Marita: Iran will smother us with crude oil

I believe Marita says what the title states and much more.  Essentially she has reinforced what is generally known by any thinking person.

Thanks to Obama and our Secretary of State, we are going to be wearing nettle clothing.  We will suffer the sticking power of each nettle of thousands every time an Iranian barrel of oil touches our shore to be paid for with bucks manufactured out of thin air by this silly administration.

We know buying oil from Iran won’t come close to being the end of our stabbing torture because we have in Iran, an enemy government desiring nothing less than our death as a people and a nation.

Marita says it better than anyone I can think of … Let’s hear it from her:

 

Greetings!

Last week I told you my column on Mexico’s energy reforms was probably of more interest to those in the industry than the general public and that it lacked my usual political snap. Well, I’ve made up for it this week. Yes, as always, I am addressing energy. But the bigger picture is political.

I had fun writing Obama: Iranian oil, good. Canadian oil, bad. American oil, bad. (attached and pasted-in-below). I hope you can tell. Please note: the reference to Jeff Foxworthy is about a parody done in his style, not something he has released—but it was just so appropriate, I couldn’t resist incorporating the idea.

With everything I write, I hope to make a difference in the national dialogue. But, somehow, I feel even more strongly about the message of Obama: Iranian oil, good. Canadian oil, bad. American oil, bad. I send it to you today with an extra prayer that you’ll spread this message far and wide. Please pray with me that the media/talk show hosts pick up on this message and that I’ll be busy with radio interviews on this topic.

Please post, pass on and/or personally enjoy Obama: Iranian oil, good. Canadian oil, bad. American oil, bad.

marita Noon 1

Marita Noon

Executive Director, Energy Makes America Great, inc.

PO Box 52103, Albuquerque, NM 87181

505.239.8998

 

Obama: Iranian oil, good. Canadian oil, bad. American oil, bad.

President Obama’s confusing approach to energy encourages our enemies who shout “death to America,” while penalizing our closest allies and even our own job creators.

Iran’s participation in the nuclear negotiations that have slogged on for months, have now, ultimately, netted a deal that will allow Iran to export its oil—which is the only reason they came to the table (they surely are not interested in burnishing Obama’s legacy). International sanctions have, since 2011, cut Iran’s oil exports in half and severely damaged its economy. Iran, it is estimated, currently has more than 50 million barrels of oil in storage on 28 tankers at sea—part of a months’ long build up.

It is widely reported that, due to aging infrastructure and saturated storage, it will take Iran months to bring its production back up to pre-sanction levels. The millions of barrels of oil parked offshore are indicative of their eagerness to increase exports. Once the sanctions are lifted—if Congress approves the terms of the deal, Iran wants to be ready to move its oil. In fact, even before the sanctions have been lifted, Iran is already moving some of its “floating storage.”

On July 17, the Financial Times (FT) reported: “The departure of a giant Iranian supertanker from the flotilla of vessels storing oil off the country’s coast has triggered speculation Tehran is moving to ramp up its crude exports.” The Starla, “a 2 million barrel vessel,” set sail—moving the oil closer to customers in Asia. In April, another tanker, Happiness, sailed from Iran to China, where, since June, it has parked off the port City of Dalian.

Starla is the first vessel storing crude offshore to sail after the nuclear deal was reached—which is, according to the FT: “signaling its looming return to the oil market.” Reuters calls its departure: “a milestone following a months-long build-up of idling crude tankers.” Analysts at Macquarie Capital, apparently think the oil on Starla will not be parked, waiting for sanctions to be lifted. A research note, states: Iran is “likely assuming that either a small increase in exports will not undermine the historic accord reached or that no one will notice.” We noticed.

Already, before sanctions are lifted, global oil prices are feeling the pressure of Iran’s increased exports. Since the deal’s been announced, crude prices have lost almost all of the recent gains.

While the Obama Administration’s actions are allowing Iran, which hates America, to boost its economy by increasing its oil exports, they are hurting our closest ally but putting delay after delay in front of the Keystone pipeline—which would help Canada export its oil.

After six-and-a-half years of kicking the can down the road, and despite widespread support and positive reports, the Keystone pipeline is no closer to construction than it was on the day the application was submitted. It is obvious President Obama doesn’t like the project, which will create tens of thousands of jobs, according to his own State Department. Back in February, he vetoed the bill Congress sent him that would have authorized construction, saying that it circumvented “longstanding and proven processes for determining whether or not building and operating a cross-border pipeline serves the national interest.” At the time, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said: “Congress won’t stop pursuing good ideas, including this one.” But he was not able to gather enough votes to override the veto and, since then, we’ve heard nothing about the Keystone pipeline. In Washington, DC, silence on an important issue like Keystone isn’t always golden.

There is no pending legislation on Keystone, but the permit application has still not been approved or rejected. I had hoped that the unions, who want the jobs Keystone would provide, would be able to pressure enough Democrats to support the project, to push a bill over the veto-proof line. But that didn’t happen. For months, Keystone has been silently dangling. But that may be about to change.

Reliable sources tell me that Obama is prepared to, finally, announce his decision on Keystone. According to the well-sourced, and verified, rumor, he is going to say: “No”—probably just before or after the Labor Day holiday. He’ll conclude that it is not in the “national interest.” So helping our ally grow its economy and export its oil is not in our national interest but helping our sworn enemy do the same, is? It’s like the “Channeling Jeff Foxworthy” parody states: we just “might live in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots.”

Speaking of economic growth and oil exports, what about here at home, in the good old U.S. of A.? Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) questions the deal that allows Iran to export its oil, while we cannot: “As Congress begins its 60-day review of President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, there are plenty of reasons to be skeptical about whether it is in our nation’s—and the world’s—best interests. Not least among them are the underexplored, but potentially significant consequences the deal will hold for American energy producers.”

Most people don’t realize that the U.S. is, as Murkowski says in her op-ed, “the only advanced nation that generally prohibits oil exports.” Due to decades-old policy, born in a different energy era, American oil producers are prohibited from exporting crude oil because it was perceived to be in “short supply.” (Note: refined petroleum product, such as gasoline and diesel, can be exported and is our number one export. We are also about ready to ship our major first tanker full of natural gas headed for Europe.) Today, when it comes to crude oil, our cup runneth over. The U.S. is now the world’s largest producer or oil and gas. Rather than short supply, we have an over-supply—so much so that American crude oil (WTI) is sold at a discount over the global market (Brent). This disadvantages U.S. producers but doesn’t benefit consumers because gasoline is sold based on the higher-priced Brent.

Murkowski argues that it is time to lift the 40-year-old oil export ban. She’s introduced bipartisan legislation that would do just that, but, if he was so inclined, President Obama could reverse the policy himself—if he found it to be in the national interest. And how could it not be?

Allowing U.S. crude oil into the world market enhances global energy security, as it would be less impacted by tensions in the Middle East. Our allies in Europe and Asia would have access to supply from a friendly and reliable source—remember the Arab Oil Embargo crippled Japan’s economy because it had no domestic supply and was overly reliant on Arab sources. Lifting the oil export ban would allow U.S. crude to be sold at the true market price, not the discounted rate, which would help stem the job losses currently being felt throughout the oil patch due to the low price of oil and exacerbated by the drop in the price of crude triggered by the Iran deal.

So, the Obama Administration is lobbying Congress to lift the sanctions on Iran, a country that views America as The Great Satan. Lifting sanctions would allow Iran to resume full oil export capabilities and boost its economy—while refusing to give our allies and our own country the same benefit. Iranian oil will enter the world market, while Canadian and American oil is constrained. How is that in the “national interest?”

It appears we might just be living in a country founded by geniuses and run by idiots.

The author of Energy Freedom, Marita Noon serves as the executive director for Energy Makes America Great Inc. and the companion educational organization, the Citizens’ Alliance for Responsible Energy (CARE). She hosts a weekly radio program: America’s Voice for Energy—which expands on the content of her weekly column.

Marita Noon: Germany’s Energy Transformation

Marita Noon

Link to: Germany’s “energy transformation:” unsustainable subsidies and an unstable system (I’d really appreciate it if you would click on this link to RedState.com and select the “recommend” option. If a column on RedState gets a lot of “Recommends,” it gets the editors’ attention and has a higher likelihood of being posted on the front page where the readership is much higher. After all, I work so hard to produce good content each week so people will read it and be informed, and act, on the issues. The option? Gruber is right about the people.)

Greetings!

This year’s climate change talks in Lima, Peru, ended yesterday with a watered down compromise and virtually no major news coverage—leading one to believe that they’ve become almost irrelevant. My column this week, Germany’s “energy transformation:” unsustainable subsidies and an unstable system (attached and pasted-in-below), uses the talks and Germany’s recent decision to ratchet up its commitment to carbon dioxide reductions as the launching place to discuss what the U.S. should be learning from Germany’s renewable energy experiment. After all, our legislators are currently wrestling with whether or not to extend subsidies for renewables.

Germany’s “energy transformation:” unsustainable subsidies and an unstable system features many quotes and observations from a report done by a Swiss group that closely analyzed Germany’s Energiewende and offered important lessons the U.S. and other countries should learn from—whether or not we will remains to be seen. But, as I say in my closing remarks, an educated constituency is important! My writing, and your sharing of it, is part of the education process.

Thanks for posting, passing on, and/or personally enjoying Germany’s “energy transformation:” unsustainable subsidies and an unstable system. Once again, I’ve attached both the full-length- and 900-word versions. If you post my work, please use whichever you feel is best for your audience.

Merry Christmas!

Marita Noon

Executive Director, Energy Makes America Great, inc.

PO Box 52103, Albuquerque, NM 87181

505.239.8998

 

Germany’s “energy transformation:” unsustainable subsidies and an unstable system

Perhaps when Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel was a child, she attend a party and was the only one who came without a present, or wearing inappropriate attire—and the embarrassment she felt haunts her to this day. That’s how psycho-dynamic psychology (Freud) might explain her December 3 decision spend more money on Germany’s failing energy experiment to avoid, as Reuters puts it: “the embarrassment of missing her government’s goal of a 40 percent reduction of emissions by 2020.”

As Europe’s biggest economy, Germany has also embraced the biggest carbon dioxide reductions through a program known as “Energiewende”—or, in English, also called energy change, shift, or transformation. Energiewende was launched in 2000 under Merkel’s predecessor who offered subsidies for any company that produced green energy.

While the European Union (E.U.) has committed to carbon dioxide cuts of 40 percent by 2030, Germany’s national goal aims to get there a decade sooner—which may have seemed achievable early in the program. After the 1990 reunification of Germany, the modernization of East Germany brought rapidly reduced emissions. However, the program’s overall result has raised costs and the emissions the expensive programs were designed to cut.

A few months ago, Bloomberg reported that due to increased coal consumption: “Germany’s emissions rose even as its production of intermittent wind and solar power climbed fivefold in the past decade”—hence Merkel’s potential embarrassment on the global stage where she’s put herself in the spotlight as a leader in reducing emissions.

On December 3, while 190 governments were meeting for two weeks of climate change talks in Lima, Peru (which, after 30 hours of overtime, produced a compromise deal that environmental groups see “went from weak to weaker to weakest”), Merkel’s cabinet agreed to a package that continues Germany’s optimistic—though unrealistic—goal and increases subsidies for measures designed to cut emissions. Regarding Germany’s “climate protection package”, Barbara Hendricks, Environment Minister, admitted: “if no additional steps were taken, Germany … would miss its targets by between five to eight percentage points.”

The results of the German agreement will require operators of coal-fueled power plants to reduce emissions by at least 22 million tons—the equivalent of closing eight of them. The Financial Times (FT) believes the plan will “lead to brownouts in German homes.”

With the goal of generating 80 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2050, Germany has aggressively pursued a green dream with unsustainable subsidies that have produced an unstable system described by FT, on November 25, as: “a lesson in doing too much too quickly on energy policy.”

So, what are the lessons? What should the U.S., and other countries, learn from Germany’s generous subsidy programs and rapid, large-scale deployment and integration of renewable energy into the power system? These are the questions U.S. legislators should be asking themselves as they argue over a tax extender package that includes a retroactive extension for the now-expired Production Tax Credit for wind energy.

Fortunately, the answers are easy to determine. Finadvice, a Switzerland based advisor to the utility and renewable industry, did an exhaustive study: “Development and Integration of Renewable Energy—Lessons Learned from Germany.” The introductory comments of the resulting report, includes the following statement: “The authors of this white paper would like to state that they fully support renewables as a part of the power portfolio. …a couple [of the authors] have direct equity interests in renewable projects.” The author’s viewpoint is an important consideration, especially in light of their findings. They wanted Germany’s experiment to work, yet they begin the Executive Summary with these words:

“Over the last decade, well-intentioned policymakers in Germany and other European countries created renewable energy policies with generous subsidies that have slowly revealed themselves to be unsustainable, resulting in profound, unintended consequences for all industry stakeholders. While these policies have created an impressive roll-out of renewable energy resources, they have also clearly generated disequilibrium in the power markets, resulting in significant increases in energy prices to most users, as well as value destruction for all stakeholders: consumers, renewable companies, electric utilities, financial institutions, and investors.”

After reading the entire 80-page white paper, I was struck with three distinct observations. The German experiment has been has raised energy costs to households and business, the subsidies are unsustainable, and, as a result, without intervention, the energy supply is unstable.

Cost

We, in the U.S., are constantly being told that renewable energy is close to cost parity with traditional power sources such as coal and natural gas. Yet, the study clearly points out the German experiment has resulted in “significant increases in energy prices to most users”—which will “ultimately be passed on to electricity consumers.” Germany’s cost increases, as much as fifty percent, are manmade not market-made—due to regulation rather than the trust costs. The high prices disproportionately hurt the poor giving birth to the new phrase: “energy poverty.”

The higher costs hurt—and not just in the pocket book. The authors cite an International Energy Agency report: “The European Union is expected to lose one-third of its global market share of energy intensive exports over the next two decades due to high energy prices.”

Subsidies and instability are big factors in Germany’s high prices.

Subsidies

To meet Germany’s green goals, feed-in tariffs (FIT) were introduced as a mechanism that allows for the “fostering of a technology that has not yet reached commercial viability.” FITs are “incentives to increase production of renewable energy.” About the FITs, the report states: “This subsidy is socialized and financed mainly by residential customers.” And: “Because of their generosity, FITs proved capable of quickly increasing the share of renewable power.”

Germany’s original FITs, “had no limit to the quantity of renewables to be built” and “lead to unsustainable growth of renewables.” As a result, Germany, and other E.U. countries have “had to modify, and eventually phase out, their program because of the very high costs of their renewable support mechanisms.”

Germany has also begun to introduce “self-generation fees” for households and businesses that generate their own electricity—typically through rooftop solar, “to ensure that the costs of maintaining the grid are paid for by all consumers, not just those without rooftop PVs.” These fees remove some of the cost-saving incentive for expensive solar installation.

Section four of the report, “Unintended Consequences of Germany’s Renewable Policies,” concludes: “Budgetary constraints, oversupply and distortion of power prices, transaction-specific operational performance, market economics (i.e. Germany proposing to cut all support for biogas), debt structures, and backlash of consumers paying higher prices were all factors contributing to regulatory intervention. Projecting past 2014, these factors are expected to continue over the next several years.”

Stability

Hopefully, by now, most people—especially my readers—understand that the intermittent and unreliable nature of wind and solar energy means that in order for us to have the lights go on every time we flip the switch (stability) every kilowatt of electric capacity must be backed up for times when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow. But, what most of us don’t think about, that the report spotlights, is that because the favored renewables benefit from “priority dispatch”—which means that if a renewable source is generating power, the utility company must buy and use it rather than the coal, natural gas or nuclear power it has available—the traditional power plants operate inefficiently and uneconomically. “Baseload thermal plants were designed to operate on a continuous base. …they were built to operate at their highest efficiencies when running 24 hours a day, seven days a week.” Now, due to renewables, these plants operate only a fraction of the time—though the cost to build and maintain them is constant. “The effect of fewer operational hours needs to be compensated by higher prices in these hours.”

Prior to the large integration of renewables, power plants earned the most when demand is high—in the middle of the day (which is also when the most solar power is generated). The result impacts cost recovery. “There are fewer hours in which the conventional power plants earn more than the marginal cost since they run fewer hours than originally planned and, in many cases, provide back-up power only.”

This translates into financial difficulties for the utilities that have resulted in lower stock prices and credit ratings. (Note: utility stocks often make up a large share of retirement portfolios.) Many plants are closed prematurely—which means the initial investment has not been recovered.

Because the reduced use prevents the power plants from covering their full costs—yet they must be available 24/7, power station operators in Germany are now seeking subsidies in the form of “capacity payments.” The report explains that a plant threatened to close because of “economic problems.” However, due to its importance in “maintaining system stability” the plant was “kept online per decree” and the operator’s fixed costs are compensated.

*****
Anyone who reads “Development and Integration of Renewable Energy” will conclude that there is far more to providing energy that is efficient, effective and economical than the renewable fairytale storytellers want consumers to believe. Putting a solar panel on your roof is more involved than just installation. The German experiment proves that butterflies, rainbows and pixy dust won’t power the world after all—coal, natural gas, and nuclear power are all important parts of the power portfolio.

Why, then, did Merkel continue Germany commitment to an energy and economic suicide? It is all part of the global shaming that takes place at the climate change meetings like the one that just concluded in Lima, Peru.

If only U.S. legislators would read “Development and Integration of Renewable Energy” before they vote for more subsidies for renewable energy, but, heck, they don’t even read the bill—which is why calls from educated constituents are so important. I am optimistic. Maybe we could learn from Germany’s experience what they haven’t yet learned themselves.

The author of Energy Freedom, Marita Noon serves as the executive director for Energy Makes America Great Inc. and the companion educational organization, the Citizens’ Alliance for Responsible Energy (CARE). She hosts a weekly radio program: America’s Voice for Energy—which expands on the content of her weekly column.

Marita Noon: Is This Any Way To Treat The Job Creators

Greetings!

Each week I work hard to produce a timely, thoughtful column. Every once in a while I run out of time and have to call good enough, good enough. Sometimes, due to my schedule, I do more opinion, less research. I have yet to find any kind of constancy in what gets a big response and what doesn’t.

This week’s column: Is this any way to treat the job creators? (attached and pasted-in-below) was a mix. I had plenty of time and started writing early on Friday. I finished it early on Saturday. I was pleased with it. It was an update on a story I know well—trigged by news. However, Is this any way to treat the job creators? has received one of the lowest quantity of responses of any of my columns! L However, it has garnered several very good and thoughtful comments. J

I hope the poor showing was due to the football games. I choose to believe people were distracted. With that in mind, I hope Is this any way to treat the job creators? will do well for you! Please post it, pass it on and/or personally enjoy Is this any way to treat the job creators?

Thanks! I am off to DC tomorrow.

Marita Noon, Executive Director

EnergyMakesAmericaGreat Inc.

PO Box 52103, Albuquerque, NM 87181

505.239.8998

 For immediate release: January 20, 2013

Commentary by Marita Noon

Executive Director, Energy Makes America Great Inc.

Contact: 505.239.8998, marita@responsiblenergy.org

Words: 1554

Is this any way to treat the job creators?

It’s no wonder that, as the New York Times (NYT) headline declared: “Growth in jobs slows sharply to 3-year low.” Addressing the Labor Department’s disappointing December Jobs Report, CNNMoney’s headline states: “2013 ends with weakest job growth in years.” USA Today called it a “Big miss” and CNBC’s Jim Cramer sees the 74,000 gain in payrolls as “A disastrous unemployment number.”

USA Today surveyed 37 economists whose median forecast for the December jobs number was a gain of 205,000 jobs.

Not only did the report’s 74,000 jobs gain fall far short of the 205,000 jobs forecast, it is not the only number that portends a job market about which CNNMoney believes: “suddenly looks a lot weaker than economists had thought.” USA Today points out: “For the year, employers added 2.18 million jobs, slightly fewer than 2012’s total of 2.19 million.” It adds: “Payroll growth was weak across the board, with education and health services, a reliable source of job growth even through the recession, adding no jobs.”

The NYT coverage of the report opens: “Just when it seemed as if the economy was finally accelerating, the latest employment figures once again confounded expectation of better days ahead.” Nelson D. Schwartz states: “The one apparent bright spot in Friday’s report—a sharp drop in the unemployment rate to 6.7 percent from 7 percent—was tarnished because it largely resulted from people exiting the work force rather than because they landed jobs. The work force shrank by 347,000 in December, reversing a big gain from November, and returning the proportion of Americans in the labor force to its October level of 62.8 percent, the lowest in 35 years.” He points out: “Areas of the economy that had been healthy for most of 2013 reversed course as the year drew to a close, significantly cutting into overall job creation.” Schwartz concludes: “Employment is still about two million below where it was when the recession started.”

With even the friendlies firing shots at the “disastrous unemployment number,” the White House tried to get out in front of the story by holding a Tuesday, January 14, meeting with the Cabinet, where President Obama aimed to pick up “the pace of his jobs message.” According to the Associated Press (AP), White House senior advisor Dan Pfeiffer sent out an email Tuesday morning to the White House list of supporters claiming: “The president will use every tool he can to create jobs and opportunities for the middle class.” The AP article highlights Obama’s “determination to use the power of executive orders and administrative actions… to help advance his agenda.”

While I oppose this administration’s fondness for skirting Congress through the use of executive orders, here’s a case where an “executive order or administrative action” could really help “pick up the pace of the jobs message.”

If President Obama truly wanted to “create jobs and opportunities for the middle class,” he could tell the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to work with—instead of against—people and companies who are ready to risk their capital in the development of our natural resources and create jobs.

While I am sure my readers could cite many similar stories, this one involves mining and mules. I have addressed this specific case three times before—first, July 2010, when the USFS approved the “Plan of Operation” for the Finley Basin Exploration Project in Montana.

My first column on this provides thorough details and I encourage you to read it, as you will be appalled by how the USFS works—and now, three and a half years later, it has only gotten worse.

Back in the ‘70s Union Carbide drilled several exploration holes on the site, “which is rated as having moderate to high mineral potential for the majority of the area.” It is believed that there is a minimum of $250 million in tungsten—which we currently import from China—and that the site also has potential copper, silver, molybdenum, and gold.

At the time I originally addressed this project, an Australian company wanted to invest in America, bring outside dollars in, and create jobs by exploring and developing the Finley Claims. But the USFS was so difficult to work with, after spending more that $500,000 over two years, the company finally packed up and went home.

The June 10, 2010, “Decision Memo” states that in order to explore the previously drilled sites, miners will have to “use a team of mules” and that “hand tools will be used to level the drilling pad and clear rocks, debris and any small shrubs.” Additionally, “all disturbances would be reclaimed using hand tools.”

Reading the Decision Memo, one gets the feeling that the USFS would rather not approve the mining proposal, but there were no real grounds not to. While explaining the “rationale” for the decision, the memo states that the company has the “legal right to conduct exploration activities” and that “The role of the Forest Service is to ensure that mining activities minimize adverse environmental effects. Congress has not given the Forest Service authority to unreasonably circumscribe or prohibit reasonably necessary activities under the 1872 General Mining Law that are otherwise lawful.”

After the Australians left, the 276 claims were purchased by experienced miners. Together, the partners in Finley Mining Inc. have more than 80 years experience in mining—with one having expertise in permitting and exploration and the other in project development and products. Because the whole mule idea was unfeasible for the size and weight of the required equipment, the new owners submitted a revised Plan of Operations that allowed for use of the existing road Union Carbide built in the ‘70s. Despite the “Inventoried Roadless Area” designation, the old road is regularly used by off-highway vehicles for recreation. The road is totally usable and doesn’t require any construction. Yet, the USFS is treating the road as “new construction” and therefore denied the plan. The experienced partners have, in the past two-and-a-half years, now submitted five different plans of operation. Each time, the USFS comes back with some new ridiculous questions, such as: “In what order do you plan to drill the holes?”

The frequent excuse revolves around the various regulations—complying with the National Environmental Policy Act, Federal Land Management and Policy Act, and other Environmental Protection Agency rules and regulations. The USFS Specialists claim they are underfunded and understaffed and are unable to do the processes required before granting a permit.

Meanwhile, to hold the claims, these potential job creators, have to pay $40,000 a year to the Bureau of Land Management. They have spent more than $200,000 for applications, preparing the Plan of Operations, and on consultants and are no further along than they were three-plus years ago.

Since the USFS doesn’t have the staff or the budget to comply with the law, despite the hundreds of thousands of dollars they’ve already taken in on this one project, Finley Mining Inc. has offered to hire approved contractors who can do the needed surveys.

The Mining Act of 1872, as revised, lays out the rules and regulations in which exploration and production on federal lands can be conducted and does allow for mining activity within Inventoried Roadless Areas—as the original Decision Memo acknowledges. Access cannot be denied to someone who has a claim. Yet, access is denied.

This one project would employ 10 people in the initial exploration phase. Assuming the resource proves up, as the original drilling on these sites indicated, more drilling will take place and, in addition to the drill site workers, biologists, engineers, economists, and geologists will be needed for analysis. If all goes as expected, Finley Mining Inc. projects a minimum of 300 people would be hired for the construction and mining phases. The nearby Stillwater Mining has 1740 employees.

If the USFS encouraged expansion, rather than simply interpreting and enforcing regulations, and managed the forest for the multiple use their mission mandates, the 300 construction workers could now be receiving a paycheck and paying taxes. Instead, we have policy-induced poverty.

If President Obama is serious about using “every tool he can to create jobs and opportunities for the middle class,” instead of appointing a new commission or doing a study, he’d issue an administrative action telling the USFS to comply with the law, to process permits within the 30 days required, and sign off on the Plan of Operations when it meets the existing requirements.

 On Wednesday, January 15, Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) spoke at a forum on U.S. energy policy. He addressed the Keystone pipeline, saying that the president’s “delay in deciding the pipelines fate” is making it “harder for a Democrat to defend some of the Washington Democrat’s agenda.” According to the Real Clear Politics report, He also “criticized Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for failing to call a vote on EPA regulation reforms” and is trying to “get Harry to look at the hard-rock mining.”

Yes, if Obama wants to use “every tool he can to create jobs and opportunities for the middle class,” he has plenty of them. The Finley Basin is an easy one. So is approving the Keystone pipeline.

Unfortunately for America’s un—and under—employed, reality tells us that the January 14 promise is just more hyperbole, more campaign-style platitudes. Is this any way to treat the job creators?

The author of Energy Freedom, Marita Noon serves as the executive director for Energy Makes America Great Inc. and the companion educational organization, the Citizens’ Alliance for Responsible Energy (CARE). Together they work to educate the public and influence policy makers regarding energy, its role in freedom, and the American way of life. Combining energy, news, politics, and, the environment through public events, speaking engagements, and media, the organizations’ combined efforts serve as America’s voice for energy.

Related articles

Enhanced by Zemanta

Listen To This Silly Prevaricating Fool

I love it when a progressive/socialist plan goes awry.  It is so inspiring to see the truth come out when a mainscream medium reports an erroneous account of what actually went on and who the main bad actor is as he is revealed in narative, video and a still photograph.

The following comes from Big Government and it is posted in its entirety.  The piece and video are used under what is understood by users to be allowed under the Fair Use Doctrine.  No monetary receipts are derived by the users; nor is any other value of material reward obtained by our use.  Use of this material is for the purpose of entertainment, education and to encourage dialogue.

What follows below is the article and pertinent additions to it. There are related articles provided for clarification and encouragement of additional study and discussion:

1 Oct 2013

It appears the Associated Press has either been duped by a partisan government union big-wig pretending to be a beleaguered government employee facing furlough due to a government shutdown, or they knew he was an activist and withheld the information from their readers.

The AP released a video titled: “EPA Worker: Furloughs Hit Employees Hard.”  The video is described as “Paul Sacker is an engineer for the Environmental Protection Agency who was furloughed because of the government shutdown. Sacker says politicians don’t understand the impact the shutdown has on workers.”

In the video Mr. Sacker laments the fact that he’s being furloughed. He talks about how it will personally affect him and how he will have to dig into his savings “as the paychecks stop coming.” He decries “the tea party that are using ideological principals to hold the government hostage.” He also says “our president needs to do more leadership,” whatever that means.

Here’s the video:

http://landing.newsinc.com/shared/video.html?freewheel=90085&sitesection=breitbart&VID=25216296

Now here’s the context the Associated Press didn’t give you.

Paul Sacker is the president of American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) Local 3911.  Here he is in an image from the union’s Facebook page:

Mr. Sacker’s been busy. He also gave an interview to the New York NPR station, WNYC lamenting the horrible conditions he is forced to live under now that the government has been shutdown for about eight hours. To WNYC’s credit, they do make passing mention of his union affiliation in the three minute interview, but not in the written article on their website.

Mr. Sacker is one popular government worker. In June he wrote an article for the Times Ledger in Queens. this time, lamenting the sequester cuts. The narrative is the exact same as we are seeing today regarding the government shutdown.

Needless to say, the AFGE endorsed President Obama for reelection in 2012.

If the Associated Press knew of Mr. Sacker’s union affiliation, certainly they should have mentioned it in their report to provide some context. If they didn’t know, they know now.

AP: Syrian Rebels Seize Control Of Christian Village

This latest attack on minority Syrian Christians is just more of what we can expect if we decide to release bombs in Syria.  If you have any doubt that al-Qaida linked rebels will delight in the slaughter of Christians and other minorities in Syria after we bomb for chemical agents then you haven’t looked at recent history to see what a mess we have left to the Taliban, al-Qaida and other Islāmic terrorists.  It is a mess they can manage, because unlike the United States government, they have a will to win and collateral damage is just a price of winning each battle until a total win is knitted together and the United States is just a bitter taste in those countries pock-marked by the bombs of the United States.

I certainly wish it could be otherwise, but the rest of the world and especially the radical Islamists, have seen our once proud resolve waste away when the going gets rough; not the resolve of our fighting men and women, but that of politicians, bureaucrats and a president habitually speaking of “facts,”  not existing … that would be verifiable facts.  We do not speak of the resolve to bomb.  Bombing is easy enough with or without the approval of Congress and/or the acquiescence of the American Citizen.

So, let us follow the first few paragraphs of the latest slaughter of Christians:


AMMAN, Jordan (AP) — Syrian rebels led by al-Qaida-linked fighters seized control of a predominantly Christian village northeast of Damascus, sweeping into the mountainside sanctuary in heavy fighting overnight and forcing hundreds of residents to flee, activists and locals said Sunday.

The battle over Maaloula, an ancient village that is home to two of the oldest surviving monasteries in Syria, has thrown a spotlight on the deep-seated fears that many of Syria’s religious minorities harbor about the growing role of Islamic extremists on the rebel side in the civil war against President Bashar Assad’s regime.

The prominence of al-Qaida-linked fighters has factored into the reluctance of Western powers to provide direct military support to the rebels. It has also figured in the debate underway in the U.S. Congress over whether to launch military strikes against Syria in retaliation for an alleged chemical weapons attack last month.

Finally, my ending remarks:  Where in the cloudy sky of economics will we get the bucks to pay for this adventure in Hades.

Click Here For The Rest Of The Article

Judicial Watch Alleges Duplicity By DOJ In Zimmerman Prosecution

Judicial Watch is worthy of your attention and support.  In the copied article below, you will learn of the sleazy ways your government twists facts and helps those that would “fundamentally change America.”

You can probably spend a day watching and listening to the videos and other records concocted by our giant government agencies.  All of the below stuff is good entertainment, but terrible government.  We hope you will pay particular attention to this bolded account which is located fairly deep in this post:

Documents Obtained by Judicial Watch Detail Role of Justice Department in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests

Skip ahead to the above bolded article, but don’t forget to come back to the beginning.

Videos Obtained by Judicial Watch Reveal Costumed Parodies, Playacting at GSA

From the latest edition of “federal officials gone wild”…

Judicial Watch recently obtained more than a half-dozen newly uncovered videos from the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) which show senior GSA officials and staff participating in costumed playacting and parodies – on the taxpayers’ dime of course.

If you would like to receive weekly emails updating you about all of our efforts to fight corruption, please sign up here.
* Email    
* State:
Judicial Watch Weekly Update

Owing to the absolutely ridiculous nature of these videos, our discovery made major headlines nationwide, including Politico, The Huffington Post and The Daily MailThe Associated Press, which broke our big story, is syndicated in hundreds of newspapers nationwide, and many other media outlets.

These videos provide clear (and bizarre) evidence of GSA’s extravagance, which, along with a scandalous 2010 Las Vegas regional conference, were revealed in a scathing April 2012 inspector general (IG) report. At one time, you could actually access these videos on the GSA’s own website. Then came the release of the IG Report excoriating GSA’s Vegas party spending, and the videos suddenly disappeared. Until now.

JW obtained the videos in response to a June 15, 2012, FOIA request seeking videos produced by the GSA’s Northeast Region (known as Region 2) from 2011 through June 2012. Because the agency failed to timely respond to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit on May 23, 2013.

And I think when you view the videos for yourself, you’ll see why the Obama administration attempted to shield them from public disclosure. They show a wide variety of costly and embarrassing videotaped performances by senior GSA officials and employees, including:

  • The Rocky Jog – With the Rocky movie theme blaring in the background, senior GSA officials lead employees on an extended jog through the corridors of the GSA’s New York office and the streets of Manhattan.

   The jog is initiated by Ben Kochanski, Deputy Regional Commissioner, GSA Public Buildings Service, whose 2012 salary was $141,066.

   Kochanski is then joined by Joanna Rosato, Regional Commissioner of GSA Public Buildings Service, whose 2012 salary was $164,500. Many additional GSA employees then join these two senior officials.

  • Directors Meeting – GSA employee tries conducting a seminar for a room full of screeching GSA employees/monkeys who continue drinking and partying until he joins them in a dance routine.
  • Rap Music Video – GSA official transforms into a rap singer to explain to young employees the need for additional revenue.
  • Jeopardy – GSA officials and employees participate in an elaborate Jeopardy game show parody, complete with theme music, light-up board, and canned audience applause.
  • The “Leasefather” – GSA employees parody the baker scene from “The Godfather” movie with supplicant pleading for Don Tony (stroking stuffed cat) to give him justice.
  • Mission Impossible – Former GSA official Ashley Cohen portrays Jim Phelps in a “Mission Impossible” TV show parody with blaring theme, lit matches, and an exploding tape recorder.
  • Sherlock Holmes – After an opening with stock footage from Universal Studios, GSA employees costumed as Holmes and Watson conduct a lengthy discussion.

Now I ask you. What do these videos have to do with the proper and efficient functioning of the GSA? Absolutely nothing, of course. Which is why our client, GSA whistleblower Linda Shenwick brought these videos to our attention. Ms. Shenwick objected to frivolous expenditures in the GSA’s Region 2 (which covers the entire Northeast and the Caribbean), the office which produced the videos and earned the ire of her GSA leadership in the process.

Rather than discouraging this juvenile behavior, GSA had a policy of encouraging and rewarding employees who produced and performed in the controversial videos.

And what happened to Ms. Shenwick, who was merely attempting to prevent fraud inside the agency for which she worked? She has since been demoted and isolated, shifted from the agency’s senior executive suite to an office in the agency’s child care center. (Judicial Watch is helping Ms. Shenwick to pursue a whistleblower case against the GSA with the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board.)

All of this from an agency that touts itself as an “innovation engine” to help the government cut costs!

With respect to the nearly $1 million Las Vegas extravaganza, the event featured not only costly videos similar to those just uncovered by JW, but also luxury accommodations for employees and their loved ones, fine cuisine, parties and expensive gifts. Dozens of agency workers were also awarded cash bonuses for arranging the event, which the Region 9 Commissioner/Acting Regional Administrator had ordered to be “over the top.”

Mission accomplished there.

Disclosure of the Las Vegas event and other abuses led to the removal of some GSA officials, but the agency officials who produced these videos still have their jobs. President Obama is seeking at least $250 million dollars for the GSA in his most recent budget.

Unfortunately, this is not the only example of shameless waste in the form of ridiculous videos and other questionable expenses inside the Obama administration.

As I reported to you a few weeks back, the IRS bankrolled a Star Trek parody video at a cost of $50,187! The agency also produced a video of IRS division managers dancing on stage and spent $44,500 for two speakers, one of whom was paid to create paintings on stage of Michael Jordan and Albert Einstein.

These funds were expended during a 2010 IRS conference that cost American taxpayers $4.1 million overall.

The activities of the GSA and the IRS are further examples of a bloated federal government completely out of control. Clearly the new GSA administrator will have his work cut out for him if this pattern of preposterous waste is to be curtailed.

Our client Linda Shenwick has done her best to alert GSA to these abuses but her efforts were ignored by GSA leadership. Federal employees such as Ms. Shenwick, who alert senior officials to this type of wasteful nonsense, are punished and vilified. As these newly uncovered videos demonstrate, there clearly needs to be a more thorough housecleaning at GSA. In fact, every agency in this administration is due for a good scrubbing.

Documents Obtained by Judicial Watch Detail Role of Justice Department in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests

If you want to get a sense of the Obama/Holder Department of Justice’s (DOJ) policies on race, just take a look at the agency’s response to two high profile events.

Let’s start with the thugs from the New Black Panther Party for Self Defense who brandished weapons and threatened prospective voters at a Philadelphia polling station in 2008. The Bush DOJ quickly filed criminal charges against the activists in a very public voter intimidation case. Then Barack Obama got elected, installed Eric Holder, and the DOJ dropped much of the case over the objections of its own attorneys.

Judicial Watch (along with key disclosures by whistleblowers and former DOJ attorneys Christopher Coates and J. Christian Adams) was able to help prove that the racist application of voting rights laws by Obama political appointees inside DOJ was the root cause of this terrible decision. We also proved that at least one DOJ official lied under oath about who was involved in the decision. (Read more here.)

Now contrast this response with that of the DOJ to last year’s shooting death of a young black man named Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman (a Hispanic) in Florida. (Zimmerman was charged in the shooting and is now standing trial.)

According to documents unearthed by JW, following the Martin shooting, the Holder DOJ dispatched a little-known unit within the agency called the Community Relations Service (CRS), to Sanford, FL, to help organize and manage rallies and protests against George Zimmerman.

Now here’s how we got the records. We first filed a FOIA request with the DOJ on April 24, 2012, and received 125 pages on May 30, 2012. We then administratively appealed the request on June 5, 2012, and received 222 pages more on March 6, 2013.  (This investigation resulted in requests for information being filed by Judicial Watch with 13 different government agencies!)

Included in those documents that weren’t withheld from us (and plenty were) are vouchers for expenses associated with the community organizing activity of DOJ employees.  Highlights include:

  • March 25 – 27, 2012, CRS spent $674.14 upon being “deployed to Sanford, FL, to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.”
  • March 25 – 28, 2012, CRS spent $1,142.84 “in Sanford, FL to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.
  • March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent $892.55 in Sanford, FL “to provide support for protest deployment in Florida.”
  • March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent an additional $751.60 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies for the march and rally on March 31.”
  • April 3 – 12, 2012, CRS spent $1,307.40 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance, conciliation, and onsite mediation during demonstrations planned in Sanford.”
  • April 11 – 12, 2012, CRS spent $552.35 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance for the preparation of possible marches and rallies related to the fatal shooting of a 17 year old African American male.”

But there’s more.

From a Florida Sunshine Law request filed on April 23, 2012, JW received thousands of pages of emails on April 27, 2012, in which was found an email by Miami-Dade County Community Relations Board Program Officer Amy Carswell from April 16, 2012 , discussing a news article in the Orlando Sentinel about the secretive peacekeepers: “Congratulations to our partners, Thomas Battles, Regional Director, and Mildred De Robles, Miami-Dade Coordinator and their co-workers at the U.S. Department of Justice Community Relations Service for their outstanding and ongoing efforts to reduce tensions and build bridges of understanding and respect in Sanford, Florida.”

In reply to that message, Battles said: “Thank you Partner. You did lots of stuff behind the scene to make Miami a success. We will continue to work together.” He signed the email simply Tommy.

Carswell responded: “That’s why we make the big bucks.”

But is this really what the DOJ’s participation was all about in this case – “reducing tensions and building bridges?”   Not by a long shot.

Set up under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the DOJ’s CRS, the employees of which are required by law to “conduct their activities in confidence,” reportedly has greatly expanded its role under President Barack Obama.

Though the agency claims to use “impartial mediation practices and conflict resolution procedures,” press reports along with the documents obtained by Judicial Watch suggest that the unit deployed to Sanford, FL, took an active role in working with those demanding the prosecution of Zimmerman.

On April 15, 2012, during the height of the protests, the Orlando Sentinel reported, “They [the CRS] helped set up a meeting between the local NAACP and elected officials that led to the temporary resignation of police Chief Bill Lee according to Turner Clayton, Seminole County chapter president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.”

The paper quoted the Rev. Valarie Houston, pastor of Allen Chapel AME Church, a focal point for protestors, as saying “They were there for us,” after a March 20 meeting with CRS agents.

Separately, in response to a Florida Sunshine Law request to the City of Sanford, Judicial Watch also obtained an audio recording of a “community meeting” held at Second Shiloh Missionary Baptist Church in Sanford on April 19, 2012.

The meeting, which led to the ouster of Sanford’s Police Chief Bill Lee, was scheduled after a group of college students calling themselves the “Dream Defenders” barricaded the entrance to the police department demanding Lee be fired.  Leading the meeting is none other CRS federal employee Thomas Battles.  Battles says during the meeting, that “if a community perceives that there’s something wrong in the black community, there’s something wrong.” That sounds like something racial agitator – and United States Attorney General Eric Holder crony – Al Sharpton might say!

According to the Orlando Sentinel, DOJ employees with the CRS had arranged a 40-mile police escort for the students from Daytona Beach to Sanford.

These documents detail the extraordinary intervention by the Justice Department in the pressure campaign leading to the prosecution of George Zimmerman. My guess is that most Americans would rightly object to taxpayers paying government employees to help organize racially-charged demonstrations.

So don’t believe the hype from the DOJ that the agency’s intervention on behalf of Trayvon Martin was about peace-keeping. This was about Alinsky-style organizing and racial politics pure and simple, something the Holder Justice Department practices on a daily bases.

Judicial Watch Sues State Department for Clinton Documents about Possible Conflicts of Interest

The moment Barack Obama tapped Hillary Clinton to serve as Secretary of State, the alarm bells starting ringing. Not only because of the Clintons’ long history of corruption (see Chinagate, Filegate, Travelgate and the long list of women abused and smeared by both Clintons, for just a few examples), but also because of the Clintons’ propensity to peddle influence to the highest bidder without regard for the harmful impact on the United States of America and its people.

How on earth could Hillary Clinton serve as the nation’s top diplomat with her husband traipsing around the globe collecting six figures on speeches and donations from foreign governments for his Clinton Global Initiative? What kind of wheeling and dealing took place behind closed doors that might compromise or influence U.S diplomatic policy? The possibilities for high stakes shenanigans were endless.

And so, Judicial Watch began asking questions. And those questions were ignored (again) by the Obama administration in defiance of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). So we are now once again forced to go through the courts to seek redress.

On May 28, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the Department of State to obtain documents pertaining to possible conflicts of interest between the actions taken by Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and Bill Clinton’s activities (including his Clinton Global Initiative).

The Judicial Watch lawsuit was filed after two years of the State Department refusing to comply with a May 2011 FOIA request for responsive documents.  By law, “all federal agencies are required to respond to a FOIA request within 20 business days.”

Pursuant to a Judicial Watch FOIA request filed with Department of Justice (DOJ) on May 2, 2011, in addition to standard forms from the Office of Personnel Management pertaining to Clinton’s position as Secretary of State, we seek the following records:

  • Any and all certificates of divestiture for Mrs. Clinton;
  • Any and all individual waivers issued to or for Mrs. Clinton pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 208 (b)(1) and 5 C.F.R. §2640.301 or any other applicable ethics statues, regulations, guidelines or agreements;
  • Any and all communications and records of communications – including but not limited to phone logs – related to Mr. Clinton’s speech schedule; and,
  • Any and all communications and records of communications – including but not limited to e-mails, fax reports, and phone logs – related to former Mr. Clinton’s personal or charitable financial relationships with foreign leaders and governments.

As I say, information from the Obama administration has not been forthcoming.

The State Department acknowledged receiving the Judicial Watch FOIA request on May 17, 2011, and was required by law to respond by June 8, 2011, at the latest.  As of the date of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit, the State Department had failed to produce any records responsive to the request, indicate when any responsive records will be produced, or demonstrate that responsive records are exempt from production.

The potential for conflicts of interest between Hillary Clinton’s role as Secretary of State and Bill Clinton’s international ventures grew increasingly controversial in late 2008 when the former president released a list of 200,000+ donors to his library and foundation in what he termed “a deal between” Obama “and Hillary.”

This “deal” reportedly included nine conditions to which Bill Clinton acquiesced, says the New York Times, including a ban on foreign government contributions to the Clinton Global Initiative. And here’s why those donations are so sensitive.

According to an AP wire story, “Saudi Arabia gave $10 million – $25 million to the foundation. Other government donors include Norway, Kuwait, Qatar, Brunei, Oman …”   CNN at the time warned that Clinton’s “complicated global business interests could present future conflicts of interest that result in unneeded headaches for the incoming commander-in-chief.”

Yes, the web of connections between the Clintons and foreign interests is complex, to say the least. But the potential impact of these complexities goes far beyond any migraines suffered by Barack Obama. This is about the potential for undermining our national interest in exchange for contributions to the Clintons’ coffers.

After all, the Clintons sold out our national security to the Communist Chinese in exchange for contributions to Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign. So why not solicit the Saudi Arabians for contributions to Clinton’s non-profit empire, for example? Again, in politics, and especially with the Clintons, even the appearance of impropriety can be impropriety itself.

Also among the “conditions” of the Clinton-Obama deal was a stipulation requiring Bill Clinton’s activities to be subjected to review by State Department ethics officials.

Does this make you feel more comfortable? Especially considering the fact that one of the individuals responsible for vetting Mrs. Clinton for the job of Secretary of State in the first place was none other than Bill Clinton’s former deputy White House counsel Cheryl Mills.

Mills is a longtime Clinton family confidante, who “endeared herself to the Clintons with her never-back-down, share-nothing, don’t-give-an-inch approach …” wrote the Washington Post in 1999.

As I noted in a recent column on Mills, she has been a “Clinton cover-up expert, specializing in subverting investigations of Bill and Hillary Clinton. Whether in the Bill Clinton White House or the Hillary Clinton State Department, Mills has served as something of a “double agent” — working on the taxpayers’ tab while seeming to spend all her time defending the personal fortunes of the Clintons.”  (Read more about her activities here.)

Most recently, evidence emerged that Mills attempted to silence the congressional testimony of State Department whistleblower Gregory Hicks in the Benghazi-gate scandal.

Not surprisingly, after clearing Mrs. Clinton for the DOS job, Mills was named the incoming Secretary’s Chief of Staff. Incidentally, Ms. Mills was also a featured speaker at Bill Clinton’s 2012 Clinton Global Initiative annual meeting.

So the job of “ethically vetting” Mrs. Clinton was left to a former Clinton hack, who was subsequently offered a job from the person whom she was “investigating.” And she also served as a keynote speaker for the very organization at the center of the controversy over the Clintons’ conflicts of interest.  Hardly reassuring.

And this is precisely why we went to court to secure the records necessary for the American people to judge for themselves whether or not Bill and Hillary Clinton acted ethically during the former First Lady’s tenure at the State Department. We’re certainly not willing to leave the matter to the likes of Cheryl Mills.

If you’d like to help us in this investigation, or the many others we have ongoing, please consider a tax-deductible contribution by clicking here. Every bit helps!

Until next week…

Oh Boy … Tyrannical Joy?

When two of the harshest critics of those arguing for fewer restrictions on 2nd amendment rights finally come out and eat a little humble pie, it has to be noted.  So, for that reasons we are posting a link showing Piers Morgan and Joe Scarborough saying that maybe the gun advocates had something valid in their arguments against  government control of citizens’ right to keep and bear arms.

English: Former Congressman and current televi...

English: Former Congressman and current television host on MSNBC Joe Scarborough during the 2008 Democratic National Convention (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

There is scant reason for us to like these two, but perhaps we can say we dislike them less intensely because a couple of scales fell from their eyes.

This sort of publicity will generate more of the same and such should serve to wake up some of their fellow ignoramuses. The link is just below and don’t forget to access any related articles:

Tyranny.  Yes Tyranny!

Piers Morgan at CES 2011.

Piers Morgan at CES 2011. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Abortion: Murder Completed In The Killing Rooms

We have posted in the past about “Dr.” Kermit Gosnell click here a former abortion factory owner and truly evil operator inside the factory. We told you the conditions at the abortion factory were reported as atrocious and the factory operated outside what is allowed by Pennsylvania law.

A monument dedicated to the unborn victims of ...

A monument dedicated to the unborn victims of abortion. This monument is next to the Church of Ste. Geneviève in Ste. Geneviève, Missouri. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The bad doctor is now on trail and much more has been revealed by expert testimony, testimony of employees,  women victims and relatives of victims.  We are posting a link to an article from CNS News about the ongoing trial.  Please accept our warning informing that the narrative and images are graphic and might not be suitable for minors.  We hope the article will strengthen your resolve to fight against abortion and if you do not have the belief abortion is wrong, we pray the story will remove the scales from your eyes.

Sad Stories About Bad People

Public Employee Unions Disjointed

After applying mega millions trying to recall Scott Walker in Wisconsin, and losing in California to keep public employee unions moving to higher salaries and higher employer contributions,  the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees are crying over losses and future opportunities:American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees:

 A heated battle is taking place inside a giant U.S. public employees’ union following its crushing failure this week to oust Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker _ organized labor’s biggest political loss in decades.

At stake is the direction of the 1.3-million-member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees after 31 years under retiring president Gerald McEntee. He’s been known for his zeal to build and maintain AFSCME’s clout as a leading liberal voice and political kingmaker in the Democratic Party.

A major question is whether that should continue.

Fresh off losses in the Wisconsin recall election and in California municipal referendums rolling back public employee pension and health benefits, the union will pick a successor to the 77-year-old McEntee in two weeks.

The race is shaping up as a broader debate on whether AFSCME should become more prudent in doling out cash to Democratic causes and candidates and perhaps make itself less a lightning rod for attacks from conservatives.

There is more from this story through the Associated Press and it can be found by clicking the link below:

Sad & Sorry AFSCME Union

English: Banners of participants in the May 20...

English: Banners of participants in the May 20, 2011 union rally at the Oregon State Capitol in Salem, Oregon (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Related articles

600 Million For The Poor Deceased

United States Department of Veterans Affairs O...

Image via Wikipedia

By Chuck Ring (GadaboutBlogalot ©2009 -2011

Quote Freely From The Article – Leave The Pseudonym Alone

It is a shame people die. All of us will be among the deceased eventually, But some relatives of deceased pensioners continue to receive benefits that should have died with the deceased recipients.  It is quite clear our governments are unable to keep up with fraud on a timely basis.  That’s why we have 600 million dollars being sent to dishonest survivors.  Here’s a report on fraudulent receipt of funds among several government doles and earned pensions and other payouts. From the Associated Press and their reporter, SAM HANANEL:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal government has doled out more than $600 million in benefit payments to dead people over the past five years, a watchdog report says.

Such payments are meant for retired or disabled federal workers, but sometimes the checks keep going out even after the former employees pass away and the deaths are not reported, according to the report this week from the Office of Personnel Management’s inspector general, Patrick McFarland.

This type of fraud and malfeasance is not unheard of and we have all listened to and/or seen accounts of medicare and Medicaid fraud; procurement rip-offs  and other such waste and abuse in all levels of government.  The POTUS’s stimulus packages have certainly suffered their share of fraud:

OPM has also sampled its records of all recipients over 90 years old to confirm whether they are still alive. In 2009, there were more than 125,000 recipients identified as over 90 and about 3,400 over 100 years old.

Both the Obama administration and Congress have made it a higher priority to crack down on improper government payments.

Last year, government investigators found that more than 89,000 stimulus payments of $250 each from the massive economic recovery package went to people who were either dead or in prison.

There’s more to read through a click on this link.

Follow “Related ” stories below: