Green Energy and Environmental Concerns – Are we putting the cart before the horse?

“We’ve got your six” is a statement that these days we hear so often, yet it is hard to find. Having its roots in Old Norse, Latin, and Greek, to include English, it appears that six runs very much a kin to sex therefore, every language seems to have a vested interest in the word.

Fighter pilots use the metaphor of sitting on the middle of a clock face to indicate the relative location of other aircraft. In other words, an enemy could be at 12 o’clock (straight ahead), at 3 o’clock (perpendicular to your path, on the right), at 9 o’clock (again perpendicular but on the left of you). So, your Six is what’s directly behind you, the most dangerous enemy location. Your backside, ass or arse. Cover your six means to protect yourself; especially a place of vulnerability.

A rather lofty opening that encompasses two matters we’d like to address. One is the fixation on the environment – or to be considered “Green” – at any rate those individuals who have good, bad, or indifferent degrees of consciousness about wetlands to various lizards, birds, frogs, and whatever. You know what we mean…extremists!

Of the second part we are now going to admit that the Republican Party has gone completely off the rails and have ostensibly lost their way. We are not sure if this is the most accurate metaphorical use of “lost their way” but for this writing, it serves to associate these candidates for the office of president in the forthcoming election are simply embarrassing themselves by acting like children.

Quite openly it has reached the level of absurdity. I for one am not a republican or democrat inasmuch as I’d rather not align myself with either of the two major political parties. Being independent allows for objectivity and keeping one from any political bias. 

Loyal to a fault, as well as conservative in my demeanor I am reasonably certain that I will never align myself with a political party because I just want who’s best for our country.

Having said that, I am wondering what Messrs. Romney and Gingrich are doing other than tearing each other to shreds and thereby the only winner as we see it here is – God forbid Barack Obama! So fella’s do us a solid by lying off of each other and get with the program – that is to defeat Obama!

Assisted by technological innovation and years of subsidies, the cost of wind and solar power has fallen sharply — so much so that the two industries say that they can sometimes deliver cleaner electricity at prices competitive with power made from fossil fuels. At the same time, wind and solar companies are telling Congress that they cannot be truly competitive and keep creating jobs without a few more years of government support.

Their efforts received a boost on Thursday from President Obama, who called for a package of tax credits for renewable power as part of a broader energy plan that he outlined while on a campaign swing through Nevada and Colorado.

But the lobbying by the wind and solar industries comes at a time when there is little enthusiasm for alternative-energy subsidies in Washington or the nation in general. And does anyone wonder why?

It is overwhelmingly obvious that the current President, Barack Obama, is seriously lacking in business what is referred to as the “executive function.” According to Covey, Drucker, and Levine in business jargon the executive function is the capacity to plan, organize, and manage time and resources effectively. And we believe that Barack Obama will become that big “case study” that will become the neo-vogue research methodology offered in most of America’s top business schools, which show through illustration what NOT to do.

Every policy or mandate put forth by the Obama Administration regarding the environment has flopped; and that’s putting it mildly. This one person on a crusade to enact something, anything that will show change regardless of what it costs is pure insanity. As for the executive function…with Solydra was there adequate planning? Nope. How about organization, what? And the notion behind time management – let’s see within 38 days to less than one year they had to know about bankruptcy.

Finally, with a commander in chief as loony as Barack Obama, how could we be surprised at the same irresponsible acts going on within the Justice Department and ATF?

 

Time to wake-up America!

There seems to be some difficulty with “doing the right thing…attribution is what blame is…not willing to fall on the sword”…and the entire notion of personal responsibility going on in Washington D.C. If we could indulge you for only a moment, we’ve got some issues on our minds that unless we get some real backing – or put our ostensible powers of persuasion together for you – hell let’s not mess around with fiat anything’s when in reality we should be making ourselves right with the Big Man…Upstairs.

And we hate like crazy to be pointing these idiosyncrasies out to you simply because we’d much rather be writing about all of the good that happens in our lives and how well America is doing.

But we are far past that when the U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who legitimately is up to his eyeballs in this Fast & Furious operation doesn’t remember anything about it? In times not so far away, Presidents of the United States would simply request a written resignation by 0800 the next morning, if not sooner.

We are respecting the posture of the Congressional committee appointed to investigate the egregiousness of these crimes. Right now – it must be known for everyone to see and hear – that the original complaints for this operation came from those men who were in the fields, comparing notes, and like an explosion they found out that they were being set-up by other members – high ranking –perfumed Asst. Attorney Generals who have deliberately misrepresented the facts.

There was a time in American history that when a president became under an investigation (during an election year!) then those around him th

rough loyalty and fortitude would automatically stand-up as an honor to protect the president. Well that’s not happening here in this case; furthermore, we can’t even get the U.S. Attorney General to apologize to the Mexican authorities.

So what gives already? Many, many children, women, and men have been killed with the very weapons provided to them by ostensibly our Justice department as well as the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, and Tobacco, and Explosives (formerly ATF now who knows?). No excuses, no rubbish, no special rights or privileges whatsoever; if a person is implicated at all, including White House personnel, then let’s restore our nation to the “rule of law.”

Quick leap…since when does a sitting President enter into the House Chamber to rehash the same old tired rhetoric and when he’s finished goes into Rock Star Status of kissing congressional personnel, hugging and kissing members of the Supreme Court, and allowing for people to come seeking autographs? It was appalling!

These people in Washington behaved as they are – small, narrow-minded folks – that remain unable to see the true picture. And like it or not, President Obama is not the man. Say it, you’ll feel better about it and yourself! America, oh America how long do we have to play this game of words, ideologies, and begin discriminating against those who have worked the hard road only to be punished by paying more and more of it to a government that steals?

Just think…$560,000,000 to Solyndra; then think…only $400,000,000 to Indiana, Purdue University, and Ener1 for research and development for a vehicle battery. If these are examples of Obama’s hope and change then he has failed on both accounts. Please remember that 960,000,000 is close to 1 billion; yet, for that kind of spending – inappropriately all things considered on a bankrupt Solyndra, Ener1, and by the way, where is the accounting of the funds spent on the Recover and Reinvest Act more commonly known as the stimulus plan?

Is Barack Obama an Environmentalist Wacko…his track record is not good

Indiana-based electric car battery manufacturer Ener1 filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on Thursday. The battery maker received over a quarter of the federal stimulus money granted to projects in the state of Indiana under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for 2009, a state which was the second highest recipient of federal stimulus money.

Ener1 CEO Alex Sorokin said that in addition to heavy competition from Asian markets, the “volatility in the debt and equity markets” further limited the company’s borrowing ability.

The loss of Ener1 customer Norwegian automaker Think Global — which declared bankruptcy in June 2011 — also “exacerbated” the problem, Sorokin said in a statement on Thursday. As we’re sure that Solandra did.

Six companies and Purdue University received over $400 million in funds specifically for the development of electric car technology. Ener1 — which was granted $118 million for the production lithium-ion cells and packs for hybrid and electric vehicles — received over a quarter of those funds.

Well as nice a product as it is – Ford’s new, by order only status now, Focus – is going to hiccup just a bit until someone can indeed furnish the automaker with the lithium-ion cells and packs for the new hybrid and electronic vehicles.

And it is a shame! One should have a look at Ford’s preview offering – caution, the bells, whistles, graphics, and trinkets all for all to see – yet, we must remember that this is a mock-up car.

All up with all standard package (S1) and a blue exterior finish the starting price for this vehicle is $42,000. Makes one wonder is the technology and everything that aligns itself to “new technology” worth the differential when the exact same petro based vehicle is listed at $16,000. Or maybe Ford’s marketing team has aligned itself with this no middle class mantra; therefore, everyone now must be in the European vehicle market.

Examining the details of Obama’s SOTU

President Obama’s array of plans in his State of the Union speech was light on a key piece of context – namely, that his hands are so tied ahead of the election that it is doubtful many if any of them can be done in the remainder of his term. Oh, how unfortunate for him. There can be little more than wishful thinking behind his call to end oil industry subsidies – something he could not get through a Democratic Congress, much less today’s divided Congress, much less in this election year.

A look at Obama’s rhetoric Tuesday night and how it fits with the facts and political realities of the day:

OBAMA: “We have subsidized oil companies for a century. That’s long enough. It’s time to end the taxpayer giveaways to an industry that’s rarely been more profitable, and double-down on a clean energy industry that’s never been more promising.”

THE FACTS: This is at least Obama’s third run at stripping subsidies from the oil industry. Back when fellow Democrats formed the House and Senate majorities, he sought $36.5 billion in tax increases on oil and gas companies over the next decade, but Congress largely ignored the request. He called again to end such tax breaks in last year’s State of the Union speech. And he’s now doing it again, despite facing a wall of opposition from Republicans who want to spur domestic oil and gas production and oppose tax increases generally.

THINKER: Executive function (requirement for all leaders) is planning (F), organizing (F) and time-management (F) which we feel President Obama has failed miserably.

OBAMA: “Our health care law relies on a reformed private market, not a government program.”

THE FACTS: That’s only half true. About half of the more than 30 million uninsured Americans expected to gain coverage through the health care law will be enrolled in a government program. Medicaid, the federal-state program for low-income people, will be expanded starting in 2014 to cover childless adults living near the poverty line.

The other half will be enrolled in private health plans through new state-based insurance markets. But many of them will be receiving federal subsidies to make their premiums more affordable. And that’s a government program, too.

Starting in 2014 most Americans will be required to carry health coverage, either through an employer, by buying their own plan, or through a government program.

THINKER: Does anyone recall any of this rhetoric espoused by President Obama. We say, Repeal it now!

OBAMA: “Tonight, I want to speak about how we move forward, and lay out a blueprint for an economy that’s built to last – an economy built on American manufacturing, American energy, skills for American workers, and a renewal of American values.”

THE FACTS: Economists do see manufacturing growth as a necessary component of any U.S. recovery. U.S. manufacturing output climbed 0.9 percent in December, the biggest gain since December 2010. Yet Obama’s apparent vision of a nation once again propelled by manufacturing — a vision shared by many Republicans — may already have slipped into the past.

Over generations, the economy has become ever more driven by services; not since 1975 has the U.S. had a surplus in merchandise trade, which covers trade in goods, including manufactured and farm goods. About 90 percent of American workers are employed in the service sector, a profound shift in the nature of the workforce over many decades.

The overall trade deficit through the first 11 months of 2011 ran at an annual rate of nearly $600 billion, up almost 12 percent from the year before.

THINKER: If this country is ever going to lead in manufacturing again, it’s time to look where the world’s industry is going and make the necessary changes; this does not include military ordnance for sale to other countries.

OBAMA: “The Taliban’s momentum has been broken, and some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home.”

THE FACTS: Obama is more sanguine about progress in Afghanistan than his own intelligence apparatus. The latest National Intelligence Estimate on Afghanistan warns that the Taliban will grow stronger, using fledgling talks with the U.S. to gain credibility and stall until U.S. troops leave, while continuing to fight for more territory. The classified assessment, described to The Associated Press by officials who have seen it, says the Afghan government hasn’t been able to establish credibility with its people, and predicts the Taliban and warlords will largely control the countryside.

THINKER: Stop playing war and wipe out the entire Taliban.

OBAMA: “On the day I took office, our auto industry was on the verge of collapse. Some even said we should let it die. With a million jobs at stake, I refused to let that happen. In exchange for help, we demanded responsibility. We got workers and automakers to settle their differences. We got the industry to retool and restructure. Today, General Motors is back on top as the world’s number one automaker. Chrysler has grown faster in the U.S. than any major car company. Ford is investing billions in U.S. plants and factories. And together, the entire industry added nearly 160,000 jobs.”

THE FACTS: He left out some key details. The bailout of General Motors and Chrysler began under Republican President George W. Bush. Obama picked up the ball, earmarked more money, and finished the job. But Ford, which Obama mentions as well, never asked for a federal bailout and never got one. It’s managed to get along on its own. Also, as part of its restructuring, Chrysler is not really a U.S. automaker anymore. Italian automaker Fiat now owns a 30 percent share, and it will eventually go to 51 percent under terms of the U.S. bailout and its bankruptcy restructuring.

THINKER: Once again it doesn’t matter where he is or who he’s speaking with President Obama is a pathological liar.

Please feel free to read more at: 

Analysis of the First Amendment

The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights that enhances the U.S. Constitution is one of those notions that when left alone – without government intervention – guarantees the rights in the free speech clause to freedom of conscience, expression, speaking, and of course the press. In addition, predicated upon the other clauses we have guaranteed rights to assembly for the redress of grievances, as well as religion, petition, and an uncensored press. One should know clearly in advance that based on this amendment the colonists were enjoying things in life that their countrymen in England were not.

In fact, the First Amendment has rarely been visited and very little has the Supreme Court had to do in keeping its function. The Founder’s and their ancestor’s suffered at the hands of the British monarchy and when framing the new Constitution vowed to protect various rights and conditions. For the sake of this writing we are limiting our content to the freedom of speech and the unabridgment of the press.

Therefore, as Justice Stewart espoused, “For this reason, it is perhaps here that a press that is alert, aware, and free most vitally serves the purpose of the First Amendment. For without an informed and free press there cannot be an enlightened people.”

Ideally or in an utopian world this may be the case; however, after full and open disclosure about the Vietnam war, the Pentagon Papers, and the egregiousness of the Watergate break-in, we ask, where was the press on September 11, 2001?

Within a few short months of witnessing the carnage and destruction of the World Trade Center; furthermore, a clean hit on the Pentagon, with more lives lost in a solemn rural area in Pennsylvania what did the press have to say about the USA Patriot Act?

Moreover, the entire system of due process of law had been shelved for the arrest, detention, and access to counsel for American citizens here in America as well as abroad? In one fell swoop the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4, 5, 6, Amendments were at the arbitrary discretions of one man…the POTUS.

Again, where was the press for this particular period? The press just like every other American was patriotically committed to seeing the demise of Saddam Hussein and the nation of Iraq. Where is Justice Stewart’s notion of the “enlightened citizenry?”

Indeed the walk on war in Iraq in Washington D.C. got so little coverage that it prompted both the Washington Post and the New York Times to apologized for their failures. Why was the press so submissive after 9-11-2001? One reason was that, like the American public generally, editors were stunned by the terrorist attacks and felt the need for national unity against the perpetrators. Indeed, America has always worked under the assumption never to criticize the president in the atmosphere of fear – that would be seen as being unpatriotic.

In time however the press began to recover from its fear and lassitude. The brazen character of President Bush’s claims of unilateral power became increasing difficult to overlook. Furthermore, one of the Justice Department’s lawyers advised him that he could order the torture of alleged terrorist detainees, and that Congress was without power to stop him.

The decision to end this differential time of none coverage was signaled by the decision of the New York Times to publish a story disclosing that the Bush administration had secretly ordered wiretapping of Americans’ international telephone calls without obtaining the warrants required by law.

In one hand George Bush held a memorandum authorizing him to wiretap calls, with the authority to torture enemy combatants, which easily is against federal criminal law. This seemed to parlay the notion that the President was above the law. And it was through earlier stories of Watergate: that everyone in high positions as well as lower positions were subject to the law. It is known as the Watergate lesson: That the law applies equally to the high and the low.

Keeping it straight about the National Defense Authorization Act…

We know that you will recall our earlier comments regarding how information is related; that being understanding the context as to what is being presented; moreover, the content, or the actual words used in the writing. Please see our previous article or just move down the page you are on. In our pursuits to bring a logical understanding of what this Act is and why all of the fuss it is important to see just how cordial our nation has been over its history in matters relative to the NDAA.

President Obama had threatened to veto the bill back in May, when the House passed one version of it, and again in November, when the Senate passed another, somewhat different version of it. But last week, after the House and Senate reconciled their two versions of the bill, the president lifted his veto threat.

His press secretary explained in a written statement that the revised bill was considered acceptable because problematic provisions had been removed, and because “the most recent changes give the President additional discretion in determining how the law will be implemented, consistent with our values and the rule of law.”

This is unequivocal nonsense! The POTUS (President Obama) doesn’t have respect for or does he follow the rule of law in this country. As a matter of fact Obama continually delineates himself from the U.S. Constitution (the actual “rule of law”) on a regular basis when appointing his czars to cabinet positions.

Numerous human rights advocates, civil libertarians, and members of Congress disagree. Human Rights Watch said that President Obama’s decision not to veto the bill “does enormous damage to the rule of law both in the US and abroad.” The ACLU said, “if President Obama signs this bill, it will damage both his legacy and American’s reputation for upholding the rule of law.”

Representative Jerrold Nadler, who voted against the bill, said that it presents a “momentous challenge to one of the founding principles of the United States—that no person may be deprived of his liberty without due process of law.”

We wonder in astonishment if these so-called “problematic provisions” which as you know are different versions of the bill by the House and Senate somehow miraculously combined their efforts, as well as President Obama’s utter disregard for the U.S. Constitution and any concerns about the “rule of law” in this country.

Founding Fathers…First Amendment

The highest duty of the press – is to inform the public about its governors – has defined in the earliest days of the United States by James Madison. In a republic, he said, the people are the ultimate sovereigns; they depend for their information on the press, which must therefore be free to “canvass the merits and measures of public men.”

As much [press] as he received, one wouldn’t think this, perhaps a bit to much, Mr. Madison was something of a romantic about the press. He wrote in 1799: “To the press alone, chequered as it is with abuses, the world is indebted for all the triumphs which have been gained by reason and humanity over error and oppression.”

The American press has to perform its Madisonian function today in relation to a federal government that Madison could scarcely have imagined. The size of the federal government in his day was considered tiny when compared to what happened during Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal in the 1930s; as New Deal programs went into effect, new governmental agencies were born and the government in Washington began to assume responsibilities that had formerly exercised by the States or even by no government at all.

Now the federal government is huge and powerful. Many of its officials often operate in secret, and they are protected by armies of spokespersons. Interestingly a government that George Washington warned of – to avoid foreign entanglements is entangled politically and militarily around the world.

Being able to cope with a government of that character requires press institutions with large resources. It is argued that the rag-tag press of the eighteenth century could not have coped with the likes of the Pentagon, or White House as they are now and even their contemporary equivalents, Bloggers wouldn’t be able to cope either.

However, this is certainly not to imply that good and responsible bloggers may someday carry that weight; nonetheless, unless bloggers reach the institutional size – which we’re sure of that every blogger strives to become – it is duly noted that it took The Washington Post to bring us into the investigation of Watergate; moreover, it was the New York Times who published the Pentagon Papers.

In his opinion in the Pentagon Papers case, Justice Stewart said the role of the press was especially important in matters of national security. In that area, he said, the usual legislative and judicial checks and balances on executive power scarcely operate; Congress and the courts tend to defer to the President. So he wrote, “The only effective restraint upon executive policy and power…may lie in an enlightened citizenry – in an informed and critical public opinion. For without an informed and free press there cannot be an enlightened people.”

By the standards mentioned by James Madison, as well documented by The Washington Post and The New York Times, there should be added an additional dictum – courageousness.

However, by that standard the American press failed sadly when it met its next great test after Vietnam: the government’s policy and power after the terrorist attacks on New York, Washington, and the American people.

Within a few months of those attacks President George W. Bush claimed the power to detain any American citizen as an enemy combatant and to hold him/her indefinitely, without trial or access to counsel. Furthermore, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012 was signed into United States law on December 31, 2011 by President Barack Obama.

The Act authorizes $662 billion in funding, among other things “for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad.” In a signing statement, President Obama described the Act as addressing national security programs, Department of Defense health care costs, counter-terrorism within the U.S. and abroad and military modernization. The Act also imposes new economic sanctions against Iran (section 1045), commissions reviews of the military capabilities of countries such as Iran, China, and Russia, and refocuses the strategic goals of NATO towards energy security.

The NDAA has been in use for each of the last 49 years inasmuch as it authorizes money for the Department of Defense. However, how many of us knew it has been a law for the last 49 years? Be well-assured that the last four years have been under the command of Barack Obama who feels that other provision within that law allows him to act without the normal constitutional processes.

How Much More…Can or are we willing to Take, part 2

Andrew Carnegie was born in Dunfermline, Scotland, and immigrated to the United States with his parents in 1848. His first job in the United States was as a factory worker in a bobbin factory. Later on he became a bill logger for the owner of the company; furthermore, soon after he became a messenger boy.

Eventually he progressed up the ranks of a telegraph company. He built Pittsburgh’s Carnegie Steel Company, which was later merged with Elbert H. Gary’s Federal Steel Company and several smaller companies to create U.S. Steel. With the fortune he made from business among others he built Carnegie Hall, later he turned to philanthropy and interests in education, founding the Carnegie Corporation of New York, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Carnegie Mellon University and the Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh.

That was just a quick word about Mr. Andrew Carnegie, hard-working Scotsman, who went from a factory worker to one of the wealthiest men in American history; all this and so much more without anything from the government.

In December, Congressional Republicans forced President Obama to make a decision within 60 days on whether to approve or reject Canada’s offer to build the Keystone XL oil pipeline all the way through the U.S. and down to the Gulf of Mexico.

The Obama administration claims that three years has not been enough time to fully evaluate the environmental impact of the project; consequently, a claim we find to be totally false.

Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) says that is “political bull” and explains why that excuse from Obama runs contrary to recent statements from the State Department as well as announcements made in the administration’s White House.

“We’re going to have Secretary of State Clinton come to our committee and explain why denying this plan was in the nation’s best interest.”

Terry discusses the ecological issues involved with the pipeline and has some more choice comments for pipeline critics who claim the resources in the pipeline would end up in China anyway.

“This pipeline would create energy security for us so we don’t have to rely on OPEC.” 

In an attempt to illustrate exactly what we are dissenting about comes to us by way of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). As late as November 2011 Speaker Boehner with his House of Representatives have been working on three energy bills that will be a part of Speaker Boehner’s American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act to create new jobs, increase American energy production and fund our aging infrastructure: 

“The bills before us today are not just energy bills, they are job bills. Increased American energy production is one of the best ways to help jumpstart our economy. It will create over a million energy jobs and thousands of indirect jobs in a variety of sectors in every state throughout the country. Given the tremendous economic benefits – not to mention the national security implications – there is no reason why we should not provide access to our own energy resources located here at home,” said Chairman Hastings.

“One thing that’s certain, doing nothing will not create any new jobs or generate any new revenue. During these difficult economic times, with soaring debts and deficits and a highway fund that needs to be replenished, Congress should not pass up an opportunity to create jobs and generate billions in new revenue.”

That being said what could be behind Obama’s refusal to engage with the Canadians with obviously an awesome deal? Lessening our dependence on OPEC, providing thousands of jobs, and diligently trying to do what he’s promised is what one would expect from a logical and sane person. This person does not deserve to be in political office any longer. Did Obama have three years to sort out Solyndra before investing $556 billion of taxpayer funds? Nope.

How Much More…Can or are we willing to Take

And you said “what” to the pipeline deal?

It hasn’t been two days since we’ve written “How much more can you take?” That article was intended to be a wake-up call for what the zealous voted for and the President they actually got. We simply cannot conceive of the “Baby-Boi-Man Barack” telling this country what he was going to do – and then sit in the pearl and watch hundreds of thousands, indeed, millions of workers getting laid-off from their jobs with unemployment still skyrocketing.

And before we lose any readers at all we need to ask has Barack Obama done anything to reverse this trend? That certainly does not mean that there’s a think-tank in operation critically examining how we can lower unemployment whilst at the same time create more jobs than any nation in history.

Obama is most content when recklessly disregarding the U.S. Constitution; moreover, to see how many ways he can cut corners, skirt, or find the loop holes in the law that will further his agenda, and not those of America; Obama does the duties that are the customary practices of attorneys; yet, certainly not Presidents!

General Electric made an astounding $14 billion in profits last year. It is worthy to mention that G.E. did not pay any taxes on that money whatsoever. Furthermore, it is an alarming ordeal in the White House how the consideration of small businesses are brought up and then immediately quashed.

 In the sector of business that is literally the backbone of this nation it has become so apparent to so many that with start up costs and managing to stay ahead of local, city, county, state, taxes, when along comes “Big Brother,” the federal government, to push the entrepreneurs farther down.

This is certainly a problem with the class warfare and income inequities brought forth by President Obama. We still hold to our belief that if one were to make an incentive for the wealthier upper income level to find their own causes (basic philanthropy) with which to donate time, energy, resources (money), our position remains that the beneficiary will receive more than if the government decides to tax this class of people. The notion of assessing a fiduciary tax against a select proportion of the population is beyond the level of fairness in a free society.

When one examines just how and what Rockefeller did in order to get Standard Oil up and moving by today’s standards he would be facing a legitimate chain of violations, he would be charged, and then tried in a court of law. Actually this did happen in his time. However, for the sake of our pet peeves the “Occupy” movement, Class warfare, the mention of capitalism, and how America became such a bountiful and prosperous nation we should look at just a few important characters.

John D. Rockefeller, we are not altogether certain that anyone wouldn’t at least know that this industrialist was rich. Mega rich in fact, American oil industrialist, investor, and philanthropist. He was the founder of the Standard Oil Company, which dominated the oil industry and was the first great U.S. business trust. Rockefeller revolutionized the petroleum industry and defined the structure of modern philanthropy.

 In 1870, he founded the Standard Oil Company and aggressively ran it until he officially retired in 1897. Standard Oil began as an Ohio partnership formed by John D. Rockefeller, his brother William Rockefeller, Henry Flagler, Jabez Bostwick, chemist Samuel Andrews, and a silent partner, Stephen V. Harkness. As kerosene and gasoline grew in importance, Rockefeller’s wealth soared, and he became the world’s richest man and first American worth more than a billion dollars. Adjusting for inflation, he is often regarded as the richest person in history.

Rockefeller continued with his self-reinforcing cycle of buying competing refiners, improving the efficiency of his operations, pressing for discounts on oil shipments, undercutting his competition, making secret deals, raising investment pools, and buying rivals out. In less than four months in 1872, in what was later known as “The Cleveland Conquest” or “The Cleveland Massacre,” Standard Oil had absorbed 22 of its 26 Cleveland competitors.

Its vast American empire included 20,000 domestic wells, 4,000 miles of pipeline, 5,000 tank cars, and over 100,000 employees. Its share of world oil refining topped out above 90% but slowly dropped to about 80% for the rest of the century.

The point? Obviously the point is that Rockefeller and several others started off as small business owners, hard working, men with a vision. Their visions were not stifled by the federal government; moreover, they started their businesses during that Great Depression or thereabouts. We will be looking at several of these business person’s for the future.

Is Obama Above the Law..?

“Congress hasn’t been able to do it, so I will.” With this bold statement, President Obama announced last Friday that he would unilaterally replace the provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) with conditions-based waivers. Obama’s waiver strategy is an alarming misuse of executive power that undermines the separation of powers.

One of the most disturbing trends of 2011 was the Obama Administration’s willingness to skirt the Constitution’s law making process. In September, the Obama administration openly bypassed Congress by unilaterally issuing waivers to exempt states from the requirements of No Child Left Behind.

Even more outrageous, Obamacare waivers (giving relief from the law’s most costly provisions) were given almost exclusively to political allies of the administration such as labor unions and Harry Reid’s home state of Nevada. Fully 20% went to unions and businesses (including luxury restaurants and financial firms) in Nancy Pelosi’s congressional district in San Francisco.

When Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said of Obamacare, “[W]e have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,” apparently she meant that it would include pain and suffering for America’s businesses, except for those fortunate enough to get waivers, including a few high-class restaurants, night clubs and hotels that reside in her congressional district. 

We cannot and will not speak for anyone in this country; however, we have been writing about this illusion that President Obama assumes where quite openly, it is “…my way or the highway…” This overreaching arrogant man does not deserve another term and should be put out of politics for good.

Barack Obama’s actions and reckless disregard for the U.S. Constitution is taking away our liberties. Government was not developed for the politician. It was developed in this nation for the protection of our liberties; a notion we’re sure that given his waivers to unions, illegal immigrants, and big businesses to cater to their profits is overwhelming.

Would Obamacare force millions of middle-class Americans to buy health insurance they can’t afford, or would Obamacare end up costing taxpayers $500 billion more over 10 years? The problem begins with Obamacare’s individual mandate, which forces every American to buy a federally approved health insurance policy. 

If the federal government was so good in the medical insurance business why would there be the need for competition? It becomes very evident that the federal government – or the Obama administration would want to issue more confines on our tax dollars to fund the monopolization of federal health care.

Obamacare then makes all insurance policies more expensive by forcing insurance companies to insure every customer who wants a policy, while also limiting the prices they can charge.

Consequently, what we have is an unconstitutional mandate that one either buys medical insurance the “Obama way” or else. Or else what? We don’t know the penalties but morally and ethically should an overbearing government – by the actions of one man and his cronies have the right to tell you what kind of light bulb to use or what type of insurance to buy?

Finally through his not-so-crafty manipulation of, or his reckless disregard for the rule of law in this country, his actions alone have put the United States in some rather ugly decision-making. And this clown wants more power? He wants Congress to allow him more power to do what exactly? The modern consensus is that he wants to balloon the size of government and tack that on to some kind of unfinished legacy monument in Washington D.C.