Category Archives: Obama

Country singer Tim McGraw sells out. Headlines for Sandy Hook gun control concert

I’m not a fan of country music, but even I have heard of Tim McGraw, husband of another country music megastar Faith Hill.

AWR Hawkins reports for Breitbart that on July 17, 2015, Tim McGraw will headline a concert fundraiser in Connecticut for a gun control group called Sandy Hook Promise.

McGraw’s “A Concert For Sandy Hook Promise” will also feature country singers Billy Currington and Chase Bryant.

Tim McGrawTim McGraw in 2003. McGraw had never served in the U.S. military, so why is he in this faux military garb?

Sandy Hook Promise is a vehicle through which various alleged family members of alleged Sandy Hook victims have joined to push gun control until it passes. One of the group’s members is Newtown father Mark Bearden, who has pledged to “dedicate the rest of his life” to pursuing gun control.

McGraw is quoted by NBC Connecticut as saying:

Out of this tragedy a group was formed that made a promise to honor the lives lost and turn it into a moment of transformation. Sandy Hook Promise teaches that we can do something to protect our children from gun violence. I want to be a part of that promise – as a father and as a friend.

According to Wikipedia, McGraw is a Democrat and has stated that he would like to run for public office in the future, possibly for Senate or Governor of Tennessee, his home state. In the same interview, he praised Bill Clinton and said that he had supported Barack Obama for president in 2008.

Breitbart reporter AWR Hawkins points out that “It should be noted that there was 100 percent gun control at Sandy Hook Elementary on December 14, 2012. No guns were allowed, period. You can’t have more gun than that. Moreover, there were laws against stealing guns and possessing stolen guns as well. But none of these laws stopped or even dissuaded Adam Lanza.”

AWR Hawkins should also know that all of that is quite beside the point because no one died at that school on Dec. 14, 2012, perhaps not even Adam Lanza himself, who supposedly shot himself in the head minutes before police and first responders arrived at the school that morning. If you doubt that, ask the State of Connecticut why the government continues to refuse to release Lanza’s and his 21 victims’ death certificates — documents that are deemed public record, i.e., accessible to the public, except in the case of Lanza and his alleged victims.

For all the other many, many reasons why many sane people, including Professors James Tracy and Jim Fetzer, believe the Sandy Hook massacre is a gigantic, elaborate false-flag fraud in the interest of gun control, go to our “Sandy Hook Massacre” page.

I dare you.

~Éowyn

Obama’s America: Army morale is low, job satisfaction low, and more than half have poor nutrition and sleep

tired soldier

USA Today: More than half of some 770,000 soldiers are pessimistic about their future in the military and nearly as many are unhappy in their jobs, despite a six-year, $287 million campaign to make troops more optimistic and resilient, findings obtained by USA TODAY show.

Twelve months of data through early 2015 show that 403,564 soldiers, or 52%, scored badly in the area of optimism, agreeing with statements such as “I rarely count on good things happening to me.” Forty-eight percent have little satisfaction in or commitment to their jobs.

The results stem from resiliency assessments that soldiers are required to take every year. In 2014, for the first time, the Army pulled data from those assessments to help commanders gauge the psychological and physical health of their troops.

The effort produced startlingly negative results. In addition to low optimism and job satisfaction, more than half reported poor nutrition and sleep, and only 14% said they are eating right and getting enough rest.

The Army began a program of positive psychology in 2009 in the midst of two wars and as suicide and mental illness were on the rise. To measure resiliency the Army created a confidential, online questionnaire that all soldiers, including the National Guard and Reserve, must fill out once a year.

Last year, Army scientists applied formulas to gauge service-wide morale based on the assessments. The results demonstrate that positive psychology “has not had much impact in terms of overall health,” says David Rudd, president of the University of Memphis who served on a scientific panel critical of the resiliency program.

army morale

The Army offered contradictory responses to the findings obtained by USA TODAY. Sharyn Saunders, chief of the Army Resiliency Directorate that produced the data, initially disavowed the results. “I’ve sat and looked at your numbers for quite some time and our team can’t figure out how your numbers came about,” she said in an interview in March.

However, when USA TODAY provided her the supporting Army documents this week, her office acknowledged the data but said the formulas used to produce them were obsolete. “We stand by our previous responses,” it said in a statement.

Subsequent to USA TODAY’s inquiry, the Army calculated new findings but lowered the threshold for a score to be a positive result. As a consequence, for example, only 9% of 704,000 score poorly in optimism.

The Army said the effort to use the questionnaire results to gauge morale Army-wide is experimental. “We continue to refine our methodologies and threshold values to get the most accurate results possible,” it said in the statement.

The Army’s effort to use positive psychology to make soldiers more resilient has been controversial since its inception in 2009. A blue-ribbon panel of scientists from the Institute of Medicine, part of the National Academy of Sciences, concluded last year that there is little or no evidence the program prevents mental illness. It argued there was no effort to test its efficacy before the Army embraced it . The panel cited research arguing that, in fact, the program could be harmful if it leaves soldiers with a false sense of resiliency.

The Army disputed the findings, pushing ahead with its positive psychology program that now costs more than $50 million a year. At least 2.45 million soldiers have taken a self-assessment test that is a crucial part of the resiliency program, and 28,000 GIs have been instructed on how to teach other soldiers the curriculum.

“The Army funds this program because the Army values the lives of soldiers and wants to instill skills and competencies that will enhance their connections, relationships and ability to mitigate stressors and exercise help seeking behaviors through their life,” says an Army statement released last month.

But the internal data obtained by USA TODAY shows most soldiers today trending in the wrong direction. Two-thirds were borderline or worse for an area called “catastrophic thinking,” where poor scores mean the soldier has trouble adapting to change or dwells on the worst possible things happening.

Other results:

  • Forty-eight percent or about 370,000 soldiers showed a lack of commitment to their job or would have chosen another if they had it to do over again. Only 28% felt good about what they do.
  • About 300,000 soldiers or nearly 40% didn’t trust their immediate supervisor or fellow soldiers in their unit or didn’t feel respected or valued. Thirty-two percent felt good about ab bosses and peers.
  • In one positive trend, more than 400,000 soldiers or 53% said they were satisfied or extremely satisfied with their marriage, personal relationship or family. About 240,000 expressed dissatisfaction.
  • For physical fitness, nearly 40% were in good shape, 28% were borderline, and 33% did poorly.

Retired vice admiral Norb Ryan, head of the Military Officers Association of America, and Joyce Raezer, executive of the National Military Family Association, said the results are not surprising. Fourteen years of war and recent decisions to downsize or cut funding for the military have left morale low, they said.

A recent survey by the Military Times and a Navy Retention Study also show troops increasingly unhappy.

Saunders defended the Army resiliency program, known officially as Comprehensive Soldier and Family Fitness, as an effort that has resonated with soldiers.” When we talk to soldiers, soldiers tell us about the life changes they’ve had,” she says.

Morale is low? Shocker, not.

Hillary Clinton what difference does it make

See also:

NY-Post-Frontpage-Obama-Islam-2-19-2015

DCG

Assbakistan Loses Another Homie

Urban Dictionary
hom·ie  noun
  1. an acquaintance from one’s town or neighborhood, or a member of one’s peer group or gang.

The Telegraph

Male model from Australia dies fighting for Islamic State

Sharky Jama, 25, a member of Melbourne’s tight-knit Somali community, is believed to be the 20th Australian to die fighting for Isil

Sharky-Jama_3269582b

By Jonathan Pearlman

Tony Abbott, Australia’s prime minister, has urged Australians not to join the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) “death cult” after a 25-year-old male model from Melbourne became the latest foreign recruit to die while fighting with militants in Syria.

Sharky Jama, a former model and keen football player from Melbourne’s Somali community, had been based in Iraq but was shot dead in Syria.

His family said they received a text message and phone call from someone on Monday informing them that he had been killed.

Hussein Haraco, a Melbourne Somali community leader, said he had known Jama’s family for ten years and he was known as a good person who assisted other community members.

“They haven’t got any idea what is the reason,” Mr Haraco told ABC News.

“He was just a young man playing soccer and being at other activities and suddenly something happened and he went to Syria. [It’s] really shocking for the whole community and we are really confused.”

Read more at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/11541318/Male-model-from-Australia-dies-fighting-for-Islamic-State.html


Shocked? Confused? Really? 
Anyone sane knows exactly what motivated him to go. 

What’s with Time magazine giving élites sinister devil’s horns?

Time magazine has a penchant to give élites devil’s horns on its cover.

The latest to receive that treatment is Hillary Clinton, on the cover of Time‘s March 13, 2015 issue:

Time's Hillary cover

The cover caught the attention of many media outlets, including Drudge Report, Fox News, National Review, and Politico.

But Time was quick to deny that the horns were intentional, and responded with a tongue-in-cheek article on its website titled “34 TIME Magazine Covers That Appeared to Give People Horns.”

Here are some examples of Time‘s other élites sprouting horns, including even Jesus. The elites can be grouped into 3 groups:

  1. Political leaders — presidents, other heads of state, and Bill Gates.
  2. Entertainment élites, including actors Russell Crowe, Angelina Jolie, Kate Winslet, Jodie Foster, Jay Leno, and Darth Vader.
  3. Religious leaders — all Christians, including the three most recent popes of the Catholic Church (Francis, Benedict, John Paul II), Billy Graham (whose horns are especially striking), and even Jesus Christ.

time-cover-bill-clinton-devil-hornsTime7Time9Time8060925_DomCNNL1R1.apnTime5Time10Time3Time4time-cover-bill-gates-devil-hornsTime2Time1time-cover-graham-devil-hornstime-cover-jesus-devil-horns

The magazine coyly insists:

Given the shape of the letter “m” in the magazine’s name and its location on the cover, many other subjects in the past have also appeared to sprout extra features (in fact this happened to Hillary Clinton at least once before. Same goes for Bill Clinton. George W. Bush too). Check out everyone from Margaret Thatcher to Pope Francis to Jesus to Darth Vader who have received the rough end of TIME’s “horns.” Any resemblance to cats, bats or devil horns is entirely coincidental.

Do you buy Time‘s excuse?

I don’t! For surely the magazine’s graphic artists could have positioned the élites’ heads underneath the letters T I M E, or have the heads to the side of the letters so that the two horns of the letter M aren’t right on top of their heads.

Time is also being disingenuous when they say the horns may “resemble” cat ears, bat ears, or devil horns, for the magazine itself labels the pictures of the élites as “devil horns.”

Verify this for yourself by going here and saving the pictures to your hard-drive. You’ll discover that every one of the 34 covers, except the first one of Hillary Clinton, is labeled “devil horns,” e.g., “time-cover-pope-francis-devil-horns.” This gives the lie to Time‘s disclaimer that “Any resemblance to . . . devil horns is entirely coincidental.” On the contrary, any resemblance to devil horns is precisely intentional and deliberate.

The Hillary cover of March 13, 2015 alone is not labeled “devil horns.” Instead, the pic is labeled “hillary-final.”

So what exactly is Time trying to tell us? What do you think?

~Éowyn

College students would renounce U.S. citizenship for illegals’ low tuition

illegals demand free stuff

Gabriella Morrongiello reports for The Fiscal Times, April 15, 2015, that illegal immigrants in 22 states are eligible for lower-cost, in-state tuition at public colleges and universities.

22 states that offer lower tuition to illegals

While students residing legally or illegally in states such as California, Texas, Maryland, and Virginia are eligible for in-state tuition, legal immigrants, international students, and U.S. citizens from out of state continue to pay out-of-state tuition, often costing several thousand dollars more.

As an example, at the University of Virginia (UVA), a public institution in Charlottesville which ranked second highest in the nation in 2013, according to Daily Progress, the annual cost of tuition for out-of-state students is $36,720, more than double the in-state tuition rate of $10,016 offered to Virginia residents. Similarly, tuition at the University of Maryland (UMD), a public university in College Park, Md., costs out-of-state students $20,145 more annually. 

Out-of-state students attending UVA and UMD–both of which offer in-state tuition to illegal immigrants–told Campus Reform they would “definitely consider” renouncing their U.S. citizenship to become “undocumented students” eligible for cheaper in-state tuition.

welfare for illegals~Éowyn

If you install solar panels, the company may put a lien on your home

Are you considering having solar panels installed in your home?

If you do, think twice, especially if the solar company’s condition is that you enter into a long-term lease contract.

A man in California who had his solar panels installed by a company called SolarCity discovered, to his shock, that the company actually placed a lien on his house.

Jeff Leeds' solar-paneled roof

Tori Richards for Watchdog.org, April 15, 2015, that Jeff Leeds now regrets having solar panels installed on the roof of his home in the Northern California city of El Granada.

Leeds didn’t actually buy the panels, but acquired them by making a 20-year lease with SolarCity — an agreement that he now says is like “partnering with the devil.”

Not only has he endured skyrocketing electric bills, installation of an inferior system, SolarCity’s refusal to clean the panels or to provide a payment for his system’s poor performance, Leeds recently received a notice from his bank telling him that SolarCity had placed a lien on his home, and that his equity line of credit application for a second home could not proceed until the lien was removed.

Leeds said the bank “told me it was a lien. I had to pay the bank a $48 fee for removal. They held me up from closing my loan to buy a vacation home so I had to borrow from another account. It cost me time in calls to both Wells Fargo and to SolarCity.”

SolarCity say it’s not a lien, but a “fixture filing” that stakes the company’s claim to the panels, which it owns if consumers have taken part in its popular 20-year lease program. Owning the solar panels that it installs on clients’ homes allows SolarCity to claim lucrative state and federal subsidies available only to system owners. SolarCity has received approximately $500 million in tax subsidies and grants over the years.

In fact, SolarCity’s lease contract specifically states “SolarCity will … file no lien against the home” and that “The Fixture Filing is intended only to give notice of its rights relating to the System and is not a lien or encumbrance against the Property. SolarCity shall explain the Fixture Filing to any subsequent purchasers of the Property and any related lenders as requested. SolarCity shall also accommodate reasonable requests from lenders or title companies to facilitate a purchase, financing or refinancing of the Property.”

SolarCity’s website, in a consumer Q&A format, also states:

“Is there a lien on the solar home? No … the UCC-1 protects our interest in the solar energy system and prohibits the lender from taking ownership of it.”

Indeed, when Leeds confronted SolarCity about its lien on his house, “they referred me to a paragraph sunk deep inside their contract. That UCC-1 is what they kept telling me on the SolarCity side, but Wells Fargo Bank considered it a lien and charged me $48 for the fact that it was there…. And nobody explains that to you when you buy it. They give you a huge contract to read and nothing is explained.”

A March 10 email from a Wells Fargo Bank employee to Leeds confirmed that the UCC-1 is a lien: “To the bank, it’s a lien on the title..”

Sal Balsamo, a real estate attorney and owner of Barrister’s Title Services in North Carolina who has been involved with closing some 40,000 home loans as both an attorney and title underwriter, explains that by attaching a fixture filing to the property, SolarCity is second in line to collect proceeds behind the original mortgage lender in the event of a default. Any future lender — whether providing a refinance or equity loan — would not want to be third in line and will demand that SolarCity remove the lien.

Balsamo says that for SolarCity to call its lien on Leeds’ house a “fixture filing” is “parsing words to a ridiculous degree.  I don’t think there’s any question that it’s a lien. Someone can say it’s nothing more than a security interest, but that’s nonsense. At best they are mincing words and at worst they are being intellectually dishonest. A fixture filing is a lien.

Balsamo warns that signing lengthy contracts like those involving solar companies is risky because consumers often don’t realize what’s contained in the contract. “It’s up to the vendor to explain it to them. Either it wasn’t explained so customers understood, or, more likely, the vendor did not tell them” about the filing. Balsamo suggested that solar customers have an attorney read any contract before signing.

During a Feb. 12 Capitol Hill hearing of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) grilled Department of Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz about solar company liens and singled out SolarCity’s rival Stealth Solar as the offender.

Flake said, “After entering into these long-term agreements, a lot are in for a surprise when they realize they have to pay off a lien put on their house. What role, if any, can or does DOE plan to play in ensuring these companies who access federal tax incentives in particular  … aren’t misrepresenting what they are doing to their customers?”

Moniz was apparently caught off guard by the question and stammered that he didn’t know anything about liens but would look into it.

Ernest Moniz

A California banker, who requested anonymity because she is not authorized to speak on this topic, says she encounters enraged homeowners with Leeds’ same scenario five to 10 times a day: “This is my nightmare for 2015. Homeowners have no idea what they’ve gotten themselves into. Fixture filings are definitely liens…. Green energy is so popular with lawmakers that it allows these companies to say, ‘This is ours, our property.’ “That lease will follow you until you die.”

Arizona acts to protect home-owners

Solar customers who live in Arizona will soon have state protections with the nation’s most comprehensive transparency laws. One of those regulations, SB-1465, prohibits any type of secretive lien process. Despite vigorous opposition by SolarCity and another solar contractor, Sunrun, Gov. Doug Ducey signed the bill into law last week. It had unanimous legislative approval.

Among the items solar contracts must contain:

  • At least 10-point type and contain no blank spaces
  • Total price must be stated over the life of the contract, including interest
  • Potential tax ramifications
  • Disclose restrictions or impacts the buyer may have to transfer or modify the property
  • Depreciation schedule
  • A right to cancel up to three business days after purchase.

Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz) explains:

“We have to have better transparency and better truth in lending. This is becoming a bigger and bigger problem across the country as (solar) systems are getting transferred. Solar is getting to be our future and we don’t need people who are pulling shenanigans on the homeowner by not allowing them to know the full story of what they are signing. We are now living in an environment where it’s OK to lie and you just back up one lie with another lie – from the spokespersons at the White House all the way down to SolarCity.

Jeff Leeds believes SolarCity “just friggin’ lied to me in the sales process.” If he had been alerted to the fixture filing by the sales person, he would have thought twice about signing the contract. He has even filed a complaint with the state of California regarding SolarCity’s business practices.

“I would love to tell them how they bamboozled me, a Ph.D.,” Leeds said. “Imagine what they can do with the average schmuck out there.”

Here are the other articles in Watchdog.org’s series on SolarCity:

  1. Congressional leaders charge ‘potentially deceptive sales tactics’ by SolarCity, others
  2. SolarCity’s $750M tax gift shrouded in secrecy
  3. SolarCity and others backed Chinese solar-panel makers flooding U.S. market
  4. SolarCity skyrocketing stock dependent on government tax giveaways
  5. Customers tell horror stories of solar company that gets $422M in tax dollars

A Cato Institute report on renewable energy like solar, written by Robert L. Bradley Jr., president of the Institute for Energy Research in Houston, Texas, warns:

A multi-billion-dollar government crusade to promote renewable energy for electricity generation, now in its third decade, has resulted in major economic costs and unintended environmental consequences. Even improved new generation renewable capacity is, on average, twice as expensive as new capacity from the most economical fossil-fuel alternative and triple the cost of surplus electricity. Solar power for bulk generation is substantially more uneconomic than . . . biomass, hydroelectric power, and geothermal projects . . . . Wind power is the closest to the double-triple rule.

The uncompetitiveness of renewable generation explains the emphasis pro-renewable energy lobbyists on both the state and federal levels put on quota requirements, as well as continued or expanded subsidies. Yet every major renewable energy source has drawn criticism from leading environmental groups: hydro for river habitat destruction, wind for avian mortality, solar for desert overdevelopment, biomass for air emissions, and geothermal for depletion and toxic discharges.

Current state and federal efforts to restructure the electricity industry are being politicized to foist a new round of involuntary commitments on ratepayers and taxpayers for politically favored renewables, particularly wind and solar. Yet new government subsidies for favored renewable technologies are likely to create few environmental benefits; increase electricity-generation overcapacity in most regions of the United States; raise electricity rates; and create new “environmental pressures,” given the extra land and materials (compared with those needed for traditional technologies) it would take to significantly increase the capacity of wind and solar generation.

~Éowyn

Frustration continues with aggressive tax-refund seizures

irs

CBS News: More than 77 million American have received tax refunds — but others may not be so lucky. CBS News has been investigating complaints that refunds are being seized by the government without notice.

Shalita Grant is a Tony nominated actress — who plays a federal agent on TV’s “NCIS New Orleans.” But to Social Security she’s been an outlaw — not because she did anything wrong — but because her father was overpaid more than $13,000 in disability. Grant grew outraged when Social Security seized her $1,500 tax refund without warning or any evidence against her.

“I would describe it as a theft,” she said. “I’m asking for a bill. I’m asking for something that says I owe you. I feel like you guys stole from me and I have nothing to show for it.” But stolen is a strong word. “Oh yeah, and I feel strongly about that.”

Over the last year, CBS News has contacted a dozen taxpayers who say Social Security has taken their tax refunds because a relative had been overpaid in benefits.

Jessica Vela, a U.S. Navy Veteran, lost a $6,000 refund last year, when she was eight months pregnant. “I had a baby due the next month,” she said, growing emotional as she recalled what happened. “There are no words to explain how helpless the situation has been.”

Helpless because Social Security admitted it had overpaid Jessica’s mother, not her. “I’ve told them ’til I’m blue in the face, I was a minor, I was learning to ride a bike during that time.”But now she’s a Navy veteran, and describing herself as defenseless. “Against your own government.”

Social Security declined to speak on camera. In court filings, it said it has the legal authority to go after the relatives of people overpaid in benefits. However, the agency has repeatedly denied it has ever done so.

In January the agency told Congress: “We did not…[collect] any…debt that was incurred by a parent or another family member.” “It’s a flat lie,” Vela said. “It’s an absolute, bold-faced lie.”**

After our investigation Social Security admitted that the taxpayers in our story were not to blame, that the money had indeed gone to their parents and both of those women got their refunds back. But that’s an admission that Social Security is doing the exact kind of aggressive debt collection it’s told the public it would never do.

Lois Lerner, queen of IRS Lies

Lois Lerner, queen of IRS Lies

**The government should know a thing or two about lies:

DCG