Proving the truth is not wanted at MSNBC. “Alright, let’s just stop it,” MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan said to his panel while they were arguing about the failed solar energy company Solyndra. “Stop it. If you want to argue about roads and Solyndra, do it on another TV show. Seriously. I have so much limited amount of time to be here and there are so many other things that I’d rather talk about. I don’t care about those things.” Yes, hack and Obama hemroid Ratigan just pushing Obama agenda.

No one wants to talk about President Obama & Bill Nelson and their support of giving your tax dollars to a failing Solyndra..

http://conservativebyte.com/2012/05/ratigan-to-guest-if-you-want-to-talk-solyndra-do-it-on-another-tv-show/

4 in 10 Democrats desert Obama in Arkansas, Kentucky primaries

Obama Embarrassed in Kentucky, Arkansas Primaries

By Josh Lederman and Emily Goodin

Four in ten Democratic voters chose someone other than President Obama on Tuesday in primaries in Arkansas and Kentucky.
In Arkansas, John Wolfe — a perennial, long-shot candidate — took 41 percent of the vote in the Democratic primary, with 71 percent of precincts reporting. Obama came in just under 60 percent. The Associated Press did not call the race for Obama until close to midnight.
And in Kentucky, 42 percent of Democrats chose “uncommitted” rather than cast a vote for the incumbent president. Obama took 58 percent, with 99 percent of precincts reporting.
With turnout low, Obama did get more total votes than presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney, who won his primary with almost 67 percent of the vote. Obama had more than 118,600 votes to about 117,100 for Romney.

Obama: Slaughter of Christians a Misunderstanding!!! WTF!!!

By Steve Peacock

The violence in northern Nigeria is mistakenly viewed as a religious conflict rather than simply a tribal dispute over land, according to the Obama administration.

Despite the ongoing Muslim destruction of churches and the slaughter of Christians – including many murdered during worship services – the U.S. Agency for International Development claims that the misunderstandings make it difficult to administer aid programs.

USAID, therefore, has launched a program titled Project PEACE – an acronym for Programming Effectively Against Conflict and Extremism.

PEACE says it will hire contractors to help the agency analyze the “true” causes of conflict and consequently provide more effective humanitarian and conflict-resolution assistance, according to planning documents that WND located via database research.

The cost of Obama’s new “knowledge generation, dissemination and management” initiative is $600 million.

The unveiling of PEACE comes as the slaughter of Nigerian Christians is on the rise.

As WND reported earlier this month, an international Christian ministry says Muslims recently killed hundreds of Christians gathering for worship.

Patrick Sookhdeo, international director for Barnabas Fund, said at the time: “The simple act of going to church on a Sunday has become a perilous one for Christians in many parts of Nigeria.”

Indeed, Nigerian media have reported that the Muslim jihadist group Boko Haram has pledged to “eradicate Christianity.”

The USAID documents, however, contend that Boko Haram simply shares with other groups anger “over the nation’s poor governance.”

Efforts to “improve state service capacities and working to enhance the service delivery capacity of local governments” would help reduce such anger and resultant conflicts, the agency says.

The Statement of Work governing the PEACE procurement does not say that USAID specifically plans to intervene in Nigeria. However, an accompanying guidance document explicitly cites Nigeria’s Christian-Muslim conflict as a “case study” for Obama’s global endeavor.

Supposed misconceptions about such strife interfere with attempts to prevent or mitigate problems, according to the USAID Conflict Assessment Framework 2.0 document.

“Hence, the first task of conflict management is to distinguish the symptoms of the conflict from its sources. … In other words, the sources of conflict must be addressed, just as a doctor tries to treat the disease and not just the symptoms.”

The guidance document – on which USAID requires prospective contractors to base future service proposals – then addresses the contentious state of affairs between Christian and Muslim communities in Jos, Nigeria.

Prior to mentioning, however vaguely, the frequent “clash in episodes of violence,” USAID alludes to the tendency of parties in conflict to dishonestly adopt “tactics and positions to advance their interests.”

“In some cases, particularly when the interests of key actors differ from those they claim to represent, a key actor may purposefully hide or deflect their intentions through rhetoric,” the agency says.

Specific to Nigeria, it then dismisses the religious element of the hostility.

“Yet, although the symptom of conflict is intercommunal violence along sectarian lines, the source of the conflict will not be found in theology. Rather, the conflict’s source [is] competition for land between a group that perceives itself as indigenous to the area and another seen as more recent settlers.”

Attempts to focus on the theological nature of the fighting have failed to halt the ongoing clash, since those parties purportedly ignore the underlying motivation for feuding, according to USAID: “Those who perceive the conflict as a religious war have been unable to gain traction in resolving the conflict because, at its root, it is more about the governance of contested resources.”

Grievances such as this “almost always precede physical acts of violence,” the document says, hinting that the indigenous Christian majority is the primary source of tensions with the Muslim Hausa minority.

“For example, in Nigeria, control of the city of Jos has long been a particular source of tension between the Muslim ‘settler’ Hausas and the largely Christian ‘indigenes.’

“Although the Hausas are a minority in Plateau state, they are the largest ethnic group in Nigeria overall. Thus, many Berom and other Christian groups voice fears of Hausa domination at the national level.

“Meanwhile, the Hausa minority harbors similar fears of being forced out of Jos.”

Both sides have subsequently spread “rumors” of imminent threats as well as “allegations of silent killings, weapons stockpiling, and so on,” the document continues.

“Tensions are so high that any minor incident between two individuals across the religious divide could escalate rapidly, facilitated by the barrage of hate messages and other alarmist texts sent across extensive cellular networks.

“Occasional outbreaks of violence do in fact occur.”

Contractors selected under Project PEACE would, among other tasks, analyze the historical and cultural contexts of ongoing or developing conflicts.

They also would be responsible for tapping into existing USAID resources – distributing reports on lessons learned from prior interventions, for example, or training USAID personnel in how to develop and implement new assistance programs as conflicts emerge worldwide.

In addition to ensuring that USAID program responses “are informed by an understanding of what is required for effective peacebuilding,” contractors would attempt to identify “bright spots” in the conflict.

Despite the imposition of Islamic law, or Shariah, in 12 northern Nigerian states in 1999-2000, the governor of Kaduna state brokered a political agreement between Christians Muslims that remains in force.

“As Christian-Muslim clashes have raged in nearby states, Kaduna has faced tensions and occasional fighting, but has remained relatively peaceful in the face of extremist provocations.

“One neighborhood in southern Kaduna, Barnawa, is particularly remarkable for having remained peaceful throughout the 2000 and 2002 crises,” the government documents state.

“In both instances, Christians and Muslims worked together to protect each other and to prevent outsiders who were intent on engaging in conflict from coming to their neighborhood.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRQ3UcO5P8k&feature=player_embedded

Obama budget defeated 99-0 in Senate

President Obama’s budget suffered a second embarrassing defeat Wednesday, when senators voted 99-0 to reject it.
Coupled with the House’s rejection in March, 414-0, that means Mr. Obama’s budget has failed to win a single vote in support this year.

Republicans forced the vote by offering the president’s plan on the Senate floor.

Democrats disputed that it was actually the president’s plan, arguing that the slim amendment didn’t actually match Mr. Obama’s budget document, which ran thousands of pages. But Republicans said they used all of the president’s numbers in the proposal, so it faithfully represented his plan.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, even challenged Democrats to point out any errors in the numbers and he would correct them — a challenge no Democrats took up.

“A stunning development for the president of the United States in his fourth year in office,” Mr. Sessions said of the unanimous opposition.

The White House has held its proposal out as a “balanced approach” to beginning to rein in deficits. It calls for tax increases to begin to offset higher spending, and would begin to level off debt as a percentage of the economy by 2022. It would produce $6.4 trillion in new deficits over that time.

By contrast the chief Republican alternative from the House GOP would notch just $3.1 trillion in deficits, and three Senate Republican alternatives would all come in below $2 trillion.

The Senate is holding votes Wednesday on Mr. Obama’s budget, the House GOP’s budget and the three Senate Republican alternatives. None was expected to gain the 50 votes needed to pass the chamber.

We’ll have to see if this one makes Anderson Cooper’s “Keeping Them Honest” segment on CNN’s “AC360.”

On Cooper’s Tuesday program, Democratic strategist and Obama 2012 campaign pollster Cornell Belcher took aim at former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s response to a question from Fox News Channel’s Juan Williams during a Monday GOP presidential debate, saying it was “it was dog-whistle politics at its worst.

That drew a response from Cooper’s other guest, former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, who noted that Belcher has made these charges before.

“This is the second time I’ve been on the show with Cornell,” Fleischer said. “Earlier, he said Herman Cain was a racist. Now he’s saying Newt uses these terms, as he put it. And what I hear, Anderson, is actually the opposite.”

Belcher then denied that he had ever called Cain a racist:

BELCHER: Well, you know, I agree with my friend, Ari. I wish I had the confidence. By the way, I never called Herman Cain a racist. I said –
FLEISCHER: You sure did.
BELCHER: His language was bigoted. No, I said his language was bigoted. I never called him actually a racist. I understand the difference. Because I understand. I never called him racist; I did say it was bigoted, because I do understand the difference between racism and bigotry.

However, on Cooper’s Sept. 29 program, Belcher had some strong words after Cain said, “African-Americans have been brainwashed into not being open minded” to a conservative point of view.

At the time Belcher said it was “a racist, bigoted statement” and suggested that Cain be “treated like a racist and bigoted person who makes those racist and bigoted statements.”

http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/18/obama-pollster-calls-herman-cain-racist-on-camera-then-denies-he-did-it/

Michelle Obama: “All This Just For a Flag”
By James S. Robbins

The internet was buzzing this week with video of First Lady Michelle Obama apparently showing extreme disrespect to the American flag at a ceremony in honor of the victims of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks. As police and firefighters fold the flag to the sound of marching bagpipers, a skeptical looking Mrs. Obama leans to her husband and appears to say, “all this just for a flag.” She then purses her lips and shakes her head slightly as Mr. Obama nods.

Just for a flag? If that is what she said it is regrettable. Even with all her years being around those who hold high public office Mrs. Obama does not seem to understand the purpose and importance of ceremonies. They reaffirm the bonds of loyalty and fellowship that cement our national unity. Yes, at one level a flag is just a colorful piece of cloth. But it symbolizes much more. It is the emblem of our land and all its ideals. It has been present at every major event of any importance to the country, battles, celebrations, meetings, and the lunar landings. It is a symbol of unity that transcends party, faction and time. It is something uniquely and explicitly American. Men and women have fought and died for it. Our enemies hate us for it and burn it in the streets. All that should mean something.

Perhaps Mrs. Obama thinks that all the pomp and circumstance she experiences in her daily life has something to do with her, rather than the unofficial office she holds. If so she should disabuse herself of that notion quickly. The official gestures of respect shown to her are the same shown to any First Lady, and if she wasn’t married to the president she would be just another citizen. Ruffles and flourishes are not hers by right, but by coincidence of marriage. Yet this is the same woman who said she had never in her adult life been really proud of America before her husband ran for president, so it is no wonder she might dismiss a flag ceremony as just so much nonsense.

All this just for a flag? Has anyone said, “All this just for Michelle Obama?”

Obama throwing OUR hard earned tax down a rat hole to help other countries while millions of OUR citizens are out of work Americans.

Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida can’t help himself in voting for BIG government and against the people. Bill Nelson is just another ELITIST living large on your hard earned money.
Keystone XL Pipeline – Vote Rejected … More American jobs lost and our energy prices continue to go up.

Repeal Big Oil Tax Subsidies Act – Vote Rejected (51-47, 2 Not Voting). These are the same business breaks all companies receive although many are already dined to BIG oil! Why does Bill Nelson think if oil companies continued to be treated different than other companies and their costs are increased GAS will become CHEAPER!!!! No this is just government GREED by Big GOVERNMENT spenders Like Bill Nelson.

In Screwed!, we expose the Rights of the Child Treaty which is now being negotiated by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and will likely be submitted to the Senate this year (perhaps in the lame duck session).

Twenty years ago, during the Clinton Administration, the Senate refused to ratify the treaty. But now it is being pushed by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA).

The Treaty, literally, tells us how to raise our children. And it would be legally enforceable in American courts under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. Only a constitutional amendment could supersede the “rights” it confers on children:

• It bans spanking or any form of corporal punishment of children.

• Article 12 of the Treaty says “when adults are making decisions which affect children, children have the right to say what they think should happen and have their opinion taken into account.” Could this proviso establish a due process right of children to challenge their parents’ divorce or their decision to move?

• Worried that your children are hanging out with a bad bunch? Article 15 guarantees children “freedom of association.” It says “Children have the right to meet together and to join groups and organizations, as long as it does not stop other people from enjoying their rights.”

• The Treaty would stop states from trying children as adults and incarcerating them with adult inmates. It would require that even murderers in their teens be sent to children’s facilities rather than prison. Article 37 says “children should not be put in prison with adults.”

The Treaty requires all signatory nations to provide children with adequate levels of food, clothing, housing, education and medical care. In Britain, Prime Minister Cameroon is facing a lawsuit for violating the Rights of the Child Treaty by proposing a cut in welfare benefits.

It also obliges rich nations to “help poorer countries achieve the best health care possible, safe drinking water, nutritious food, and a clean and safe environment for children.” Enforceable in US courts, this provision might create a basis for judicial decisions ordering increases in foreign aid, just as courts now order steps to address overcrowding of prisons.

The Treaty would make a new level of busybody intrusion into our lives.

President Barack Obama tried to make the argument today that he’s the real small-government leader, not Reagan and other Republicans.

“After there was a recession under Ronald Reagan, government employment went way up,” Obama said at a college in Albany, N.Y. “It went up after the recessions under the first George Bush and the second George Bush. So each time there was a recession with a Republican president, compensated — we compensated by making sure that government didn’t see a drastic reduction in employment.”

“The only time government employment has gone down during a recession has been under me,” he continued. “So I make that point just so you don’t buy into this whole bloated government argument that you hear.”

The purpose of the speech was for Obama to announce his “to-do list” for Congress — “just like when Michelle gives me a list, I check it off.”

“I’m going to need you to pick up the phone, write an email, tweet, remind your member of Congress we can’t afford to wait until November to get things done,” Obama said.

Really??? America cannot tolerate 4 more yours of failure and big government.