.

VARGAS: In the meantime, the Libya issue has been overhanging this election. Allegations of a, quote, massive cover-up, by Senator John McCain about this administration's, really, refusal to really put to rest this issue before voting day. Waiting until after election day.

RADDATZ: They didn't want to talk about it. Everybody tried to pin them down on that. They did not want to talk about it. I think a lot of those questions will probably get cleared up with an investigation that's now going on. And there will probably be hearings, as well.




To: longnshort who wrote (18)11/8/2012 5:29:18 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Vestas to cut 3,000 more jobs

By Ted Sickinger, The Oregonian November 08, 2012 at 8:22 AM
oregonlive.com


Vestas Portland headquarters features a sculpture by Lee Kelly.

Vestas Wind Systems is aiming to sell a stake of as much as 20 percent and shed another 3,000 off its headcount, more than doubling the number of jobs it plans to eliminate by 2013.

The announcement came as the Danish company reported disappointing financial results that sent its shares tumbling 13 percent.

The world's biggest wind turbine-maker said Wednesday that its third-quarter loss widened to 175 million euros ($225 million), compared with a loss of 60 million euros in the year-ago period. Analysts had forecast net income of 20 million euros, according to a Bloomberg survey.

Revenue increased 49 percent, to 1.99 billion euros.

Vestas, struggling to return to profit as overcapacity has squeezed margins, will trim its workforce to 16,000 by the end of next year, versus 22,721 in 2011, bringing its annual fixed cost savings to 400 million euros by the end of 2013. The company did not provide a regional breakdown of the job cuts.

In one sense, Oregon and Portland have already dodged several bullets with Vestas.

Portland was considered a front-runner in 2002 when Vestas was fishing for a place to land its North American manufacturing operations. Those plants went to Colorado, which subsidized the move and had seen employment slashed from 1,700 to 1,200 in recent months.

Oregon also lost a bid in 2008 to score a $25 million Vestas research center. That went to Houston, which offered an agreement with three universities. The company announced last week that the Houston center will close, along with two other R&D offices in Massachusetts and Colorado, cutting 85 more jobs.

Later in 2008, Oregon offered $19 million in incentives for Vestas to build a $250 million headquarters in the South Waterfront, in exchange for a promise of 850 new jobs. Vestas held off that expansion because of the economic slowdown.

Officials finally persuaded the company to take taxpayers' money in 2010, when Vestas agreed to a $66 million renovation of a former Meier & Frank building in the Pearl District to house its North American sales and service operations.

The city of Portland extended an $8 million interest-free loan to the developer, Gerding Edlen, to fund part of the renovation. The state kicked in an additional $2.25 million, including a $1 million forgivable loan from the governor's strategic reserve fund. That forgiveness was conditioned on the company retaining 398 jobs and creating 102 more over any eight consecutive calendar quarters between Oct. 1, 2008, and June 30, 2014.

If the company fails to do so, the October 2010 agreement requires Vestas to return part of the $1 million.

Vestas moved into the building this summer. For now, it remains Vestas sales and service hub in North America, but employment there has also been cut. The company says it employs "nearly 300" in the Pearl, down from "more than 300" in recent months, and 25 percent below the "nearly 400" at the beginning of the year.

Vestas is looking for an investor to help it weather falling turbine prices, Chief Financial Officer Dag Andresen said Wednesday.

"What's important is that we have investors who understand the company, the segment that we are working in and also have a longer-term view," he said from the company's headquarters in Aarhus, Denmark.

He and CEO Ditlev Engel declined to discuss talks announced in August about a potential "strategic cooperation" with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.

Engel said he's bracing for a decline in orders next year in the U.S. as a tax credit supporting wind power expires. "We are preparing for it to be a very tough U.S. market in 2013," he told Bloomberg Television.

The production tax credit provides an incentive of 2.2 cents a kilowatt-hour for wind power. When it was allowed to lapse at the end of 2003, U.S. wind installations declined to 397 megawatts in 2004 from 1,670 megawatts in 2003. President Barack Obama has said he supports extending the credit.

The company's job losses include about 3,700 previously announced job cuts and 3,000 reductions announced Wednesday. Engel said some staff reductions will come through the selling of facilities, meaning Vestas workers may retain jobs by working for another company. Others will come from not filling vacant positions, he said.

Vestas closed at 26.65 kroner Wednesday in Copenhagen.



To: longnshort who wrote (18)11/9/2012 6:25:21 AM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16547
 
600 Layoffs At Groupon

Business Insider ^ | 11/9/12


More layoffs announced at Anniston weapons incinerator

Anniston Star ^ | 11/9/12


Murray Energy confirms 150 layoffs at three subsidiaries

WTOV ^ | 11/9/2012


130 laid off in Minn. dairy plant closure

Minnesotta Public Radio ^ | 11/9/12



Stanford brake plant to lay off 75

Kentucky.com ^ | 11/9/12



TurboCare, Oce laying off more than 220 workers

Republic American Newspaper ^ | 11/9/12


ATI plans to lay off 172 workers in North Richland Hills

Star Telegram ^ | 11/9/12



SpaceX claims its first victims as Rocketdyne lays off 100

KPCC ^ | 11/9/12

Career Education to cut 900 jobs, close 23 campuses (Illinois)



Daily Herald ^ | 11/9/12


Vestas to cut 3,000 more jobs

Oregon Live ^ | 11/9/12

FirstEnergy to cut 400 jobs by 2016, cites lower prices, competition

Cleveland Plain Dealer ^ | 11/9/12




To: longnshort who wrote (18)4/16/2013 5:03:13 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Someone needs to ask Bill Ayers what his thoughts are about the Boston bombings.



To: longnshort who wrote (18)5/24/2013 1:09:02 PM
From: joseffy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16547
 
Now The Gibson Guitar Raids Make Sense---
Investor's Business Daily:

05/23/2013
news.investors.com




The inexplicable raid nearly two years ago on a guitar maker for using allegedly illegal wood that its competitors also used was another targeting by this administration of its political enemies.

On Aug. 24, 2011, federal agents executed four search warrants on Gibson Guitar Corp. facilities in Nashville and Memphis, Tenn., and seized several pallets of wood, electronic files and guitars. One of the top makers of acoustic and electric guitars, including the iconic Les Paul introduced in 1952, Gibson was accused of using wood illegally obtained in violation of the century-old Lacey Act, which outlaws trafficking in flora and fauna the harvesting of which had broken foreign laws.

In one raid, the feds hauled away ebony fingerboards, alleging they violated Madagascar law. Gibson responded by obtaining the sworn word of the African island's government that no law had been broken.

In another raid, the feds found materials imported from India, claiming they too moved across the globe in violation of Indian law. Gibson's response was that the feds had simply misinterpreted Indian law.

Interestingly, one of Gibson's leading competitors is C.F. Martin & Co. According to C.F. Martin's catalog, several of their guitars contain "East Indian Rosewood," which is the exact same wood in at least 10 of Gibson's guitars.


So why were they not also raided and their inventory of foreign wood seized?

Grossly underreported at the time was the fact that Gibson's chief executive, Henry Juszkiewicz, contributed to Republican politicians. Recent donations have included $2,000 to Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., and $1,500 to Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn.

By contrast, Chris Martin IV, the Martin & Co. CEO, is a long-time Democratic supporter, with $35,400 in contributions to Democratic candidates and the Democratic National Committee over the past couple of election cycles.

"We feel that Gibson was inappropriately targeted," Juszkiewicz said at the time, adding the matter "could have been addressed with a simple contact (from) a caring human being representing the government. Instead, the government used violent and hostile means."

That includes what Gibson described as "two hostile raids on its factories by agents carrying weapons and attired in SWAT gear where employees were forced out of the premises, production was shut down, goods were seized as contraband and threats were made that would have forced the business to close."

Gibson, fearing a bankrupting legal battle, settled and agreed to pay a $300,000 penalty to the U.S. Government. It also agreed to make a "community service payment" of $50,000 to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation — to be used on research projects or tree-conservation activities.

The feds in return agreed to let Gibson resume importing wood while they sought "clarification" from India.

The feds say they acted to save the environment from greedy plunderers. America is a trivial importer of rosewood from Madagascar and India. Ninety-five percent of it goes to China, where it is used to make luxury items like $800,000 beds. So putting Gibson out of business wasn't going to do a whole lot to save their forests.

Juszkiewicz' claim that his company was "inappropriately targeted" is eerily similar to the claims by Tea Party, conservative, pro-life and religious groups that they were targeted by the IRS for special scrutiny because they sought to exercise their First Amendment rights to band together in vocal opposition to the administration's policies and the out-of-control growth of government and its power.

The Gibson Guitar raid, the IRS intimidation of Tea Party groups and the fraudulently obtained warrant naming Fox News reporter James Rosen as an "aider, abettor, co-conspirator" in stealing government secrets are but a few examples of the abuse of power by the Obama administration to intimidate those on its enemies list.



To: longnshort who wrote (18)6/12/2013 11:49:38 AM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
longnshort

  Respond to of 16547
 
Bank president Mahajan FDIC lawsuit, Motion hearing, June 12, 2013, Rezkos sold lot to Obamas



Citizen WElls News ^ | June 12, 2013





To: longnshort who wrote (18)9/2/2013 12:50:08 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
EXCLUSIVE–US CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSIONER: AMNESTY MEANS SPECIAL, NOT EQUAL, TREATMENT

by MATTHEW BOYLE 1 Sep 2013

Peter Kirsanow, a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, told Breitbart News that Attorney General Eric Holder’s claims that amnesty for illegal immigrants is a civil rights issue “profoundly ahistorical.” “If you take a look at the basis of the civil rights movement, it was to have blacks treated in all respects the same as whites or everybody else,” Kirsanow (pictured) said in a phone interview. “What amnesty is doing is setting aside a special class of individuals who are going to put forward and treated more favorably than others. In other words, they’ve already broken the law and are being given amnesty.

"In terms of immigration policy... it would severely affect the rights of blacks generally and all low-income Americans. What it is going to do is displace those individuals from the labor market.”

The U.S. Civil Rights Commission, Kirsanow said, has held extensive hearings in recent years detailing how amnesty would economically impact American workers, especially the black community.

“We had a hearing before the Civil Rights Commission on the effects of illegal immigration on black employment levels, both wage levels and unemployment rates,” Kirsanow said. “What we had were a number of experts from just about every sphere you can think of: business, academia and immigration experts in general. They spanned the ideological spectrum. We had individuals from the far left, individuals in the middle, individuals on the right.

"They disagreed in some respects about certain policy prescriptions but they were unanimous in their conclusion, backed by copious amounts of data," he recalled, "that illegal immigration had a deleterious effect on the wage and employment levels of black Americans. And it’s not a small effect. It’s a clearly sizable effect.”

Kirsanow and some of his fellow U.S. Commission on Civil Rights members have pushed for members of Congress and key political figures in the national immigration debate like President Barack Obama himself to address these issues, but they have ignored the calls thus far.

“What’s interesting is those who have described themselves as the champions of civil rights are doing enormous damage to the ranks of black Americans by supporting and shepherding through comprehensive immigration reform that does nothing to control the borders, that grants amnesty and is going to create a legal population of individuals who are going to undercut the employment and wage prospects for low income Americans, generally, and specifically black Americans and more specifically black males,” he asserted.

Kirsanow questions who the lawmakers in Washington, D.C., on both sides of the political aisle are really representing, given that they have not substantively discussed the issue in their legislative deliberations. “I testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee back in April on immigration reform on the same thing that we’re talking about right now," he stated. "What was amazing is the number of senators who were either cavalier about it or they gave grudging acknowledgment to the fact that ‘yeah, there’s a possibility that there might be some dislocation to American workers as a result of illegal immigration’ and then just kind of moved on.

"The question I have is: Who do they represent? They are United States Senators. They represent Americans, presumably. Yet, what they’re proposing is they’re going to have a decided negative effect on Americans. What reason? What? Who do they represent? Do they represent illegal immigrants? Or do they represent lawful Americans? And that’s a question that needs to be posed to them.”

Kirsanow was originally one of only three witnesses who were going to be called to testify on the immigration situation before the Senate Judiciary Committee. He; GOP establishment figure Doug Holtz-Eakin of American Action Forum (AAF), a group advocating in favor of amnesty; and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano were going to be the only ones who testified were it not for public outcry about the rushed process.

Originally, Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Sen. Pat Leahy (D-VT) and Senate Democratic Party leadership were not even going to call any hearings.
“On a matter this large, it is an insult to the American people that only three people were going to testify regardless of how knowledgeable they may be about the subject matter," Kirsanow said. "This is such a complex matter that they needed perspectives from so many different places. What we had was a bill that was gigantic. It was almost the size of Obamacare and yet it was released barely 36 hours before our testimony.

"In other words, we were testifying in an information vacuum on a momentous piece of legislation. Only after there was a bit of hue and cry did Senate leadership understand that they needed to open up the testimony to more witnesses.”

Kirsanow and others members of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission have written letters on this matter to President Obama and to Congressional Black Caucus chairwoman Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-OH), among other lawmakers, and they have received no response. Similarly, advocates opposed to amnesty like Leah Durant have written letters to members like Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), the chairman of the House Budget Committee, raising these same concerns—which have gone ignored, as well.

Kirsanow said that while there are likely a number of reasons why members of the Congressional Black Caucus have ignored this real threat to their constituents, he thinks the most prevailing is that President Barack Obama, America’s first black president, is pushing the policy so they have no ability to stand up to him politically.

“I have asked them why they are not standing up for the needs of their constituents,” Kirsanow said. “We’ve sent these letters to Marcia Fudge. We’ve sent them to members of the Congressional Black Caucus. Radio silence. Complete radio silence."

"I wish reporters asked members of the Congressional Black Caucus what the heck they’re thinking," he said. "They’ve not been challenged on this. One of the dynamics at play is the fact that we have the first black president who is in support of this. If he is in support of it, a lot of black Americans will reasonably presume that he is looking out for their best interests. So, the Congressional Black Caucus can use that as cover.

"If President Obama supports amnesty, and therefore 90 percent of the Congressional Black Caucus’ constituents will believe it’s in their best interests, those members of the Congressional Black Caucus are unlikely to be questioned by their constituents about whether it’s a good idea on that because they will have believed ‘Barack Obama looks out for my interests, it must be a good idea.’”

Kirsanow said the president is not sticking up for the black community and argued it might be because of special interests and potential future voter pools. “You know that old line, when you want to figure out why something is being done, follow the money? Well, in politics, you not only follow the money, but you follow the votes or potential votes," he explained. "I think what a lot of sides see, both on the Republican side and the Democratic side, is this vast untapped pool of votes that they expect are going to materialize as a result of amnesty.

“Republicans don’t want to be seen as being anti-Hispanic, Democrats see this as a giant new constituency group and, so, what you’ve got I think, and I don’t know if this pertains to President Obama, but you’ve got a political class looking out for their interests. ‘I want more votes,’ as opposed to current interests of their constituents.

"I don’t necessarily want to ascribe that motive to them, but it’s as plausible and probably more rationale than anything else because I can’t figure out why it is representatives of the United States of America are doing something that is harmful to their constituents.”

While Kirsanow argues members of the political class in the black community like members of Congress and leaders of black groups like the NAACP and others do not stick up for their rank and file on this issue, he said he does get the impression many ordinary black citizens are aware of this threat to their economic well-being.

“A lot of folks do,” Kirsanow, who lives in inner-city Cleveland and used to serve as a member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), said. “I was in Washington, D.C., and I also appear of black radio shows from time to time, and other radio shows, and what you get without question and what you used to get for quite some time was whenever the issue of illegal immigration came up, black callers were outraged because they feel the effects," he declared.

"They see it with their own eyes. You get calls from people who have been displaced by illegal immigrants, people who can’t find jobs because they can’t compete against low wages offered to illegal immigrants and it’s fairly vigorous."

credit fubho



To: longnshort who wrote (18)9/2/2013 3:29:35 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
What's with the making the hand into a pistol.

5 year old kids are suspended from school for that.




To: longnshort who wrote (18)2/12/2014 5:19:22 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Sid Caesar Skit--This is Your Life