Bloomberg Banning Baby Formula – To force Woman to Breast feed Babies

July 30, 2012 in Uncategorized

Bloomberg wants To force Woman to Breast feed Babies By  Banning Baby Formula – Bob Beckel Ask Andrea Tantaros if She Breast Fed.
Nanny State!!

New York Mayor Bloomberg wants to HIDE baby formula in hospitals to put pressure on new mothers to breastfeed

Mayor Bloomberg has demanded that hospitals stop handing out baby formula to persuade more new mothers to breastfeed their babies.

The New York City health department will monitor the number of formula bottles being given out and demand a medical reason for each one.

From September 3, 27 out of 40 hospitals in the city have agreed to the terms of the Latch On initiative – which will also see them stop handing out free bags of formula and bottles.


Read more:

“Bubba” Clinton to the Rescue

July 30, 2012 in Uncategorized

Barack Hussein Obama and his calculating spouse have read the tea leaves and as downright dreadful as it will be, they have apparently made a back door deal with the Clintons to save his second term. The quid pro quo goes something like this. You, “Bubba”, like the snake charmer that you are, deceive our Democrat and Independent voters into electing me to a second term and Hillary gets her sought after nomination in 2016, without any Obama opposition.

It would appear that we are witnessing a double Machiavellian deal that has been struck between the Obamas and Clintons .The only potential losers being Freedom and Liberty loving Americans.  If we are charmed and Obama were to gain a second term, he would continue his onslaught against our Constitution and against our US Sovereignty, towards a One-World Government.  It is a theme that these elitists have been proclaiming for more than half a century. More recently we have, Bush 43, “Bubba”, Hillary, and Obama openly proclaiming the virtues of a world where there is no religious, political or economic conflict because they will all be regulated by government. My guess is that Bush 43 was just an unwitting accomplice .

I guess the question of the day is, will the propaganda and deception work? Have we as a nation become so intellectually dumbed down and so easily manipulated that the Obamas’ and Clintons’ are so self assured about the outcome that they are willing to bet their futures on it.

Canada Close To Going With China due to Our denial Of Keyston Oil Pipe Line

July 30, 2012 in Uncategorized

China’s CNOOC Ltd. (0883.HK) said Monday it has reached an agreement to acquire Canadian oil and gas producer Nexen Inc. (NXY) for $15.1 billion in cash.

In China’s biggest overseas energy acquisition to-date, CNOOC will pay $27.50 per share for Nexen, representing a 61% premium to their closing price on Friday on the New York Stock Exchange.

State-owned CNOOC is China’s largest offshore oil company. The deal will give it ownership of oil and gas reserves in western Canada, the U.K. North Sea, the Gulf of Mexico and offshore Nigeria.
In 2012, approximately 70% of Nexen’s output is expected to come from offshore fields, according to Nexen’s website, making it a good fit for the Chinese company’s offshore fields. In 2011, Nexen produced around 207,000 barrels a day of oil equivalent.

Nexen, which describes itself as a major player in Canada’s oilsands sector, is also a producer of shale gas, in northeastern British Columbia.

In a statement on the Hong Kong stock exchange, CNOOC said it will fund the deal through existing cash resources and external financing. Nexen’s current debt of around $4.3 billion will remain outstanding, CNOOC said.

If the deal is approved by Nexen shareholders, Nexen will become a wholly owned subsidiary of CNOOC, the statement said.

Write to Aaron Back at

Subscribe to WSJ:

Copyright © 2012 Dow Jones Newswires
Read more:

Gov. Deval Patrick Shirks his Oath to Enforce New EBT Legislation

July 30, 2012 in Uncategorized

Gov. Deval Patrick: EBT enforcement ‘not feasible’

Gov. Deval Patrick joins His Comrade in Arms Barack Hussein Obama by similarly shirking his Oath to Support the “Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts… and the Laws” by Refusing to Enforce the Newly Enacted EBT law.

This is nothing new to either Governor Patrick nor President Obama. They are both extreme “Ideologues” that are willing to defy their oaths and their duties as Chief Executives to enforce legislative mandates. The Governor’s lame justification that it’s “not feasible” to ban EBT purchases of frills such as liquor, cigarettes, lottery tickets, tattoos and bail are absurd. Private sector corporations already utilize readily available software to restrict  the use of their corporate cards. When are the majority of sheepeople going to wake up and finally elect leaders that will enforce our State and Federal laws based upon our  Constitutions and not on the whim of  an incumbent seeking favor. 

By John Zaremba
Saturday, July 28, 2012 – Updated 2 days ago

A defiant Gov. Deval Patrick finally signed a welfare reform bill into law yesterday — only to say he won’t enforce key parts of the measure, drawing the wrath of lawmakers working to crack down on widespread abuses of the system.

Patrick, in a letter to lawmakers, said it’s “not feasible” to ban EBT purchases of frills such as liquor, cigarettes, lottery tickets and tattoos — and that “this administration will not enforce what cannot be enforced with respect to the use of EBT cards.”

“He’s saying he’s not going to enforce the law. That’s a first for me,” said state Rep. Shaunna O’Connell (R-Taunton), who is leading the charge for reform.


“Just because we don’t have somebody to follow every person around doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have rules in place, or that we shouldn’t tell people they can’t purchase certain items,” O’Connell said.

The bill signing caps weeks of political strife that pitted Patrick against both houses of the Legislature. The governor vetoed the reforms altogether July 8, sending them back to the House and Senate and asking lawmakers to remove the specific-item ban.

Patrick said the independent EBT Card Commission — which was created after a series of Herald stories exposing abuses — ruled out forbidding certain items “for reasons of feasibility, enforceability (and) cost,” and that any lawmaker who thought otherwise was guilty of “political grandstanding.”

That set off a snit between the governor and legislative leaders, who brushed off Patrick’s recommendations and sent the reforms back unchanged.

“The Legislature did not accept the Governor’s sensible changes. He signed the package today in order to protect the measures that can effectively prevent abuse,” Patrick spokeswoman Kimberly Haberlin said.

House Speaker Robert A. Deleo gave half-hearted praise, saying Patrick was right to sign the bill but wrong to take a pass on the item ban. “We applaud the governor for signing the EBT reform legislation into law and expect him to fully enforce it,” DeLeo (D-Winthrop) said in a statement.

The new law also forbids the use of so-called Electronic Benefits Transfer cards at casinos, strip clubs, jewelry shops, nail salons, rental centers and cruise ships. The Patrick administration said it will enforce that part of the law.

“The Governor supports anti-fraud and waste measures that are effective. That’s why he approves banning establishments where EBT cards can be used. Restricting individual purchases is difficult if not impossible to enforce due to a lack of technology and the expense for retailers,” Haberlin said.

Also yesterday, Patrick shot down a bill that would require proof of legal U.S. residency to register a car.

“This bill appears to be aimed at using the RMV to identify and police undocumented people. This is an inappropriate purpose,” Patrick said in his letter to lawmakers. “The recent ruling of the United States Supreme Court, striking down most of Arizona’s anti-immigrant law, underscores the importance of states treading lightly in the enforcement of federal immigration rules.”


In a Strange Mix of Bedfellows Senator Scott Brown Backs Mumbles Menino and Disses Chick-fil-A

July 29, 2012 in Uncategorized

President Obama’s  utter disregard for our Constitution has now migrated to the lower echelons of our government bureaucracy.  The chief of the Boston Patronage Machine, the inimitable Mayor “Mumbles” Menino, flexed his unconstitutional authority in an attempt to deny Chick-fil-A from opening a store in Boston. Menino’s rebuke is ostensibly because of the company’s “Christian values”.

In usual far-left fashion, Chicago’s Mayor Rahm Emanuel came out and backed Mumbles assault on Chick-fil-A, saying in a statement that Chick-fil-A would be unwelcome in his city.

Then of all people, Senator Scott Brown comes to the inimitable Mayor Menino’s aid and wrote from in his South Boston Headquarters that “I disagree with what the CEO from Chick-fil-A said. I was glad he spoke further and said that his company does not discriminate.” Come on Senator, you know better than to conjure up unjustifiable images of discrimination.

What Dan Cathy, president of the Christen rooted Atlanta-based company, said in an interview is that,  “we’re inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage.”  Cathy’s father founded the chain and instilled biblically-based principles in its operations, including the practice of closing on Sundays in respect to the Christian day of worship.

Oh my gosh! A chain that closes on Sundays to respect biblical teachings and supports biblically based tenets! These guys must be a threat to our National Security so to hell with their 1st Amendment Rights! 

Enter stage left, Mayor Michael Bloomberg who appears to arrive from a SYFY Episode because he disagrees with Mumbles and sides with Chicken-fil-A and their incontrovertible right under our Constitution to operate a store  in Boston.
video platform video management video solutions video player
Even stranger than Mayor Bloomberg’s SYFY Episode is the Boston Globe’s editorial statement that, “The president of Chick-fil-A opposes gay marriage. While this view goes against the grain in a state that made history by embracing it, it’s no reason for Mayor Thomas M. Menino to oppose a Chick-fil-A restaurant in Boston.”

This episode once again proves that politics can indeed be stranger than fiction!

Chineese co Buying Canadian Oil Co After Obama Blocks Keystone PipeLine – Our National Security At Risk

July 28, 2012 in Uncategorized

Chineese co Buying Canadian Oil Co After Obama Blocks Keystone PipeLine
Obama Blocks Keystone PipeLine & Jobs & Now China Taking Advantage

Our National Security At Risk


Oregon Man Sentenced to 30 Days in Jail — for Collecting Rainwater on His Property

July 28, 2012 in Uncategorized

( – A rural Oregon man was sentenced Wednesday to 30 days in jail and over $1,500 in fines because he had three reservoirs on his property to collect and use rainwater.

Gary Harrington of Eagle Point, Ore., says he plans to appeal his conviction in Jackson County (Ore.) Circuit Court on nine misdemeanor charges under a 1925 law for having what state water managers called “three illegal reservoirs” on his property – and for filling the reservoirs with rainwater and snow runoff.

“The government is bullying,” Harrington told in an interview Thursday.

U.N. Arms Treaty Fail For Now!

July 27, 2012 in Uncategorized

UN fails to reach deal on global arms trade treaty, as US asks for more time

Published July 27, 2012

UNITED NATIONS –  U.N. member states have failed to reach agreement on a new treaty to regulate the multibillion-dollar global arms trade.   Some diplomats and treaty supporters blamed the United States for triggering the unraveling of the month-long negotiating conference.

Hopes had been raised that agreement could be reached on a revised treaty text that closed some key loopholes by Friday’s deadline for action. But the United States announced Friday morning that it needed more time to consider the proposed treaty — and Russia and China then also asked for more time.   A bipartisan group of 51 U.S. senators on Thursday had threatened to oppose the global treaty regulating international weapons trade if it falls short in protecting the constitutional right to bear arms.   In a letter to President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the senators expressed serious concerns with the draft treaty that has circulated at the United Nations, saying that it signals an expansion of gun control that would be unacceptable.   The Constitution’s Second Amendment offers broad protection for weapons ownership by civilians. As recently as 2008, the Supreme Court affirmed it when it struck down a ban on handguns in the District of Columbia, ruling that individuals have a constitutional right to keep guns for self-defense and other purposes.   The court also has ruled separately that treaty obligations may not infringe on individual constitutional protections and rights within U.S. borders. This goes back at least to a 1920 ruling that a migratory bird treaty with Canada, which prohibited the hunting or capturing of certain birds, was an unconstitutional interference with states’ rights under the 10th Amendment.   Treaties are government-to-government agreements and do not subject citizens of one nation to laws of another or to those of an outside body.   Also, the U.N. resolution that authorized drafting of the small arms treaty recognizes the clear-cut right of nations “to regulate internal transfers of arms” and says nothing in the treaty that emerges will affect “constitutional protections on private ownership” of firearms.   Beyond that, there are many court rulings spelling out the limits of treaties. And if an act of Congress is inconsistent with a treaty obligation, the law passed by Congress prevails. Legal scholars say this has been well established.     The U.N. General Assembly voted in December 2006 to work toward a treaty regulating the growing arms trade, with the U.S. casting a “no” vote. In October 2009, the Obama administration reversed the Bush administration’s position and supported an assembly resolution to hold four preparatory meetings and a four-week U.N. conference in 2012 to draft an arms trade treaty.     The United States insisted that a treaty had to be approved by the consensus of all 193 U.N. member states.     Ambassador Roberto Garcia Moritan, the conference chairman, said treaty supporters knew “this was going to be difficult to achieve” and there were some delegations that didn’t like the draft though “the overwhelming majority in the room did.” He added that some countries from the beginning of negotiations had “different views” on a treaty, including Syria, Iran and North Korea.     Despite the failure to reach agreement, Moritan predicted that “we certainly are going to have a treaty in 2012.”     He said there are several options for moving forward in the General Assembly which will be considered over the summer, before the world body’s new session begins in September.     Britain has taken the lead in pushing for a treaty to reduce the impact of the illicit arms trade.     Ahead of Friday’s meeting, Britain’s Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg discussed treaty prospects with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in London and told reporters and both urged the treaty’s adoption.     “Global rules govern the sale of everything from bananas to endangered species to weapons of mass destruction, but not guns or grenades,” Clegg said. “This anomaly causes untold suffering in conflicts around the world. 1,000 people are killed daily by small arms wielded by terrorists, insurgents and criminal gangs.”     The secretary-general said he was disappointed at the failure to agree on a treaty, calling it “a setback.” But he said he was encouraged that states have agreed to continue pursuing a treaty and pledged his “robust” support.     At the end of the negotiating session, Mexico read a joint statement from more than 90 countries saying they “are determined to secure an Arms Trade Treaty as soon as possible.”

Read more:


ICE, Border Patrol unions claim illegal immigrants exploiting ‘dreamer’ policy

July 27, 2012 in Uncategorized

ICE, Border Patrol unions claim illegal immigrants exploiting ‘dreamer’ policy

Union heads representing thousands of America’s immigration agents slammed the Obama administration Thursday over a policy they claim is forcing officials to ignore the law and allowing illegal immigrants to exploit the system.

In a startling allegation, the president of the union representing Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers claimed illegal immigrants are “taking advantage” of a new directive allowing some undocumented residents who came to the U.S. as children to stay in the country. Union boss Chris Crane said the policy ends up allowing illegal immigrants to avoid detention without any proof — particularly so-called “dreamers,” or those illegal immigrants who would benefit under the “DREAM Act” proposal, which Congress has not passed but the administration has partially implemented.

“Prosecutorial discretion for dreamers is solely based on the individual’s claims. Our orders are if an alien says they went to high school, then let them go,” he said at a press conference with GOP senators. “Officers have been told that there is no burden for the alien to prove anything. … At this point we don’t even know why DHS has criteria at all, as there is no requirement or burden to prove anything on the part of the alien.

“We believe that significant numbers of people who are not dreamers are taking advantage of this practice to avoid arrest,” he said.

Crane cited one case in which, he said, an immigrant facing criminal charges was let go under the policy. Further, he complained that officers are “under threat of losing their jobs” if they defy the policy.

ICE didn’t respond to those allegations directly but said allegations of fraud and abuse will be investigated.

The press conference comes just days after the Federation for American Immigration Reform, an anti-illegal immigration group, released a report claiming the administration has worked for the past three-and-a-half years to undermine immigration enforcement.

ICE, though, defended its operations Thursday evening — noting, as it often does, that the agency is only funded to remove roughly 400,000 people a year and has to prioritize. The prioritization under this administration has been to fast-track for deportation those accused of serious criminal offenses and potentially give a reprieve to those who aren’t.

“Because the agency encounters more removable aliens than it is able to process, the agency prioritizes its resources on aliens whose removal have the greatest impact on public safety and the integrity of the immigration system,” spokeswoman Gillian Christensen said in a statement. “ICE’s efforts to target the agency’s enforcement priorities are paying big dividends. For each of the past three fiscal years, ICE has removed more criminal aliens from the country than ever before and more than 90 percent of ICE’s removals fell into one of the agency’s enforcement priority categories.”

She disputed the notion that the policy impacts public safety, but she said the agency meets regularly with union representatives “to discuss our goal of ensuring public safety by focusing on the removal of individuals who meet our enforcement priorities.”

In light of the accusations Thursday, she added that “the agency will aggressively investigate allegations of fraud and abuse of the deferred action process.”

The allegations from the union were expressed in unusually blunt terms Thursday.

George McCubbin, president of the National Border Patrol Council union, said the Department of Homeland Security has made it impossible for agents to do their jobs.

Crane said it’s led to disorganization and “confusion” at ICE.

Republican lawmakers used the forum to continue their sustained campaign against the administration’s immigration policy changes.

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said the latest directive is without legal basis and “condones breaking the law.”

Read more:

Obama Administration’s DOJ Teams Up with ACLU to Dispossess Korean War Veterans of their Memorial

July 26, 2012 in Uncategorized

The Obama Administration’s Department of Justice and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (The MOST OVERTURNED Appeals Court in America) are colluding to remove La Jolla Korean War Veterans of their War Memorial.
The ACLU has been clandestinely negotiating with the Department of Justice without including the group that actually maintains the cross and memorial site. Let’s call our Senators and Congressmen and tell them to support the War Veterans and their memorial.

Supporters vow to keep cross in California veterans tribute despite court ruling


Published July 25, 2012

  • Mount Soledad Cross Controversy.jpg

    Because it sits on public property, critics have long argued that the cross at the , CaliMount Soledad Veterans Memoria in La Jolla Calif., is an unconstitutional entanglement of government and religion. (AP File)

For decades, there has been a First Amendment battle raging over the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial in La Jolla, Calif., where a large cross anchors a tribute to Korean War veterans.

Because it sits on public property, the American Civil Liberties Union has long argued that the cross amounts to an unconstitutional entanglement of government and religion. 

In 2011, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, triggering an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, but in June, the high court justices declined to hear the case.

Oddly, the 9th Circuit, while ruling the cross illegal, didn’t order it removed. The parties were left to begin negotiations about what to do with it. “We’re going to go back and talk to the district court and talk to the government, and we will work at arriving at an appropriate remedy,” ACLU attorney David Loy said at the time.

But just days ago, attorneys for the Mount Soledad Memorial Association learned that the ACLU has been negotiating with the Department of Justice without including the group that actually maintains the cross and memorial site. That sparked concern on Capitol Hill. 

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., a veteran himself, notes that there is a federal law in place protecting the memorial. Hunter worries that rather than fighting to uphold the law, the Justice Department may be negotiating away the protections outlined in the law.

“If the DOJ is not going to enforce congressional law, they’re going to go off on their own in what appears to be lockstep with the ACLU. That puts the cross in danger,” he said.

Hunter, along with fellow California Republican Rep. Brian Bilbray, sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder requesting more information about the negotiations and demanding that the Memorial Association be included in future talks. The lawmakers also requested an immediate meeting with Justice officials, but Hunter says that was refused.

On Thursday, a federal judge is scheduled to hold a hearing involving the parties, and now it appears that hearing will be focused on the issue of negotiations and which organizations must be included in talks about what to do with the cross.

Attorneys for the Memorial Association say they will take the opportunity to lodge serious objections to the “secret negotiations” between the ACLU and Justice Department and will not agree to any resolution that involves taking the cross down from its current spot.

Read more: