Ladies and Gentlemen:

A very disturbing, but reality based report on the decline of household median annual incomes, down 8%. I’ll catch you on the other side of this report with more of my views.

Median household incomes fell by another 1.1% in August, according to a Sentier Research report released Tuesday.

by Tony Lee

September 26, 2012

“Since Obama took office, according to the report, household incomes are down more than 8%. And since the economic recovery began in June of 2009, household incomes have fallen by 5.7%. 

“Even though we are technically in an economic recovery, real median annual household income is having a difficult time maintaining its present level, much less recovering,” said Sentier co-founder and former Census Bureau official Gordon Green.

These figures come as, Business Insider notes, the Census Bureau released its annual report showing three million more people were in poverty in 2011 than 2009, and the “average inflation-adjusted income for households in the middle 20% is now lower than it’s been since 1995.”

In addition, The Health Care Cost Institute released a report that found “per-capita costs jumped 4.6% last year,” and a Center for Disease Control and Prevention report found there were more than one million uninsured Americans in the first three months of 2012 compared with last year.”

Gasoline, thus far, has increased 107% in its cost, since President Obama took office. Why?  Why doesn’t Obama allow the Keystone pipeline project to move forward? It is not because of ideological differences with others. It is because he wants to hold the majority of the nation in economic slavery through increased energy costs.

Obama said that the nation’s electricity costs would “necessarily skyrocket.” He has certainly kept that promise.

The median income decreased from $54,000 and change when Obama took office to $51,000.00 and change currently. That’s a drop of $4000.00 in real income.

Keeping as much of one’s paycheck as one can is what I’m for. I am not against taxes. We must have a certain amount for the government to function, whether it be local, state or otherwise. What I am against is the absurdity of the amount taken and the justifications given to ask for more than is needed. That is what is absurd. That is part of, what I call, “economic slavery.”

If my teenage grandson was earning $100.00 a month when Obama was inaugurated in January of 2009, then discovers, to his own surprise, that his paycheck has shrunk to $92.00 for the same amount of work four years later, do you think he would wonder about that? Maybe he would or maybe he wouldn’t. What happened to his paycheck is still real though. He’ll eventually make the connections and figure out what to do about it.

I know what to do about it. My vote is going to Romney. I want my grandson to have his $100.00 plus more purchasing power back. You’ll never get that with Obama. You’ll certainly get it with Romney.

Has anybody wondered or asked  about the ironic silence of the media occurring under President Obama regarding the Afghanistan war? There’s good reason, for Obama anyway.

Reporter Tony Lee from Brietbart.com explains below, with data, information the mainstream media is purposefully ignoring. Obama would need to be accountable for these figures; hence, they are being kept away from public discussion. This article is dated September 11, 2012:

“……………..more U.S. soldiers have been killed and wounded during President Barack Obama’s first term in office than former President George W. Bush’s two terms. And the anti-war mainstream media that regularly counted the number of deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan under Bush, for the most part, has been silent on the number of deaths and casualties that have resulted under Obama.

Under former President George W. Bush, 575 American soldiers died and fewer than 3,000 were wounded in Afghanistan. This means under Obama, at least 1,405 soldiers have died and nearly 15,000 additional soldiers have been wounded, which means 70% of the deaths  and nearly 80% of the injuries in Afghanistan have occurred under Obama’s watch.

In 2010, Obama sent 33,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan as part of the “surge,” and Americans have been received with more hostility with each passing day. In June, Obama announced he would accelerate the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan, and America would transfer security duties to the Afghans in 2014.

Because Obama is a Democrat, the media has been reluctant to shine more of a light on Afghanistan’s destabilization under Obama. Perhaps the media is afraid that such reports would make Americans question whether Obama has mismanaged the Afghanistan war like he has the economy. Or maybe the media does not want to report on anything that would make Democrats seem weak on national security, as was the case when Bill Clinton was president.

For whatever reason, the mainstream media is not reporting the striking increase in deaths and casualties in Afghanistan under Obama, again helping Obama through their omissions.”

These are unbelievable statistics. On his Sept.24, 2012 morning radio program, Glenn Beck stated that college tuition is going up 25%. Why is that? Does Obama want to make collegiate education so expensive that people who normally would have gone to college are now forfeiting that opportunity? Is this increased cost in education a devious way of dumbing down America for the democrat party political gain? Oh sure the democrat party says that they want educated voters but their actions show otherwise.

We have not heard from the mainstream media about these unbelievable numbers on the Afghan war and all the associated costs in lives etc. We heard the numbers reported under Bush II though. Wonder when the reporting hypocrisy will end? For an administration that applauds transparency from the outside, there has been little quality work done on the inside to affect changes Obama says he wants.

Translation: The President lies a lot. We, the American people, don’t call him out on it. We just let it go. I hope our passive behavior doesn’t keep him in office.

Republicans are getting depressed under an avalanche of polling suggesting that an Obama victory is in the offing. They, in fact, suggest no such thing! Here’s why:

1. All of the polling out there uses some variant of the 2008 election turnout as its model for weighting respondents and this overstates the Democratic vote by a huge margin.

In English, this means that when you do a poll you ask people if they are likely to vote. But any telephone survey always has too few blacks, Latinos, and young people and too many elderly in its sample. That’s because some don’t have landlines or are rarely at home or don’t speak English well enough to be interviewed or don’t have time to talk. Elderly are overstated because they tend to be home and to have time. So you need to increase the weight given to interviews with young people, blacks and Latinos and count those with seniors a bit less.

Normally, this task is not difficult. Over the years, the black, Latino, young, and elderly proportion of the electorate has been fairly constant from election to election, except for a gradual increase in the Hispanic vote. You just need to look back at the last election to weight your polling numbers for this one.

But 2008 was no ordinary election. Blacks, for example, usually cast only 11% of the vote, but, in 2008, they made up 14% of the vote. Latinos increased their share of the vote by 1.5% and college kids almost doubled their vote share. Almost all pollsters are using the 2008 turnout models in weighting their samples. Rasmussen, more accurately, uses a mixture of 2008 and 2004 turnouts in determining his sample. That’s why his data usually is better for Romney.

But polling indicates a widespread lack of enthusiasm among Obama’s core demographic support due to high unemployment, disappointment with his policies and performance, and the lack of novelty in voting for a black candidate now that he has already served as president.

If you adjust virtually any of the published polls to reflect the 2004 vote, not the 2008 vote, they show the race either tied or Romney ahead, a view much closer to reality.

2. Almost all of the published polls show Obama getting less than 50% of the vote and less than 50% job approval. A majority of the voters either support Romney or are undecided in almost every poll.

But the fact is that the undecided vote always goes against the incumbent. In 1980 (the last time an incumbent Democrat was beaten), for example, the Gallup Poll of October 27th had Carter ahead by 45-39. Their survey on November 2nd showed Reagan catching up and leading by three points. In the actual voting, the Republican won by nine. The undecided vote broke sharply — and unanimously — for the challenger.

An undecided voter has really decided not to back the incumbent. He just won’t focus on the race until later in the game.

So, when the published poll shows Obama ahead by, say, 48-45, he’s really probably losing by 52-48!

Add these two factors together and the polls that are out there are all misleading. Any professional pollster (those consultants hired by candidates not by media outlets) would publish two findings for each poll — one using 2004 turnout modeling and the other using 2008 modeling. This would indicate just how dependent on an unusually high turnout of his base the Obama camp really is.

(Reuters) – A coal-fired power plant in Billings, Montana, will be mothballed starting in April 2015 because it will cost too much to comply with new emissions reductions required by the government, plant owner and operator PPL Montana said on Wednesday.

“Our detailed analysis has shown that to meet the emission reductions required by EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, we would need to invest $38 million in the Corette plant,” the company said in a statement.

“We simply cannot justify that level of spending in the current wholesale power market in the Northwest,” it added.

The plant will then be placed in reserve status, commonly called mothballing. Mothballing the Corette plant, rather than shutting it down permanently, gives PPL Montana the opportunity to resume operations at some point if conditions change.

PPL Montana is a subsidiary of PPL Corp.

This is one of 204 coal plants planning to shut down. I wonder if Obama has used what I call “thin air authority?” My definition of “thin air authority” is simply fabricated authority. Authority not delegated or even available, via the Constitution, but made out of “thin air” and implemented as if the authority always existed. Gee, that sounds like Obama’s modus operandi!!

Was there such latitude for the EPA to rightfully decide what they did in this case? I really wonder, are they stretching themselves to fit the circumstances to bring forth their desired outcome?

Obama stated in the beginning, when he was the Democratic nominee, that under his administration energy prices will “necessarily skyrocket.”  We got a warning; energy was going to be more expensive for us instead of cheaper to purchase. Shutting down 204 coal plants over the next several years is part of the strategy.

I have wondered, why hasn’t Reagan or Bush Sr. called for these shut downs? Even during the Clinton and Bush Jr. years we did not see these coal powered plants in danger. Now, all of a sudden we have 204 coal plants on the chopping block under Obama. Don’t you think there’s something wrong with that picture? I do.

Something is very fishy here, but, my hope is that coal does not go by the wayside.

 This is a perplexing time we live in, especially under President Obama. I will describe eleven incidents, among many others, which have come to recent memory and given me a total migraine [figuratively]. Hope you have better insight into our president when I’m done. 

1) There’s communists in the White House. We have members of the Muslim Brotherhood there as well.

2) QE3 has passed, now we’re printing money. Mitt Romney called Ben Bernanke and asked him not to start the printing because our money would have less value. The plea fell on deaf ears. When Romney wins Bernanke is gone.

3) Obamacare became law of the land. This is an interesting one. At one point 63% of our nation rejected this horrible idea. Look at what happened, even though the nation spoke  out overwhelmingly against it. In Missouri, for example, 71% of the voters were clear, they did not want it. Clearly Obama is not listening and does not care for the needs of the nation. It is his socialist agenda that matters and nothing else.

4)  School lunch menus have been altered across the nation through Michelle Obama’s persistent efforts for mandatory veggies and other federal changes. While I agree that children should have a balanced diet at school as well as other places, it is education and the freedom to choose either direction on this issue which matters, not the King George III of England recipe that the government knows better than you. If you are not well versed in the science of nutrition, then LEARN IT.

5) What about 20 oz. sodas being illegal in New York City? A stupid mass suggestion by the way, carried out by no one other than Mayor “I am a republican progressive” Bloomberg. He’s the mayor who thinks you don’t know how to put your pants on correctly. I put mine on one leg at a time, don’t you? 

6) There has been an attack on religion nationwide. What about that major tiff between the Catholics and the administration? What of Obama’s attachment to Reverend Wright and his “liberation theology?” On several occasions, that I am aware of, President Obama has left out the phrase “one nation under God” while pledging allegiance to the flag. Isn’t that odd? Where is his allegiance? Is it to Indonesia, to the USA or someone or something else?

7) Obama’s not cool, he’s slick. There is quite a difference. He’s not suave, he’s got swagger. He’s not secure within himself, he’s a needy narcissist. 

8) The Sandra Fluke fiasco. She’s a thirty something activist, fronted by the Obama campaign to create this false “War On Women” theme. Didn’t you know the taxpayer should pay for her contraceptives? It’s the right thing to do! So she said before Congress. Yeah, right.

Try this novel thought on for size: if she wants contraceptives, why doesn’t she just go to the store and buy them herself instead of sticking the taxpayer with the bill? Oh, I know why. She needs her “mommy” to hold her hand at the store, where the needed supply for her carnal appitite exists, and say, “that’s alright dear, we’ll make it through the shopping line.”  She’s a taker.   

9) There’s the Libyan incident which left four of our brethren dead, including Ambassador Stevens. Reports have emerged that information was given to the government up to three days in advance of the attack. What a sickening scenario, if there’s confirmation of its truthfulness. They could’ve gotten everyone out of there and safe, ahead of time. Instead they’re all dead. A horrible outcome with a very disturbing uncertainty attached to its future. Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, we salute you with heavy hearts.

10) What about the latest incident with Israel? President Obama denies Prime Minister Netanyahu an audience with him because he must travel to see David Letterman and go to a fundraiser in Las Vegas. These meetings were easily postponable. Instead, why does the President stiff arm the Israeli prime minister during one of Israel’s most urgent times of need? Is Obama that stupid or does he really want Israel to be annihilated at the hands of Iran? Very unwise move Mr. President.

11) Highjacking Of The Supreme Court: If President Obama receives another term from the American people, the Supreme Court Of The United States could become a nest of liberals interpreting the law. Try this on for size: A modified version of the 9th Circut in San Francisco sitting on the final of finals bench. That, my fellow Americans is very scary.  

These are some of the reasons why Barack Hussein Obama cannot be permitted to bring us further down to a figurative hell. Most importantly, he’s spending money we don’t have. This is both moral and fiscal irresponsibility. The best predictor of future behavior are past actions.

He is certainly unfit to govern the country. Release him now and bid him farewell.

by Jim Valenti   9/10/2012

Here we go again. The leftist ACLU is going beserk.

The ACLU has filed suit against the House of Worship Protection Act passed by the Missouri legislature and signed by Governor Jay Nixon. This law became effective on August 28, 2012.

Joe Ortwerth of The Missouri Family Policy Council recently wrote the following synopsis of the law. The synopsis states:

“The law makes it an offense to intentionally disrupt a worship service, or to intimidate or interfere with any person seeking to exercise their right to religious freedom in a house of worship. The House of Worship Protection Act was designed to deter incidents staged by homosexual rights groups and other activists who invade churches during worship services and engage in disruptive protests……The Missouri Family Policy Council is working with the Missouri Attoney General’s Office to see that these religious liberty laws are vigorously and capably defended.”

To be clear, this is already  Missouri state law. The ACLU has a legal right to challenge, if they so choose, and they have. However,  this lawsuit is foolish and incredibly dumb.

The ACLU may feel they are doing justice to the state by participating in this circus, but, instead, they create deep division.

This case is an affront to many Missourians. It is frivolous, time wasting and a people and monetary resource drain. I hope a judge who presides over this hearing and/or trial will independently and fairly recognize the malevolence before him or her and throw the case out of court.

In an August 25, 2005 article, Alan Sears, a former federal prosecutor during the Reagan era, explains the true history and deceptive and evil purpose of the ACLU:

“One of the great myths of the 20th–and now 21st century, is the belief that the American Civil Liberties Union was an organization that had a noble beginning, but somehow strayed off course. The myth is untrue. The ACLU set a course to destroy America—right from the start. From its very beginning, the ACLU had strong socialist and communist ties.  As early as 1931, the U. S. Congress was alarmed by the ACLU’s devotion to communism.”

That’s evil alright. When your organization, from the very beginning of its history, has detailed designs to destroy America, that’s beyond evil, that’s treasonous. Yet, the communist leaning ACLU walks into our courtrooms daily, defending diverse forms of  debauchery in the name of the precious freedoms built within our constitution. My guess is that most of their lawyers are unaware of the odious origin of the ACLU.

The ACLU has earned the privilege of oral argument in front of a judge or jury, defending the most liberalized, insidious concerns imaginable. If you or I did what the ACLU has been able to do, we would be in Alcatraz. Swimming in shark infested waters with zero chance of survival would be better than a trip to Alcatraz with treason as the main conviction.

Where are our “right thinking” legal scholars to combat such progressivism in the courts?

Mr. Sears continues: “Roger Baldwin and Crystal Eastman founded the ACLU in 1920 along with three other organizations dedicated to the most leftist of causes. The histories of these two individuals belie their claims of patriotism and respect for the Constitution. Baldwin openly sought the utter destruction of American society.

“………Baldwin wrote: “ I am for Socialism, disarmament and ultimately, for the abolishing of the State itself…..I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and the sole control of those who produce wealth.” That is beyond abhorrent.

Mr. Baldwin was also an admirer of Margret Sanger, Planned Parenthood founder. What sickening company to be in, but, evil continues to beget evil, even when its genesis is evil.

A final paragraph from this article I would like to share with you. Mr. Sears expresses the following:

“While many accept the ACLU as a mainstream organization, their history tells a drastically different story. Organizations such as the Alliance Defense Fund are dedicated to exposing the myth that the ACLU is working hard for the First Amendment rights of Americans.

Instead of being an organization that simply took a “wrong turn” the ACLU has devoted itself from the very beginning to the devastation of America’s most cherished traditions, values and laws.”

I have learned through reading and discussion with others more intelligent than I in these matters, that the ACLU is and has been intent since its organizational birth in 1920, to ruin America and her inspired purpose.

Be wary of the occasional good that might come from this evil empire called the ACLU.

The ACLU uses their rare sprinkles of “doing what is right” for society as a vehicle  to continue to deceive and disguise their true purposes. Their reasons for existing are to change and destroy America and her holy principles as we know them.

While this is a hard truth, we must face it. The ACLU, as an organization, was never and isn’t interested in the “first amendment rights” of Americans. In my humble opinion, one of its subversive goals is to turn the first amendment on its head and leave this nation thoroughly confused about the first amendment.

Watch out for the wolf in sheep’s clothing. It’s here.

The complete article Mr. Allan Sears wrote can be read at http://www.wnd.com/2005/08/31979

Apologies to anyone who may have wondered if I forgot to write more regarding our president. I did not, but, my computer blew up between the time I went to bed Thursday nite and woke up Friday morning. Probably my punishment for watching Obama speak Thursday night.

I wanted to present you with some hard facts. These facts are presented in the context of a THEN and NOW continuim. These stats were obtained from the Sept. 2nd, 2012 progam of FOX NEWS SUNDAY. These facts were presented when David Axelrod, chief campaign manager for the Obama clan, was on the program.

The sources of this information come from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics  [BLS], Sentler Research, Dept. Of Energy  [DOE] and the Dept. Of United States Treasury.

These facts are when Obama was inagurated until the Sept. 02, 2012 FOX NEWS SUNDAY report.

Obams takes office——————THEN                            NOW

UNEMPLOYMENT                         7.8%                                    8.3%

Median Household Income           $54,983                            $50,964      [$4,019.00 drop]

Gasoline                                    $1.85/gal                      $3.78/gal [$1.93 per gallon increase]

National Debt                        $10.6 trillion                    $15.9 trillion    [over 16 trillion now]

Business leaders make decisions on a number of factors when it comes to hiring and firing people. If Obama was a CEO of a very reputable company and his Board of Governors read these statistics about their company, they would have fired him yesterday and he would be out looking for work immediately. You can’t run a business like that. Customers would wonder what planet you came from.

The current national Hispanic unemployment rate is 10.3%. That’s 2 full percentage points above the national average. If you factor in what FOX calls Discouraged Workers the rate jumps from 10.3% to 19%. That’s almost double the amount for our hispanic brothers and sisters.

Obama opposes the Keystone oil pipeline. One story estimates between 10,000-20,000 jobs would be created. Why is Obama opposing such a move? Because this is one of many steps he wants to take to downgrade American exceptionalism and keep us equal among all nations. Sorry, it ain’t gonna happen in spite of us going ever deeper down the road of socialism. See a pattern here?

Don’t get sick over all these numbers, just wonder when 2016 comes where gas prices will be or if the debt will continue to increase. Will your income increase or decrease? What about employment figures 4 years out? Up or down? I contend it depends what man we choose to become the next CEO of the nation. I want Romney.

Obama must learn to do what is right for this nation. He is a selfish, self-centered, arrogant national CEO. His arrogance and self-centeredness is mistakenly described as being cool.He has little concern for this nation. His only objective is to satisfy the oligarchs currently pulling the puppet strings for his presidency.

Talk to you soon.

“In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate –look to his character.” –Noah Webster (1789)

It is interesting to me that in 1789 we become instructed on what to look for in a candidate for office at any level of government. We must be thorough, selecting and electing individuals of principle, virtue, wisdom and a moral compass; for city, county, state and national offices won through the honest election process. People need not be perfect; they must, however, have the heart of a pure servant and the humility and willingness to receive instructions from Heaven.

We must retain those men and women who naturally lend themselves to constitutional, moral and upright behavior. Whose hearts and voices reach in mighty prayer to God for assistance in their daily duties to this country, particularly the district, region, city or county office with which they have been temporarily entrusted.

Speaking about the privilege of voting and its moral implications, one of our founding fathers, Noah Webster, said this in “Noah Webster, History of The United States, 1832″:

“When you become entitled to exercise the right of voting for public officers, let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers, “just men who rule in the fear [love] of God.”

“The preservation of our government depends on the faithful discharge of this duty; if the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will not be made for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the laws; the public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizen will be violated and disregarded.”

Electing good, upright men to office in this great land is a holy and moral responsibility. That means that we, the people, must do our due diligence. Then, after due consideration, vote responsibly for the person or people who are most principled and wise. Those who commit to continually educate themselves on the issues and use their ongoing constitutional education as a guide for their decisions, shall have success in the office unto which they are elected or appointed.

As we come closer to this presidential election, I would ask that we remember our time to vote as a sacred, yet expected responsibility. Our rights come from God, not some institution of our government. To whom much is given, much is expected.

The federal government was created purposefully; through the people, with structurally limited capacities and purposes, for the benefit and blessing of our country.  It must be reduced to those restricted boundaries once again for its service to remain honest and effective for the nation.  

“In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate –look to his character.” –Noah Webster (1789)