FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR/TV
Big Lies in Politics
Where We Create & Share Music, Talk Radio Shows, Conservative
News & Cartoons for Our Subscribers, Viewers, Other Artists
& the General Public. (WFZR Radio / TV Coming Soon)
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
BIG LIES IN POLITICS
Posted By Woody Pendleton
It was either Adolf
Hitler or his propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, who said that the people
will believe any lie, if it is big enough and told often enough, loud enough.
Although the Nazis were defeated in World War II, this part of their philosophy
survives triumphantly to this day among politicians, and nowhere more so than
during election years.
Perhaps the biggest lie of this election year, and the one likely to be
repeated the most often, is that the income of "the rich" is going up, while
other people's incomes are going down. If you listen to Barack Obama, you are
bound to hear this lie repeatedly.
But the government's own Congressional Budget Office has just published a
report whose statistics flatly contradict this claim. The CBO report shows that,
while the average household income fell 12 percent between 2007 and 2009, the
average for the lower four-fifths fell by 5 percent or less, while the average
income for households in the top fifth fell 18 percent. For households in the
"top one percent" that seems to fascinate so many people, income fell by 36
percent in those same years.
Why are these data so different from other data that are widely cited,
showing the top brackets improving their positions more so than anyone else?
The answer is that the data cited by the Congressional Budget Office are
based on Internal Revenue Service statistics for specific individuals and
specific households over time. The IRS can follow individuals and households
because it can identify the same people over time from their Social Security
numbers.
Most other data, including census data, are based on compiling statistics
in a succession of time periods, without the ability to tell if the actual
people in each income bracket are the same from one time period to the next. The
turnover of people is substantial in all brackets -- and is huge in the top one
percent. Most people in that bracket are there for only one year in a decade.
All sorts of statements are made in politics and in the media as if that
"top one percent" is an enduring class of people, rather than an ever-changing
collection of individuals who have a spike in their income in a particular year,
for one reason or another. Turnover in other income brackets is also
substantial.
There is nothing mysterious about this. Most people start out at the
bottom, in entry-level jobs, and their incomes rise over time as they acquire
more skills and experience.
Politicians and media talking heads love to refer to people who are in
the bottom 20 percent in income in a given year as "the poor." But, following
the same individuals for 10 or 15 years usually shows the great majority of
those individuals moving into higher income brackets.
The number who reach all the way to the top 20 percent greatly exceeds
the number still stuck in the bottom 20 percent over the years. But such mundane
facts cannot compete for attention with the moral melodramas conjured up in
politics and the media when they discuss "the rich" and "the poor."
There are people who are genuinely rich and genuinely poor, in the sense
of having very high or very low incomes for most, if not all, of their lives.
But "the rich" and "the poor" in this sense are unlikely to add up to even ten
percent of the population.
Ironically, those who make the most noise about income disparities or
poverty contribute greatly to policies that promote both. The welfare state
enables millions of people to meet their needs with little or no income-earning
work on their part.
Most of the economic resources used by people in the bottom 20 percent
come from sources other than their own incomes. There are veritable armies of
middle-class people who make their livings transferring resources, in a variety
of ways, from those who created those resources to those who live off them.
These transferrers are in both government and private social welfare
institutions. They have every incentive to promote dependency, from which they
benefit both professionally and psychically, and to imagine that they are
creating social benefits.
For different reasons, both politicians and the media have incentives to
spread misconceptions with statistics. So long as we keep buying it, they will
keep selling it.
PLAYING CHICKEN WITH FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Posted By Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR/TV
Playing Chicken with Freedom of Speech
Each day brings new evidence of the Left’s hatred for Christians and other
traditionalists, but the smear campaign against Christian-owned Chick-fil-A sets
a new low.
The Atlanta-based, 1,600-restaurant chain that’s famous for its
misspelling-prone cows who urge consumers to “eat mor chikin,” is under a
full-scale, fascistic assault, complete with obscene celebrity tweets and
government bullying.Acting more like Benito Mussolini than Paul Revere, Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino said he will block Chick-fil-A from opening a facility in his city. Chicago Alderman Proco “Joe” Moreno said he will stop Chick-fil-A from building its second Chicago store. In Philadelphia, Councilman Jim Kenney sent a letter to Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy advising his company to “take a hike and take your intolerance with you.” Meanwhile, the Jim Henson Company, owner of The Muppets, has canceled a deal to provide toys for Chick-fil-A kids’ meals. This is just the beginning.
What has the dastardly company done? Chick-fil-A’s management, while not political, is an unapologetic defender of traditional values. Like the Boy Scouts, the company has enraged progressives who are at war with Nature and Nature’s God.
This isn’t the first time Chick-fil-A has been singled out. In February 2011, homosexual activists launched an unsuccessful boycott when they found out that the company donated food to the Pennsylvania Family Institute’s marriage retreat. Seriously, it doesn’t take much to tick them off.
The current hysteria began after Dan Cathy, son of the chain’s founder, gave an interview that ran in the Baptist Press on July 16. Mr. Cathy noted that Chick-fil-A’s management is “based on biblical principles, asking God and pleading with God to give us wisdom on decisions we make about people and the programs and partnerships we have. And He has blessed us.” When asked about the company’s positions in support of marriage and family, Mr. Cathy went on to say, “Well, guilty as charged. We are very much supportive of the family — the biblical definition of the family unit. …”
This was too juicy to ignore. CNN ran a July 19 religion blog post, “Chick-fil-A’s marriage stance causing a social storm.” Casually striking a match while pouring the gasoline, writer Brad Lendon wrote that “the comments of company President Dan Cathy about gay marriage to Baptist Press on Monday have ignited a social media wildfire.”
It doesn’t matter that Mr. Cathy never brought up “gay marriage,” as noted by The Weekly Standard’s Mark Hemingway. All Mr. Cathy did was defend the company’s stance that families are paramount and that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.
That’s what marriage laws do, too – they define the institution. It’s no accident that the media routinely describe marriage laws as “gay marriage bans,” as if marriage didn’t exist until recently, when it was invented solely to vex homosexuals. You think I’m joking? That’s what openly gay U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker essentially said in his bizarre ruling striking down
California’s voter-approved constitutional marriage amendment.
This
madness has gone so far that simply defending marriage is enough to get you
banned in Boston. There may be room, however, for a legal challenge, as UCLA Law
Professor Eugene Volokh notes:
“Denying a private business permits because of such speech by its owner is a blatant First Amendment violation. Even when it comes to government contracting — where the government is choosing how to spend government money — the government generally may not discriminate based on the contractor’s speech, see Board of County Commissioners v. Umbehr (1996).”
Perhaps the ACLU will step forward to represent Chick-fil-A. Perhaps the
Chicago River will freeze in August.
Comic and Green Party favorite Roseanne Barr joined the Chick-fil-A bashing
on Wednesday, tweeting, “anyone who eats (expletive) -- Fil-A deserves to get
the cancer that is sure to come from eating antibiotic filled tortured chickens
4Christ.”
As reported by the Media Research Center’s Newsbusters, she sent another
Christian-themed, obscene tweet that I won’t repeat, followed by this sarcastic
offering: “off to grab a (expletive)- fil-A sandwich on my way to worshipping
Christ, supporting Aipac and war in Iran.” (Aipac stands for the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee.)On July 25, Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank accused Mike Huckabee of pushing “obesity” because Mr. Huckabee has called for people who honor “Godly values” to fight back by eating at Chick-fil-A on August 1. Huckabee’s “defense of the fast-food restaurant will make Chick-fil-A a fat target in the culture wars and will further divide Americans,” Milbank asserted.
Right. Huckabee’s the divisive one for helping the mugging victim. If he were a Good American (like Mr. Milbank), he’d just stay silent (unlike Mr. Milbank).
Up in Boston, where consistency is not necessarily a virtue, Mayor Menino didn’t mind giving a taxpayer-subsidized, sweetheart land deal in 2002 to the Islamic Society of Boston, which has been linked to terrorist groups. But on the “Freedom Trail,” where the American Revolution began, Menino says Chick-fil-A “doesn’t send the right message to the country. We’re a leader when it comes to social justice and opportunities for all.” Except for Christians, who are about as welcome in Boston as the New York Yankees.
Stand for natural marriage and you’ll get the Left’s version of “social justice:” an iron fist in a lavender glove. The end-game is to criminalize Christianity and replace it with a state-approved, false religion that retains enough trappings to fool the unwary.
Chicago’s notoriously foul-mouthed Mayor, Rahm Emanuel, who donned brass knuckles to assist Alderman Moreno, put it this way: “Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values.”
No, perhaps not in a town where Al Capone’s spirit animates its politics.
Psalm 12:8 says, “The wicked freely strut about when what is vile is honored
among men.”
As for Mr. Cathy, “We intend to stay the course,” he said. “We know that it
might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country
where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles.”
I know where I’m having breakfast, lunch and dinner on August 1, do
you?by WP: I am glad I am not messrs. Emanuel, Moreno, Lee, or Menino. Spitting in GOD"S face is not conducive to a long and happy life. But they would have to read the Bible to learn that. The chastizement that is forthcoming will be devastating to the cities these un-GODLY people run.
TWO RESERVOIRS OF DISPAIR
Posted By Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR/TV
Two Reservoirs of Despair
The idea is that if they act, they can decrease interest rates. Lower interest rates supposedly create demand so business and people borrow more, creating more economic activity. However, rates are already close to zero. I just had an adjustable rate mortgage drop to 3.1%.
Companies and individuals don’t act on macro. They behave on microeconomic principles. That means, while they look at the big picture, it’s marginal things that cause them to act. Another QE from the Fed isn’t going to move the needle enough to get any economic fires started.
The problem right now is the money that gets created sits. There is no economic velocity with regard to money. It’s not turning over because economic activity is stalled at virtually every level, and in every industry.
Companies see the macro, a decline with continuing problems in Europe; a slow down in China, and a fiscal cliff in the US, and then look at the micro in their own backyard. It’s not any better. Retail sales and consumer spending are flat. There just aren’t as many customers coming through the door.
US Retail Sales data by YCharts
If we want to change the game, we have to think micro, not macro. There is little the Fed can do on a micro level given the state of the economy. The only one that can release the dam that’s creating a reservoir of despair is the President by agreeing to tax cuts for corporations and individuals at all income levels. Then, at the margin, behavior will change.
The Romney Character Assassination Has Begun
The Democrats cannot win on the facts. They tried to bend the facts, but the data keeps exploding in their face. What’s left in their playbook? Character assassination.
Here are two examples.
First, the recent Newsweek cover.
Next, comes an article at Business Insider by left leaning Henry Blodgett. The column is a backhanded, “I am just curious” assault on Mormonism. It starts out,
Our next President may be a Mormon, so it seems a good time to learn some things about that particular religion.
For example:
Do Mormons have any weird beliefs or practices that might make a President do strange things?
Is there a Mormon “pope” or other boss that a President might feel some greater allegiance to?
Can Mormons truly separate “church” and “state”–or do they think that their “God’s law” is higher than American law?
And so on…
Cheap shot for sure.
Here is our Twitter repartee.@hblodgetThere will be continual assaults on the Romney character, and sly attacks on the Mormon religion from now until election day. All of a sudden, religion matters to the left. All of a sudden, they are curious.
And Now For A Bunch Of Things I Just Learned About The Founding Of Mormonism… http://read.bi/T1246i
Expand
@pointsnfigures
@hblodget were you worried about Obama’s church of choice in 2008? Bush’s in 2000? Clinton in 1992? Does it matter?
@hblodget
@pointsnfigures Or not “worried,” really… I’m not “worried” about Romney’s religion. Mostly curious.
1:30 PM – 30 Jul 12 via TweetDeck · Details
?@pointsnfigures
@hblodget I am not Mormon. You might want to take a trip to Salt Lake if you really want to find out about Mormonism.
31m 57Jeffrey Carter ?@pointsnfigures
@hblodget your was the first I saw going after Mormonism in a backhanded way.
My kids sat in the pews at Obama’s church when Reverend Wright was preaching. It’s a different brand of Christianity, far from mainstream Christianity. Why wasn’t the left curious about what was going on there?
I think we know the answer. It’s a double standard. President John F. Kennedy endured the same amount of bigotry back when he was running as the first Catholic. Fortunately for him, he wasn’t a Republican.
UPDATE
I should clarify, my kids attended Wright’s church as a part of a program at
the church I belonged to, Fourth Presbyterian. Fourth Pres confirmation classes
go to other churches, synagogues, and mosques as part of a confirmation program.
WHY "YOU DIDN'T BUILD THAT " WILL NOT GO AWAY
Posted By Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR/TV
Why “You Didn’t Build That” Won’t Go Away
President Obama’s self-revealing “You didn’t build that” speech in Roanoke,
Va., is turning out to be the gift that keeps on giving.
The speech was delivered July 13, and the New York Times last week
dubbed it “the campaign story that will not go away.” There are several reasons
why this story won’t—and must not—go away. Reason number one is that this is the first time that President Obama has revealed for public consumption a foundational tenet of his economic theory. The Obama administration has a history of being cagy. For example, we think we know why White House Press Secretary Jay Carney refused to answer a question as to whether the administration regards Jerusalem as the capital of Israel last week. We have our suspicions. But we can’t be sure. No one will say.
With the Roanoke speech, the public at large can for the first time know with absolute certainty what the president thinks about those who succeed in business. Rather than being the engine of job creation, business mooches, in the president’s worldview. The disdain in Mr. Likeability’s voice and demeanor was palpable—and not very likeable.
This isn’t some anecdote dredged up from the president’s twenties, something uttered behind closed doors at a posh San Francisco fundraiser, something we ourselves can never hear, or an impromptu response to an importunate plumber. This is what the president believes, and for once he flat out said it. Thanks for sharing, Mr. President.
Moreover, these words, offensive to those who have worked to build family businesses, didn’t come out of thin air—rather than being the verbal meanderings of a tired man without his teleprompter, these words reflect a particular point of view that has wide currency on the far left.
William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection located one of the sources of this attack on the self-made man or woman (and that is what this is) in the works of Berkeley linguist George Lakoff. “There is no such thing as a self-made man,” Jacobson quoted from Lakoff. “Every businessman has used the vast American infrastructure, which the taxpayers paid for, to make his money. He did not make his money alone.”
This is very much what the president was saying in Roanoke. President Obama’s ally Elizabeth Warren, the Massachusetts senatorial candidate and darling of the far left, also has said pretty much the same thing. President Obama, who like Warren and Lakoff has spoken fondly of the anarchistic Occupy Movement, spoke his own truth in a moment of off-scripted candor in Roanoke. These were not errant words, but words of sincere belief.
The Obama campaign’s response shows that they recognize the potentially politically grave consequences of the president’s moment of self-revelation. Among other things, the campaign is vociferously claiming in an ad that the president never said any such thing (commendably bold, when you consider that the entire speech is easily available on the internet).
Showing just how devastating the president’s words potentially are to a second term, Jonathan Chait resorted to the all-purpose liberal shut up: it is racist to criticize President Obama’s anti-business tirade. Chait wrote about the speech and the reaction in New York magazine:
The key thing is that Obama is angry, and he’s talking not in his normal voice but in a “black dialect.” This strikes at the core of Obama’s entire political identity: a soft-spoken, reasonable African-American with a Kansas accent. From the moment he stepped onto the national stage, Obama’s deepest political fear was being seen as a “traditional” black politician, one who was demanding redistribution from white America on behalf of his fellow African-Americans.Senator John McCain most likely would have been buffaloed by the racist ruse. The “You didn’t build that” speech would have been declared off limits. Romney, whose campaign drove veteran politician Newt Gingrich crazy, probably won’t. Indeed, the Chait claim that talk about the Roanoke speech is racist may mark the official moment at which the racism charge jumped the shark. Chait’s ludicrous column is provoking more mirth than the usual fear and trembling at the prospect of being (unfairly) dubbed a racist.
There will come a moment in the presidential debates when Mitt Romney and the president can go head to head on the meaning of Roanoke. I hope Romney is practicing for this great opportunity. I would suggest that, when the president says his words were twisted, or that Romney took them out of context, Romney give viewers a website where they can listen to the whole speech. This can’t be delivered in the usual go-to-my website toss-off of a politician who can’t be bothered to tell you himself. It has to be done just right to convey the idea that the Roanoke speech is the key to decoding President Obama.
If you know that this is what the president believes, the rest falls in
place: his incessant calls for higher taxation on “millionaires and
billionaires,” the stagnation of business in the U.S. under Obama, and, most of
all, the 8.2 unemployment rate.
10 CONCEPTS LIBERALS TALK ABOUT BUT CAN NOT UNDERSTAND
Posted By Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR/TV
10 Concepts Liberals Talk About Incessantly But Don't Understand
"It isn’t so much that liberals are ignorant. It’s just that they know so many things that aren’t so." -- Ronald Reagan
”You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.” -- Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride
1) Being Open Minded: To a liberal, this has nothing at all to do with
seriously considering other people's ideas. To the contrary, liberals define
being "open-minded" as agreeing with them. What could be more close-minded than
assuming that not only are you right, but that you don't even need to consider
another viewpoint because anyone who disagrees must be evil?
2) Racism: Liberals start with the presumption that only white people
who don't belong to the Democratic Party can be racist. So, for example, even if
Jeremiah Wright can make it clear that he hates white people because of their
skin color or if liberals take an explicitly racist political position, like
suggesting that black people are too stupid and incompetent to get
identification to vote, they can't be racist. White Republicans, on the other
hand, are generally assumed to be racist by default, no matter how much evidence
there is to the contrary.
3) Fairness: In all fairness, I must admit that fairness is an
arbitrary concept. So, you could make the argument that no one could get
"fairness" wrong. Still, liberals do because they don't make any effort to
actually "be fair." As a practical matter, liberals define "fairness" as taking
as much as possible from people who they don't think are going to vote for them
and giving it to people who may vote for them in return for their ill gotten
largesse. Certainly conservatives, libertarians, and moderates might disagree
about how much money to take from the wealthy to redistribute to the poor or how
to help the disadvantaged, but the only liberal answer to the question, "How
much is enough?" is "more."
4) Greed: To a liberal, believing that you pay too much in taxes or
even opposing paying more in taxes is greedy. In actuality, wanting to loot as
much money as possible that someone else has earned to use for your own
purposes, which is what liberals do, is a much better example of greed.
5) Hate: Liberals often define simple disagreement with them on issues
like gay marriage, tax rates, or abortion as hatred. No matter how well a
position is explained, or the logical underpinnings behind it, it's chalked up
to hate. Meanwhile, the angriest, most vicious, most hateful people in all of
politics are liberals railing against what they say is "hatred." This irony is
completely lost on the Left.
6) Investment: Actual investments involve putting money or resources
into a project in hopes that they will appreciate in value. Liberals skip the
second half of that equation. To them, an "investment" is taking someone else's
tax dollars and putting it into a project that liberals approve of and whether a
profit is made or lost is so irrelevant that they typically don't even bother to
measure the results.
7) Charity: Contributing your own money or time to a good cause is
charity. Liberals view themselves as charitable if they take someone else's tax
dollars and give it away to people they hope will vote for them in return. At a
minimum, they should at least credit the taxpayers who paid for the money they
gave away for the charity, although it's not really charity if it's involuntary.
Of course, there's nothing charitable about asking someone else to sacrifice for
your gain, which could actually be better described as selfish.
8) Patriotism: Liberals love America the way a wife beater loves his
spouse. That's why they're always beating up the country "for its own good."
Doesn't the country understand that liberals have to hit it in the mouth because
they LOVE IT SO MUCH?!?!? Of course, the conventional definition of patriotism,
which is loving your country and wishing it well, isn't one that liberals can
wrap their heads around.
9) Tolerance: In a free, open, and pluralistic society, there are all
sorts of behaviors that we may have to tolerate, even though we don't approve of
those activities. Liberals don't get this distinction. For one thing, they don't
understand the difference between tolerance and acceptance. They also don't
extend any of the tolerance they're agitating for to people who disagree with
them. Liberals silence people who disagree with them at every opportunity which
is, dare we say it, an extremely intolerant way to behave.
10) Diversity: What liberals mean by "diversity" is that they want a
broad range of people from different races, colors, and creeds who have
identical political views. A black or Hispanic conservative doesn't contribute
to "diversity" in liberal eyes because he actually has diverse views. Incredible
role models for women like Sarah Palin can't be feminists to liberals because
she doesn't share the same liberal beliefs as sexist pigs like Anthony Weiner
and Bill Maher. How can you have any meaningful "diversity" when everyone has to
think the same way?by WP: The Word OF GOD teaches that selfishness is the basic cause of sin and evil. PRETTY MUCH EXPLAINS WHERE THE LIBERALS ARE COMING FROM.
OBAMA'S ENTREPENURIAL COMMUNIST MANIFESTO
Posted By Woody Pedleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR/TV
Obama's Entrepreneurial Communist Manifesto
"If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business -- you didn't build that; somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."In fact, the entirety of Obama's speech points to the prize in partnership with the federal government. Obama believes that it is not your business! Obama's statements shouldn't come as any surprise, as he has declared emphatically from early in his presidency that "only government" is our savior, and he has supported his socialistic platform through multiple company and corporate bailouts. To Obama, government is your business partner; government is your savior; government is your hero; government is the economic caped crusader who swoops down like the Dark Knight to save your soul, sales and pocketbook. In fact, Obama's belief in government partnership -- indeed, ownership -- is at the heart of his justification to increase taxes on couples who make more than $250,000 a year, a levy that an Ernst & Young study just showed would cost 710,000 U.S. jobs. Obama's business comments were an assault on free enterprise and entrepreneurialism. They were not a gaffe; they represent, at the very least, his preferred philosophy for a European type of socialism. The Wall Street Journal even editorialized that the president is "subordinating to government the individual enterprise and risk-taking that underlies prosperity." The truth is that Obama's statements in Virginia were in no way reminiscent of great capitalists and innovators. On the other hand, his words did smack of a few other societal manipulators:
"Society does not consist of individuals, but expresses the sum of interrelations, the relations within which these individuals stand." -- Karl Marx "Production itself changed from a series of individual into a series of social acts, and the products from individuals to social products. The yard, the cloth, the metals that now came out of the factory were the joint product of many workers through whose hands they had successfully to pass before they were ready. (No one person could say of them: 'I made that; this is my product.')" -- Friedrich Engels "All our lives we fought against exalting the individual, against the elevation of the single person, and long ago we were over and done with the business of a hero, and here it comes up again: the glorification of one personality. This is not good at all." -- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin "Comrades, we must abolish the cult of the individual decisively, once and for all." -- Nikita Khrushchev "We must affirm anew the discipline of the Party, namely: (1) the individual is subordinate to the organization; (2) the minority is subordinate to the majority; (3) the lower level is subordinate to the higher level; and (4) the entire membership is subordinate to the Central Committee. Whoever violates these articles of discipline disrupts Party unity. -- Mao Zedong And now we can add these words to the lineup: "If you've got a business -- you didn't build that; (the federal government) made that happen." -- Barack ObamaTo the contrary, America's Founding Fathers declared an independence from governmental tyranny and taxation over personal business and welfare. For them, America was a republic founded upon "We the People" and individuals' rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Government was charged with the sole role of protector, not proprietor, of those "inalienable" rights with which all humans are endowed by their Creator. Thomas Jefferson explained, "The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government." And Benjamin Franklin said: "The Constitution only guarantees the American people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself." Dare I say that if they or any of our other founders were alive today, they would say, "If you want a business, you build it. You make it happen."
TRANSPARENCY AS IT REALLY IS. WHERE IS OBAMA'S???
Posted By Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR/TV
Subject: Records since birth!You may not like/approve the data, and that’s OK, but at least they are available. A refreshing concept.Personal Information:
His full Name is: Willard Mitt RomneyHe was Born: March 12, 1947 and is 65 years old.
His Father: George W. Romney, former Governor of the State of Michigan
He was raised in Bloomfield Hills , Michigan
He is Married to Ann Romney since 1969; they five children.
Education:
B.A. from Brigham Young University,
J.D. and M.B.A. from Harvard University
Religion:
Mormon - The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints
Working Background:
After high school, he spent 30 months in France as a Mormon missionary.
After going to both Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School simultaneously, he passed the Michigan bar exam, but never worked as an attorney.
In 1984, he co-founded Bain Capital a private equity investment firm, one of the largest such firms in the United States .
In 1994, he ran for Senator of Massachusetts and lost to Ted Kennedy.
He was President and CEO of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.
In 2002, he was elected Governor of the State of Massachusetts where he eliminated a 1.5 billion deficit.
Some Interesting Facts about Romney:
Bain Capital, starting with one small office supply store in Massachusetts, turned it into Staples; now over 2,000 stores employing 90,000 people.
Bain Capital also worked to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino's, Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply, and many others.
He was an unpaid volunteer campaign worker for his dad's gubernatorial campaign 1 year.
He was an unpaid intern in his dad's governor's office for eight years.
He was an unpaid bishop and state president of his church for ten years.
He was an unpaid President of the Salt Lake Olympic Committee for three years.
He took no salary and was the unpaid Governor of Massachusetts for four years.
He gave his entire inheritance from his father to charity.
Mitt Romney is one of the wealthiest self-made men in our country but has given more back to its citizens in terms of money, service and time than most men.
And in 2011 Mitt Romney gave over $4 million to charity, almost 19% of his income.... Just for comparison purposes, Obama gave 1% and Joe Biden gave $300 or .0013%.
Mitt Romney is Trustworthy:
He will show us his birth certificate
He will show us his high school and college transcripts.
He will show us his social security card.
He will show us his law degree.
He will show us his draft notice.
He will show us his medical records.
He will show us his income tax records.
He will show us he has nothing to hide.
Mitt Romney's background, experience and trustworthiness show him to be a great leader and an excellent citizen for President of the United States.
You may think that Romney may not be the best representative the Republicans could have selected. At least I know what religion he is, and that he won't desecrate the flag, bow down to foreign powers, or practice fiscal irresponsibility. I know he has the ability to turn this financial debacle that the current regime has gotten us into. We won't like all the things necessary to recover from this debt, but someone with Romney's background can do it. But, on the minus side, He never was a "Community Organizer", never took drugs or smoked pot, never got drunk, did not associate with communists or terrorists, nor did he attend a church whose pastor called for God to damn the US.
You should know the difference
between the men running for America's top
office.
Does Obama/Biden deserve 4 more
years?
Pass this on...Stupid is what
stupid does!
OBAMA STARTING ANOTHER WAR TO KILL AMERICAN TROOPS??
Posted By Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR/TV
Claim: U.S. forces on Syrian border
Assad considering putting military on highest alert
by Aaron KleinEmail |
Archive
Bashar al-Assad
Russian intelligence has information that U.S. troops are in Turkey near the
country’s border with Syria, a senior Syrian official told WND today.
The official said the Russians observed American forces taking part in
Turkish military measures to secure the Syria-Turkey borders.
The official said the information about a U.S. military presence in Turkey
has led to a debate within the Syrian leadership about whether to move the
Syrian military to its highest alert level.Currently, the Syrian army is on its second highest alert.
Aaron Klein’s “Fool Me Twice: Obama’s Shocking Plans for the Next Four Years Exposed” uncovers the blueprint for Obama’s second term
While the presence of U.S. forces in Turkey could not be immediately
verified, it is not the first time the American military has been accused of
aiding the insurgency targeting Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
In February, WND
was first to report the U.S., Turkey and Jordan were running a training base
for the Syrian rebels in the Jordanian town of Safawi in the country’s northern
desert region, according to several knowledgeable Egyptian and Arab security
officials speaking to WND.The security officials also claimed Saudi Arabia was sending weapons to the rebels via surrogates, including through Druze and Christian leaders in Lebanon such as Druze leader Walid Jumblatt; Saudi-Lebanese billionaire Saad Hariri, who recently served as Lebanon’s prime minister; and senior Lebanese opposition leader Samir Farid Geagea.
The U.S. repeatedly has denied directly arming the rebels, stating it is only
providing non-lethal aid.
Any aid to the rebels is highly controversial.
WND
reported in May there is growing collaboration between the Syrian opposition
and al-Qaida as well as evidence the opposition is sending weapons to jihadists
in Iraq, according to an Egyptian security official previously speaking to
WND.There are now widespread reports of al-Qaida fighters among the ranks of the opposition, with some jihadist branches reportedly officially joining the U.S.-supported Free Syrian Army.
The opposition is currently intensifying the fight against Assad’s forces in the key city of Aleppo amid claims, denied by the rebels, that the Syrian military has retaken the city.
WND reported that Assad held a meeting last week in which he set the goal of entirely quelling the opposition targeting his regime by October, according to a senior Syrian official.
The official, speaking to WND on condition of anonymity, said Assad ordered his military to rid the Damascus region, including Aleppo, of rebels by the end of Ramadan on Aug. 18. He said Assad believes he can clear the opposition from the region of Homs by Sept. 10 and end the insurgency by October.
The official admitted the coming weeks will be “bloody.” He affirmed Russia
stands squarely in the Syrian camp.
THE GREY HAIRED WARRIORS
Posted By The Circuit Rider
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR/TV
|
THIS IS ANOTHER GREY HAIRED CHRISTIAN AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONALIST PATRIOT SIGNED ON. WE ARE LOCKED AND LOADED.
DEMOCRATIC PARTY'S HISTORY ONE OF CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION
Posted By Woody Pendleton
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR/TV
Ex-Time editor: Dem Party 'criminal organization'
Dark history jam-packed with politically powerful gangsters
by
The entire history of the Democratic Party is one of crime and corruption,
according to former Time magazine associate editor Michael Walsh.
In a radio interview with WND’s Greg Corombos, Walsh provides a detailed analysis of the party’s dark past – from Aaron Burr’s building of Tammany Hall and how Democrats tried to defeat Abraham Lincoln’s re-election bid to Franklin Roosevelt’s rise to the presidency and the Chicago machine connected to the Obama administration.
“What distinguishes them is a real desire to win,” he explained. “They’re the
oldest party in the country obviously. …
He said the Democratic Party’s win-at-all-cost attitude led to the creation of political machines that ran big-city politics for years.
“But the party has always been in bed with this sort of criminal element, and sometimes a seditious criminal element. That was also true in the Roosevelt administration, where a number of Roosevelt administration officials turned out, subsequently, to have been Soviet agents of influence. Again, it’s not a pretty sight.”
Walsh said President Harry Truman, when he came up in politics in Kansas City, was the bag man for the great criminal Irish gangster who ran the city, Tom Pendergast.
“There’s always this sub current running underneath the Democratic presidents,” Walsh said. “The party got seized in 1968 in the streets of Chicago during the riots … and is now basically turned into the McGovern-Alinsky group that runs the country today.”
In his book, “The People v. the Democratic Party,” Walsh writes, “With Obama in office, all Washington is a skating rink on which characters like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd turn triple-Lutzes while their media cronies applaud like the Harvard-trained seals that many of them are.”
In the WND interview, Walsh indicted his former colleagues in the mainstream media for doing little more than carrying water for their preferred candidates and issues.
“What’s left of the mainstream media is a pretty hard-core group of leftists whose life’s work and ambition is to promote their agenda,” he said. “And they’re doing a good job of it. It’s just that they’re losing their influence, and I think they’ll continue to lose it as the public realizes they’re not playing straight with them anymore.”
In a radio interview with WND’s Greg Corombos, Walsh provides a detailed analysis of the party’s dark past – from Aaron Burr’s building of Tammany Hall and how Democrats tried to defeat Abraham Lincoln’s re-election bid to Franklin Roosevelt’s rise to the presidency and the Chicago machine connected to the Obama administration.
“They’ve stayed because they know how to win, and they’re willing to change
at the drop of a hat. They’re willing to change their policies. They’ve gone
from being the party of slavery and segregation to now claiming to be the party
of civil rights laws passed in ’64 and ’65, when, in fact, those were passed
with greater Republican support than Democrat support. But they’re always
mutating and trying to grab the moral high ground. And it seems to me they don’t
have any moral high ground.”
Walsh detailed what he believes is a history of corruption in the Democratic
Party, going all the way back to Aaron Burr.
“He founded Tammany Hall, which turned into, over the course of its 150-year
existence, the prototypical big-city political machine: corrupt, in league with
the most violent gangsters in New York during its heyday and the source of
patronage and power on which the Democratic Party rests,” Walsh explained.He said the Democratic Party’s win-at-all-cost attitude led to the creation of political machines that ran big-city politics for years.
“I think what’s interesting about the Roosevelt era – if you go back to the
’20s and ’30s when you have basically Hoover and Roosevelt – it’s also the time
of the great gangster empires in America,” he said. “It’s when organized crime
was really founded. That occurred in 1929 in Atlantic City, when every great
gangster from all the ethnic groups came to Atlantic City and they split up the
country into zones of influence. But they were very political as well, and the
gangsters tended to be Democrats. Except for the Republican mayor of Atlantic
City, ‘Nucky’ Johnson, it’s hard to think of a gangster who was not a Democrat.
They were very influential in getting Roosevelt nominated.
“In 1932, Al Smith had thought he had their allegiance, but they
double-crossed him and they thought they’d get off easy with Roosevelt, who then
promptly double-crossed the gangsters and sent Tom Dewey after them in the great
clean-up of gangs in the ’20s and ’30s.“But the party has always been in bed with this sort of criminal element, and sometimes a seditious criminal element. That was also true in the Roosevelt administration, where a number of Roosevelt administration officials turned out, subsequently, to have been Soviet agents of influence. Again, it’s not a pretty sight.”
Walsh said President Harry Truman, when he came up in politics in Kansas City, was the bag man for the great criminal Irish gangster who ran the city, Tom Pendergast.
“Truman never lost his affection for Pendergast,” he said. “Even after he was
finally brought to justice and sent to jail, Truman admired him very much.”
He said the father of John F. Kennedy had been very much in league with
gangsters, including Owney Madden, the biggest bootlegger and politically
influential gangster in New York City.“There’s always this sub current running underneath the Democratic presidents,” Walsh said. “The party got seized in 1968 in the streets of Chicago during the riots … and is now basically turned into the McGovern-Alinsky group that runs the country today.”
In his book, “The People v. the Democratic Party,” Walsh writes, “With Obama in office, all Washington is a skating rink on which characters like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd turn triple-Lutzes while their media cronies applaud like the Harvard-trained seals that many of them are.”
In the WND interview, Walsh indicted his former colleagues in the mainstream media for doing little more than carrying water for their preferred candidates and issues.
“What’s left of the mainstream media is a pretty hard-core group of leftists whose life’s work and ambition is to promote their agenda,” he said. “And they’re doing a good job of it. It’s just that they’re losing their influence, and I think they’ll continue to lose it as the public realizes they’re not playing straight with them anymore.”
“There is a natural order to this world, and those who try to upend it do not fare well” – Cloud Atlas Trailer
Posted by BH
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR FZTV
“There is a natural order to this world, and those who try to upend it do not fare well” – Cloud Atlas Trailer
Posted on July 31, 2012 by willyloman
I never promote anything on this site and I’m certainly not paid
to do this but after all the time I have spent flushing out the steady
stream of sophomoric, ham-handed propaganda coming out of Hollywood
these days, it’s nice to sit back and present this extended trailer for a
film that appears to be written at above a 6th grader’s comprehension
level which would appear to present an idea wholly different that the
“dog eat dog” ideology of neo-liberalism and libertarianism and
corporatism that we are fed day in and day out. It’s nice every now and
again, to focus on art that lifts rather than degrades. According to the
directors it took them a year to get a Hollywood studio to take this
film.
From the creators of the Matrix… Cloud Atlas
I believe there is another world, a better world. I’ll be waiting for you there
Dawood National Military Hospital, Afghanistan: What Happened and What Went Wrong?
Posted by BH
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR FZTV
Dawood National Military Hospital, Afghanistan: What Happened and What Went Wrong?
Posted on July 31, 2012 by willyloman
by Scott Creighton
Perhaps the most horrific story on the brutality of the Afghan
occupation that you are going to see all year. They tried to cover it up
for various reasons; they didn’t want bad press coming out of
Afghanistan and at least one 3 star general didn’t want to embarrass
President Obama before the election. An 11.2 billion dollar training
program paid for by the US taxpayers. The hospital is run at a level of
malfeasance that goes well beyond what any sane person would call
corruption. Doctors and nurses forcing the families of the soldiers to
pay brides for the treatment of their loved ones. Medications being
routinely sold on the black market to the tune of hundreds of millions
of dollars. Death squads roaming the hallways…. all of this under the
watchful eye of the US trainers who were there and on staff. The photos
at the Information Clearinghouse site (link below) are grotesque to say
the least. And this went on for years. Gen. Petraeus was apparently
briefed on this years ago and did nothing. He now runs the CIA as a
proxy for Panetta. The conditions these soldiers were kept in rivals
anything that I have heard of being done to POWs in Vietnam or even
Japan.
Colonel Gerald Nicholas Carozza: “Patients were lying in filth, in some cases starving and with grotesque bed sores. One patient was on the brink of starving to death.”…
…“The Patients’ Bill of Rights posters were found ripped off the walls lying on the ground torn to pieces ‘to allow for painting of the walls.’”…
…Colonel Schuyler K. Geller: “Afghan soldiers’ families have sold their farms and indentured themselves for healthcare in the US- and coalition-supported Daoud Khan Hospital.”
This story is getting very little attention from the MSM. Here is the hearing…
The Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense, and Foreign Operations held a hearing entitled, “Dawood National Military Hospital, Afghanistan: What Happened and What Went Wrong?” on July 24, 2012.
DOING'S IN DALLAS AND GBTV
Posted by BH
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR FZTV & GBTV AND RESTORING LOVE WEEK IN DALLAS
~~~
~~~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
