No 903 “En mi
opinión” Marzo
14, 2015
“IN GOD WE TRUST” Lázaro R González Miño EDITOR
Enero 20, 2017 FIN DEL DISPARATE
AMENPER: Monerías
Con respecto al gay
latino que fue cesanteado de Univisión por comparar a Michelle Obama con un
personaje del planeta de los simios, vamos a analizar sobre la referencia de
Michelle a ser un estuche de monerías.
Según la Real Academia
Española, ser un estuche de monerías significa tener
la capacidad de hacer muchas cosas.
Vamos a observar la
capacidad de Michelle Obama de hacer muchas cosas, de ser un estuche de
monerías.
La primera dama, y sus
hijas Sasha y Malia, con un séquito de 70 de apoyo personal llegaron a China el
pasado año para una visita de una semana que ha sido etiquetado como parte
Turismo, y parte diplomacia.
El grupo se hospedó en
el Hotel de 5 estrellas Westin Chaoyang cerca de la embajada estadounidense en
Beijing. Los Obama se quedaron en la suite presidencial del hotel, que lleva
una etiqueta de precio de aproximadamente $8.400 por noche, según USA Today.
Michelle Obama está
tomando a sus hijas Malia y Sasha en un viaje de vacaciones a Japón y Camboya a
mediados de marzo.
La Sra. Obama visitará
Tokio y Kyoto, Japón, del 18 al 20 de marzo y al final del viaje con una parada
21-22 de marzo en Siem Reap en Camboya, dijo la casa blanca el martes.
Hasta el momento no hay
detalles sobre el costo del viaje, pero grupo de la primera dama gastó $222.000
durante dos días en hotel los gastos durante su visita en el 2014 a China,
informó el Washington Examiner.
El fin de semana de San
Valentín, la primera dama y sus hijas tomaron un fin de semana de esquí en
Aspen, Colorado, mientras el Presidente viajó a California para jugar al golf.
Según el Washington
Examiner, en un artículo publicado en octubre de 2014, las recientes vacaciones
de los Obama dejaron los contribuyentes con una cuenta de $ 6,2 millones.
El monto total facturado
en seis años de la familia en la casa blanca ha sido más de $ 40 millones.
Así que el estuche de
monerías de Michelle, con sus monadas ha costado unos cuantos millones hasta
ahora, y todavía nos quedan un año y medio de monerías.
Nos quedan dos 15 de
Abril en que vamos a pagar nuestros impuestos para poder costear estas
monerías.
No cabe duda de la
relación de Michelle y las monerías.
“EMO” No me gusta
participar en correcciones porque realmente no soy la persona indicada, pero,
gay es un individuo contento, que los maricones hayan querido secuestrar la
palabrita, no se los concedo. Ellos son individuos en un sexo que ellos no los
aceptan. Por otra parte el no es latino, ni nadie ahora es latino porque la
aldea “Latinia” en Italia de donde se originan “los únicos latinos” ya hace muchísimo
tiempo que ni existe. Asi que aquí nadie es “latino” Tu tue des ser Centro
americanos, Suramericano, Norte americano. Que hables el español no te hace “latino”
Eres en todo caso originario de un país que habla el español. Puedes ser
Caribeno, centro americano, suramericano, norte americano, Pero no puedes ser
ni gay si no estas contento y creo que este individuo que botaron a la calle,
no puede ser gay (contento) porque lo botaron como un perro, cosa que se lo
merecia pero no por esto sino porque era un prepotente y déspota. Quizas le
dieron un poco de su propia medicina. Es
algo increíble que una cadena de propagación de las opiniones y hechos,
Despidan a cjas destempladas a un empleado porque diga una berracada como la
que hizo. En ese canl se dicen todas las berracadas habidas y por haber en casi
todos los programas y no pasa nada. Este canal esta mezclando la difucion con
el servilismo a un gobierno que realmente no se lo merece. Realmente esta
cadena al igual que muchas otras se ha convertido en una lamebotas del
gobierno. Estan convirtiendo a USA en una país como Bolivia, Venezuela,
Argentina o Cuba… Una verdadera porquería. Y lo mas jodido es que nadie ha
salido en defensa del derecho a tener una cabrona opinión. Por eso este minúsculo
panfleto se llama “En mi opinión” Auque acepto que no es solo mia. LRGM.
AMENPER: Los Clinton son
un Chiste PESAO Y GASTAO…
Creo que la mejor explicación que pudo dar Hillary en su entrevista sobre
el servidor privado es que era de su esposo Bill Clinton. Si es de
Willy debe de ser igual que él, tiene un buen disco duro pero la memoria le
falla.
Cuando le preguntaron a Hillary sobre la situación de Rwanda, dijo, le
aseguro que mi esposo nunca ha tenido una relación sexual con ella.
Tengo un producto que le puse Suero Oral, lo hice por Clinton, porque puedo
hacer propaganda del producto poniendo atribuciones que no tiene y no me pueden
decir nada, porque ya por Clinton quedó aclarado que si es Oral nada es
Inmoral.
Sobre el problema de Cuba, no se sabe qué hará Hillary si es presidente,
pero con el doble uso que Bill le dio a los tabacos cubanos con Mónica, quizás
Bill la persuada de tener una mejor relación con Cuba para poder comprar más
tabacos. Además a Bill le gusta la equitación y le gustaría ir a Cuba para
poder admirar a las jineteras cubanas.
Mónica Lewinsky cumplió ya 30 años, parece que fue ayer cuando todavía
estaba gateando…en la Casa Blanca.
La campaña de Clinton está buscando un lema que atraiga a un gran número de
mujeres, me parece que el mejor lema sería “Si se acostaron con mi marido, lo
menos que pueden hacer es votar por mí”
Pero las encuestas dicen que Hillary es la mujer más admirada en América.
Bueno lo creo, porque las mujeres la admiran porque ha logrado poder político,
y los hombres la admiran porque deja a su esposo que le sea infiel.
Bueno, si por fin Hillary es electa presidente, ¿Qué será Bill? No puede
ser la “Primera Dama” porque no es una dama, y no puede ser el “Primer Caballero”
tampoco porque ya se sabe que eso no es verdad
Con este problema de los E Mail hasta demócratas están sugiriendo que
Hillary debe de dejar de tratar de ser el candidato y se vaya para su
casa. Por eso es que Bill la está apoyando tanto, no quiere que se
vaya para la casa.
Por todo lo de arriba los Clinton son un chiste en la política que ya se
han pasado de rosca y Hillary sería una aberración. ¿Pero están los
demócratas listos para abandonar la coronación de Hillary?
El problema con el partido demócrata si Hillary no corre para presidente es
que ellos siempre han sido un partido más homogéneo últimamente con una
política definida a la izquierda socialista. ¿Qué van a hacer si
Hillary no corre? Esto significa desorganización, ¿Joe
Biden? Bueno por lo menos no tendrá el problema de los E Mail, ya el
declaró que presentaría los dos E Mails que él ha escrito desde que es
vice-presidente. Los dos E Mails fuero dirigidos al presidente
Obama, y Barack no contestó ninguno de los dos, así que no hay mucho que leer.
\Pero Biden
reclama que tiene experiencia internacional porque ha visitado numerosos países
durante su tenencia como vicepresidente. Lo que no sabe es que viajó
tanto porque los asesores de la Casa Blanca lo querían lejos de los periodistas
para que no metiera más la pata.
La otra candidata es Elizabeth Warren, que sería la candidata que corriera
una campaña como socialista declarado desde George McGovern, el amigo de Fidel,
contra Nixon, en que según pueden ver en el mapa arriba McGovern nada más que
ganó el estado de Maryland, perdió todos los demás estados. La
pregunta es ¿Está el pueblo de los Estados Unidos listo para elegir a un
candidato Socialista? Obama salió por ser negro y porque siempre
negó que fuera socialista. Pero no creo que el partido pueda querer
arriesgarse a una derrota como la de McGovern con Elizabeth
Warren. Así que lo que queda es Joe Biden, y esto sería un chiste.
Así que aunque los Clinton sean un chiste, los demócratas tienen que echar
el resto con ellos.
AMENPER: Luce muy mona
Hay que tener cuidado
para decirle a una mujer ¿Qué mona luces? Todo depende de quién es la mujer.
Hace poco en una
conversación estábamos tratando de llegar a la conclusión de que cual era la
minoría más privilegiada y preservada en sus puestos de
trabajo. Unos pensaban que los negros, otros que los gays, otros que
los latinos, pero la mayoría estuvo de acuerdo que el más privilegiado sería un
gay negro latino.
Pero nos equivocamos, ha
sucedido que un gay latino fue cesanteado de Univisión por tener comentarios
racistas, con respecto nada menos que a Michelle Obama. Y esto nos
lleva a la conclusión que el problema más que racista es político.
Rodner Figueroa, el
corresponsal de estilo abiertamente gay en El Gordo y la Flaca de Univisión, ha
sido despedido por comentarios de la primera dama Michelle Obama en comparación
con un personaje de "Planeta de los simios" durante un segmento en el
aire.
Figueroa hizo los
comentarios racistas durante un segmento con Paolo Ballesteros, un artista
Filipino actor y maquillaje con una extraordinaria habilidad para transformarse
en diferentes celebridades femeninas usando nada más que sus habilidades de
maquillaje formidable.
Mientras observa
Ballesteros tratando de cambiar el contorno de su cara para hacer que Figueroa
se pareciese a Michelle, lo cual lo logró según ven en la foto de
arriba, Figueroa aprovechó la oportunidad para comentar sobre la
primera dama: "Todos saben que Michelle Obama parece que ella es de la
película el planeta de los monos."
Raúl De Molina, uno de
los anfitriones de Figueroa, trató de disipar la situación afirmando
repetidamente que muchas personas, incluyendo él mismo encontraban la señora
Obama muy atractiva, pero el daño ya estaba hecho.
El segmento vivo fue
transmitido a las audiencias de la costa, pero los comentarios racistas fueron
editados de tiempo para la difusión de la costa oeste. Al final del día
Univisión había terminado con Figueroa, lo limpiaron de su página
oficial, y emitieron un comunicado oficial sobre su decisión diciendo que su
comentario "era totalmente reprobable y de ninguna manera refleja los
valores u opiniones de Univisión".
Horas que más tarde
Figueroa lanzó una declaración propia para disculparse por sus comentarios y
afirmando que fue despedido después de representantes de la casa blanca
expresaron su preocupación a Univisión.
"Estoy
avergonzado, pido perdón, porque no hay ninguna excusa para un
profesional como yo hacer comentarios como éste que pueden ser malinterpretadas
como ofensivas y racistas durante una época tan volátil en nuestro país",
escribió. "Asumo la responsabilidad por este error de juicio de mi parte,
pero no puedo aceptar ser llamado a racista y despedido así, humillada, perdon,
quise decir humillado públicamente por Univisión, después de 17 años".
Él continuó: "Vengo
de una familia latina bi-racial, con miembros de la familia como mi padre, que
son Afro-latinos. Yo soy el primer anfitrión abiertamente gay en la televisión
hispana y he sido activista por causas ayudar a las minorías, que como yo han
discriminado. He votado abiertamente dos veces por su esposo, Barack Obama,
porque considero que es un gran hombre que respeta a las minorías como yo en
este país."
Bueno Rodnito te
jodistes, no importa si eres gay, latino y aunque hayas salido del closet como
negro diciendo que tu abuelita era negra, que hayas botado por Barack, te
jodistes de todas maneras, nadie puede tocar a la emperatriz sin sufrir las
consecuencias.
Amenper: La Religión Liberal del
Ecologismo y su Paraíso
Ecologismo es una parodia
perfecta del siglo XXI de las creencias Judeo-cristianas tradicionales.
Hoy el ecologismo es una
de las religiones más poderosas en el mundo occidental.
El presidente Obama y
el secretario de Estado Kerry, han dicho que el ecologismo es más
importante que el peligro de ISIS y los conflictos del Medio
Oriente.
Ecologismo parece ser la
religión de la opción para los ateos urbanos y estamos corriendo el riesgo de
que se convierta en la religión del estado.
Que los Estados
Unidos se conviertan en una teocracia.
¿Por qué digo que
es una religión? Bueno, aparte de la cantidad de pastores y sacerdotes, y
ministros laicos como nuestro presidente, miren las creencias.
Si miras con atención,
verás que el ecologismo es en realidad una parodia perfecta de la reasignación
de las creencias tradicionales Judeo-cristiana.
Hay un Paraíso inicial,
un paraíso, un estado de gracia y de la unidad con la naturaleza, hay una caída
en desgracia en un estado de la contaminación como resultado de comer del árbol
del conocimiento y como resultado de nuestras acciones, también existe un día
del juicio final para todos nosotros.
Todos somos energía
pecadora, condenados a morir, a menos que busquemos la salvación, que ahora se
llama conservación y sostenibilidad. La conservación y sostenibilidad es la
salvación en la iglesia del medio ambiente. Así como alimentos orgánicos son su
comunión, esa oblea libre de pesticidas que el derecho de personas con las
creencias del bien beber y comer.
El reciclaje es la
penitencia de la confesión de nuestros pecados del consumismo.....
Por favor, no jodan, no
hay ningún Paraíso nunca lo hubo.
¿Cuál era ese Paraíso
del pasado mítico maravilloso?
Cuando nos dicen
que es un frío o un calor record que no se había producido en 50 años,
¿Entonces hace cincuenta años, estábamos entonces ya con un medio ambiente
contaminado?
¿Era el paraíso el
tiempo atrás cuando la mortalidad infantil era un 80%, cuando cuatro niños en
cinco murieron de enfermedad antes de la edad de cinco años?
¿Cuándo una mujer en seis
murió en el parto?
¿Cuándo el promedio de
vida era de 40?
¿Cuándo las plagas
recorrían la tierra, matando a miles de personas?
¿Fue cuando morían miles
de hambre?
¿Es entonces que la
tierra era el paraíso?
Porque así vivian
los indios, eso es lo que nos dicen que era el paraíso que le
robamos a los indios, que ni siquiera tenían desodorantes ni jabón
para bañarse, ni papel sanitario para limpiarse, pero eran ecológicos, no
tenían que reciclar todas esas cosas que han destruido el planeta. Y como sólo viván
40 años, si lo lograban, no hacían mucho daño al planeta ahora el hombre
daña con su defecación y su orinadera por mucho más tiempo porque vive más
tiempo.
¿tenemos que vivir
de vuelta a aquellos tiempos?
¿Tenemos que volver a
ese paraíso de los indios?
¿Es ese el paraíso que
construirá el Mesías Al Gore en su segunda venida en su Jet privado?
Amenper: The Lee–Rubio Tax Plan’s Business Reforms Are
Tremendously Pro-Growth
By Curtis S. Dubay and David R. Burton. Abstract
Senators Mike Lee (R–UT) and
Marco Rubio (R–FL) recently released a tax reform plan that amply succeeds at
the core mission of tax reform, which is to improve economic performance. It
does so largely because the business portion of the plan is the best business
reform to come from Congress in recent memory. The individual side is a modest
improvement. Its centerpiece is a greatly expanded Child Tax Credit. Credits do
not enhance growth. Expanding the credit, instead of lowering rates further, is
a missed opportunity for additional growth. The plan will help tax reform to
become a reality by keeping the debate alive and adding to it.
The
primary purpose of tax reform is to enhance economic growth by expanding the
economy’s potential. Based on initial analysis, the tax reform plan recently
released by Senators Mike Lee (R–UT) and Marco Rubio (R–FL) amply succeeds at
this core purpose, mostly by substantially improving the tax treatment of
businesses. On the individual side, the plan takes steps in the right
direction, but leaves room for improvement.
Lee and
Rubio did not release the full details of their plan. Those details, when
released, could alter the analysis below.
Business Tax Reforms Tremendously
Pro-Growth
The
biggest reason the tax code is holding back the economy is the antiquated way
that it taxes businesses. The U.S. has the highest corporate tax rate in the
developed world as defined by the 34 countries in the Organization for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD). The U.S. is also the only major country in
that group that taxes its businesses on their income earned in other countries.[1]Moreover, the U.S.
capital cost recovery system is much worse than the OECD average.[2] The high tax rate,
worldwide taxation, and poor treatment of capital investment reduce investment.
Less investment reduces job creation and productivity improvement, and it
suppresses wages of U.S. workers.
Corporate Tax Rates. The Lee–Rubio plan fixes these issues. It
sets the rate on all businesses (C corporations and pass-throughs) at 25
percent. Some businesses with lower income would pay a 15 percent tax rate. It
also creates a territorial system through a dividend-exemption regime, similar
to what Representative Dave Camp (R–MI) proposed when he was Chairman of the
House Ways and Means Committee.[3]
The
average corporate tax rate of the other developed nations in the OECD is
approximately 25 percent.[4] The Lee–Rubio plan
would put the U.S. close to that average. This would help to increase
investment by U.S. and foreign firms inside the U.S. More investment would
improve the productivity of American workers, create more jobs, and raise
wages. Lowering the rate below that of other developed nations would create
even more jobs and raise wages higher.
A
territorial system would increase investment by U.S. firms abroad, which would
also boost their investment domestically. This would also boost job creation
and wage growth.
Double Taxation. Double taxation in the current system is
another problem that holds the economy back. Businesses pay taxes on their
income, and their owners (shareholders) pay a second layer of taxes on dividends
and capital gains. This raises the effective tax rate on capital. Lee–Rubio
would fix this problem by eliminating the second layer of tax. Shareholders
would not pay tax on their capital gains or dividends. This would further lower
the cost of capital and boost investment.
Capital Cost Recovery. The Lee–Rubio plan builds on these pro-growth
changes by abolishing the growth-depressing manner in which the tax code allows
businesses to deduct the cost of capital investments. Currently, businesses
face a cumbersome system of depreciation that forces them to deduct from their
income certain percentages of their capital costs over many years.
The
concept of depreciating assets wrongly leaked into the tax code from financial
accounting, which is concerned with determining the financial value of a
business. Tax accounting should measure actual business receipts and outlays
and should not necessarily follow the conventions of financial accounting.
When
accounting for the cost of capital for tax purposes, businesses should be able
to deduct the full cost of assets at the time that they purchase them. This is
known as expensing. Anything short of expensing, such as current depreciation
rules, raises the cost of capital and creates a bias against investment by forcing
businesses to delay deducting their capital expenses,[5] sometimes for as
long as 39 years.[6] This creates cash
flow problems and, because of the time value of money, makes investments in
plants, machinery, equipment, and structures more costly. A higher cost of
capital reduces investment.
Lee–Rubio
scraps depreciation in favor of expensing and would therefore reduce the cost
of capital, substantially increase the capital stock, improve productivity, and
further enhance job creation and wage growth.
Treatment of Interest. Interest is a facet of taxation that often
causes problems for lawmakers. Under an income tax, if interest income is
taxable to lenders, it should be deductible for borrowers so that taxes do not
artificially affect lending or borrowing decisions. The code can also keep
taxes out of lending and borrowing decisions by not taxing interest income and
denying a deduction to borrowers.[7]Lee–Rubio chooses the
second option. Given the large number of non-taxable lenders, this choice would
likely raise a substantial amount of revenue for additional rate reduction.
Together,
these reforms to business taxation are the correct way to reform the system.
They would certainly increase economic growth substantially. For instance, one
estimate finds it would increase the size of the economy by 12 percent to 15
percent compared with what would happen in the absence of the reform.[8]
Congress and
President Barack Obama have been discussing possibly pursuing business-only tax
reform. If they choose that route, the business part of the Lee–Rubio plan
should be the type of system that they implement.
Individual Reforms Move in the Right
Direction, But Could be Stronger
On the
individual side, the reforms in the Lee–Rubio plan are positive, although not
as strong as on the business side. The plan reduces the top rate from 39.6
percent to 35 percent.[9] Instead of the
current system of seven tax brackets, the Lee–Rubio plan has just two. Incomes
under $150,000 ($75,000 for single filers) would be taxed at 15 percent. The 35
percent rate would apply to all income above that level. A lower top rate will
increase incentives to work and save, which will boost growth.
The other
major change on the individual side is a significant expansion of the Child Tax
Credit (CTC). Today, parents receive a tax credit of $1,000 per child, which
phases out over $110,000 ($75,000 for single filers).
Lee–Rubio
adds an additional $2,500 per child CTC that would be creditable against
parents’ income and payroll taxes and would not phase out. The existing CTC
would not change and therefore would continue to phase out. For taxpayers under
the existing phase-out level, the combined CTC would be $3,500 per child, which
is 250 percent larger than under current law.
The
greatly expanded CTC is the centerpiece of the individual side of the plan, but
it represents an enormous missed opportunity. The new $2,500 credit would use a
substantial amount of revenue that the plan could have otherwise used to lower
rates. The top rate, therefore, could have been much lower than 35 percent. The
amount of forgone revenue reduction depends on how much the Joint Committee on
Taxation (JCT) estimates the expanded CTC would reduce revenue.
Credits,
such as the CTC, have no impact on economic growth.[10] Lower rates
improve incentives for working, saving, investing, and taking entrepreneurial
risk, the basic components of economic growth. They do so by lowering the
tax-imposed bias against work, savings, investment, and entrepreneurship. The
slightly lower top rate will only slightly increase these incentives. If the
Lee–Rubio plan lowered rates further instead of expanding the CTC, those
incentives would increase substantially more, making the plan more pro-growth.
Exacerbating
the problems with the CTC is a $4,000 per family ($2,000 for individual filers)
credit that takes the place of the standard deduction and personal exemption.
All tax filers could claim the credit. It creates a zero-percent tax bracket as
the standard deduction and personal exemption do now. Like the CTC, this credit
has no impact on growth and similarly squanders an opportunity for additional
rate reduction.
The most
important thing that Congress could do to help middle-class families is to
adopt public policies that would foster a return to prosperity and improve
incomes. Reducing marginal tax rates is a more effective means of helping
families than higher child tax credits.
Other Issues
Tax reform
plans are generally revenue neutral, meaning that they raise the same amount of
revenue as the current system. Although the details are largely unspecified,
the Lee–Rubio plan eliminates many deductions, credits, exemptions, and
exclusions on both the business and individual sides of the tax code.
Nevertheless, the Lee–Rubio plan would likely be a substantial tax cut, even
taking into account its very positive impact on the economy and the consequent
expansion in the tax base.[11] Cutting taxes is
good, especially during periods when revenues are expected to surpass their
historical average—as they are in the current budget window.[12] However, the plan
probably reduces revenues below that average.
Lee–Rubio
could replace some of that revenue by fixing a flaw in the plan. It keeps the
mortgage interest deduction (MID) in a modified manner that it does not
specify, even though it does not tax interest income. The current MID is not a
subsidy for homeowners given that lenders pay tax on the interest income that
they earn. However, it would become one under Lee–Rubio because lenders would
no longer be taxed on their interest income. To resolve this problem, Lee–Rubio
could either eliminate the MID or tax mortgage lenders on the taxable mortgages
that they issue.[13] Either option
would eliminate the subsidy that the plan creates and lessen the size of the
tax cut. However, because the plan sensibly eliminates interest deductions and
does not tax other forms of interest income, it is easier to take this approach
with mortgage interest.
For
married filers earning between $150,000 and $405,100 ($75,000 and $405,100 for
single filers), the Lee–Rubio plan would increase their marginal tax rates
compared with current law because they are in a tax bracket with tax rates
below 35 percent. Higher marginal rates are a disincentive to work and save.
These taxpayers’ average tax rate may be lower than under current law if they
have children, but the rate that they would pay on additional income would
rise. Adding rates between 15 percent and 35 percent in this range would lessen
the effect, but would decrease revenue further.
Conversely,
for taxpayers earning between approximately $75,000 and $150,000 ($37,000 and
$75,000 for singles), Lee–Rubio is a marginal rate cut. Combined with the
enormous CTC, many taxpayers in this range would pay substantially lower taxes.
Lee–Rubio could mitigate the revenue lost from the combined rate reduction and
large child credit by adding rates above 15 percent in this range. Taxpayers
would still have lower marginal rates, and the extra revenue would further
reduce the large tax cut.
Additional
revenue could also be gained by scrapping the personal credit.
Keeps Debate Moving
The
business side of the Lee–Rubio plan is the best business income tax reform plan
that has been proposed in Congress in recent memory. The individual side is a
modest step in the right direction, but leaves much room for improvement. The
business tax reforms are so positive that, taken as a whole, the plan would
dramatically improve the economy and the incomes of American families.
The
Lee–Rubio plan would also increase interest in tax reform and show the way on
business tax reform. It will help to make tax reform a reality when there is a
President in office who wants to lead the effort.
—Curtis S. Dubay is
Research Fellow in Tax and Economic Policy and David R. Burton is
Senior Fellow in Economic Policy in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic
Policy Studies, of the Institute for Economic Freedom and Opportunity, at The
Heritage Foundation.
Time magazine responds to fuss over Hillary Clinton
'devil horns' cover
 |
Time magazine is catching hell for its latest cover supposedly giving
Hillary Clinton devil horns.
Some hawk-eyed politicos noticed the “M” in TIME carves out little blue triangles above the former
secretary of state’s head.
The eye-catching cover comes in the wake of a scandal over Clinton’s use of a personal email address on a private server as a government official.
Time sought to extinguish the flames of the online firestorm on Thursday by pointing out that this has
happened to plenty of subjects in the past — given the placement of the “M” —
and was in no way intentional.
The magazine’s website published a gallery of 34 other covers that
similarly appear to feature devilish horns.
This list includes former U.S. presidents Bill Clinton and George W.
Bush, several popes, actor John Travolta, former U.K. Prime Minister Margaret
Thatcher and “Star Wars” villain Darth Vader.
“Any resemblance to cats, bats or devil horns is entirely coincidental,”
the website said.
The uproar drew more attention to the magazine’s featured article, “The Clinton Way,” by David Von
Drehle.
Jorge Alberto
Villalón Y.
Clinton's
Personal Email Account a "Serious Breach" of Security. And Illegal.
Hillary
Clinton's bad string of news stories gets worse with revelations -- in the New York Times(link
is external), of all
places -- that she illegally used a personal email account during her entire
term as Secretary of State:
Mrs. Clinton did not have a government email address during her
four-year tenure at the State Department. Her aides took no actions to have her
personal emails preserved on department servers at the time, as required by the
Federal Records Act.
It was only two months ago, in response to a new State Department effort
to comply with federal record-keeping practices, that Mrs. Clinton’s advisers
reviewed tens of thousands of pages of her personal emails and decided which
ones to turn over to the State Department. All told, 55,000 pages of emails
were given to the department. Mrs. Clinton stepped down from the secretary’s
post in early 2013.
Her expansive use of the private account was alarming to current and
former National Archives and Records Administration officials and government
watchdogs, who called it a serious breach.
“It is very difficult to conceive of a scenario — short of nuclear
winter — where an agency would be justified in allowing its cabinet-level head
officer to solely use a private email communications channel for the conduct of
government business,” said Jason R. Baron, a lawyer at Drinker Biddle &
Reath who is a former director of litigation at the National Archives and
Records Administration.
Team Clinton, of
course, defends her violation of the law and endangering national security,
saying she observed the "spirit" of the law, even as she was breaking
it.
It's also come to light that Mrs. Clinton created this
email account the day her
Senate confirmation hearings began(link is external). How was this
discovered? By hackers:
In March 2013, an adviser to Clinton, Sidney Blumenthal, had his email
hacked by "Guccifer" -- the Romanian hacker perhaps best known for
revealing George W. Bush's paintings to the world. At the time, Gawker reported(link is
external) that Blumenthal was
communicating with an account that appeared to belong to Clinton at the
"clintonemail.com" domain. The content of some of those emails was
published by RT.com(link is
external).
Examining the registry information(link is
external) for "clintonemail.com"
reveals that the domain was first created on January 13, 2009 -- one week
before President Obama was sworn into office, and the same
day(link
is external) that Clinton's
confirmation hearings began before the Senate.
SHERIFF RESPONDS TO ORDER TO REMOVE
AMERICAN FLAG FROM COURTHOUSE: “YOU MESS WITH MY FLAG, THE FIGHT IS ON BABY!”
When
asked why the flag would be offensive, Sheriff Watson responded, “I guess they
think that terrorists might walk through the courthouse… we’ve given them
everything else…. We’ve given our country away,… but you mess with my flag, the
fight is on baby!”
Portsmouth,
Virginia Sheriff Bill Watson says he is furious after he was told by a group of
judges to remove an American flag from the lobby of a courthouse that was
donated by the Portsmouth Fire Department.
WTKR
reports:
Sheriff
Watson said his agency got the American flag display as a gift from members of
the Portsmouth Fire Department a few weeks ago.
It’s
made of old fire hoses which a sign beneath it that reads, “A Tribute to Public
Safety.”
Watson
said he requested to have it mounted on the wall in the lobby of the courthouse
but was shocked by what he was told.
Watson
said he was told, “Not only do we not want it on the wall, we don’t want it in
the courthouse.”
“I
just can’t believe that they don’t want to display the American flag in a
courthouse, I mean that’s the most asinine thing I’ve ever heard in my life,”
Watson rightly said.
One
of the judges, who wanted to remain unidentified, spoke with NewsChannel 3 and
said that the courthouse was not the appropriate place to display the flag.
The
judge claimed that if you allowed one type of display, then you have to allow
all types and it would set a “wrong precedent.”
“They
expect my deputies to put their life on the line for a judge,” Sheriff Watson
said. “If somebody was going to come into a courtroom with a gun, the deputy is
supposed to stand in front of the judge and take a bullet, but yet they won’t
let us have our flag, saluting public safety? To me, that’s a slap in the
face.”
Read more at http://patriotoutdoornews.com/13300/sheriff-responds-to-order-to-remove-american-flag-from-courthouse-you-mess-with-my-flag-the-fight-is-on-baby
Read more at http://patriotoutdoornews.com/13300/sheriff-responds-to-order-to-remove-american-flag-from-courthouse-you-mess-with-my-flag-the-fight-is-on-baby
Boko
Haram Pledges Allegiance To The Flag Of ISIS
The
group has killed 11,000 people since 2011, including 6,000 just in 2014 alone.
The
Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) accepted the pledge of allegiance
offered by African terrorist group Boko Haram. The Nigerian terrorist
organization offered to align itself with ISIS last Saturday.
ISIS
media arm Al-Furqan made the announcement Thursday.
“We announce to you to the good news of the expansion of the caliphate to West
Africa because the caliph … has accepted the allegiance of our brothers of the
Sunni group for preaching and the jihad,” said ISIS spokesman Mohammed
al-Adnani.
Al-Adnani
also issued a warning to non-Muslims residing in territories controlled by
ISIS. “If you insist on being arrogant and stubborn,” he warned, “soon you will
bite your fingers off in regret.”
Last
week, Boko Haram leader Abubakar Sheka posted an audio message online swearing
allegiance to ISIS, Fox News reported.
“We
announce our allegiance to the Caliph of the Muslims … and will hear and obey
in times of difficulty and prosperity, in hardship and ease, and to endure
being discriminated against, and not to dispute about rule with those in power,
except in case of evident infidelity regarding that which there is a proof from
Allah.”
The
group has killed 11,000 people since 2011, including 6,000 just in 2014 alone.
Boko
Haram’s newly formed alliance with ISIS comes just as the Pentagon announced
Friday that Iraqi and Kurdish forces have regained over one quarter of
territory once held by ISIS in Iraq, ABC News noted.
“We
assess ISIL’s front lines have been pushed back in northern and central Iraq,”
Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren said in a briefing with the media Friday.
“ISIL no longer has complete freedom of movement in roughly 25 percent of
populated areas of Iraqi territory where they once operated freely.”
Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/boko-haram-pledges-allegiance-flag-isis/#SfpJEAZwMdAIeEIz.99
Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/boko-haram-pledges-allegiance-flag-isis/#SfpJEAZwMdAIeEIz.99
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia Urges GOP to
Move Fast to Eliminate Obamacare
AP Photo/Matt Rourke
New Play on Justice Scalia Examines Tough Issues
'The Originalist,' a new play opening Friday in
Washington examines one of the most conservative and polarizing justices on the
Supreme Court - Antonin Scalia. (March 5)
AP
In a recent interview, Supreme Court Justice Antonin
Scalia said conservatives and Republicans could move quickly to eliminate parts
of Obamacare after the Court issues a decision in a case being heard this
month, causing some to hope that the decision might end up dealing a blow to
the president’s take over of the nation’s health care system.
Scalia noted that lawmakers could move very quickly to amend and eliminate parts of Obama’s
health care insurance law if the Court strikes down the subsidies issued by the
federal insurance exchange.
At issue is the straight language in Obamacare that
maintains that government subsidies to help citizens afford the more expensive
coverage forced on them by the president’s law are only available to states
that set up state-based Obamacare exchanges.
Lawmakers wrote Obamacare expecting that every state
would set up the exchanges, but a later Supreme Court decision determined that
the federal government could not force the states to create an exchange if they
didn’t want to. 37 states ended up opting out of the state-based Obamacare
exchanges.
The law is clearly written to provide only those
states with state-based exchanges with subsides. But when 37 states opted out
of the exchanges, Obama decided on his own that all citizens would be eligible
for subsidies through the federal exchange. It is this unilateral decision that
the current case, King v. Burwell, seeks to overturn.
Republicans in both the House and the Senate have
already offered basic ideas on how to replace subsidies if they are lost by a Supreme
Court decision that invalidates Obama’s subsidies.
House members have proposed tax credits to help
citizens in non-exchange states to pay for their health care insurance policies
forced upon them by Obamacare. The exact amount of that tax credit has not been
decided.
The House is also proposing to allow states to fully
opt out of the Obamacare mandates.
For its part, the Senate has proposed a temporary
program of financial assistance for lower income insurance buyers so that they
can keep their insurance while Congress works out a solution to the issue.
Democrats, though, claim that neither house will be
able to muster the votes to put dents in Obamacare no matter what the Court
decides.
Regardless, both houses of Congress are in a waiting
game until the Supreme Court releases its ruling in June.
Rodner Figueroa Pens Apology Letter To Michelle Obama,
Accuses Univision Of Humiliating Him
Posted: 03/12/2015
8:26 pm EDT Updated: 03/13/2015 11:00 am
EDT
Less than 24 hours after being fired over his "Planet
of the Apes" remark toward Michelle Obama, former
Univision host Rodner Figueroa has penned
an open letter apologizing to the first lady and
firing back at Univision for how they handled the situation.
In the lengthy letter,
Figueroa addresses Obama directly and offers a formal apology while explaining
that the comment was taken out of context. The former "Sal Y
Pimienta" host also said his dismissal was a direct result of a complaint
by the first lady's office to the network and that Univision publicly
humiliated him.
"I want to clarify that I'm not racist and in no
way was my comment directed at you, but rather the work of the [make up]
artist, which left much to be desired," the letter says.
Rodner said in the letter that he comes from a
biracial family, was among the first openly gay television personalities on
Hispanic television and voted twice for President Barack Obama.
The apology comes after a segment by the fashionista
on Univision's entertainment show "El Gordo Y La Flaca," in which
Figueroa was analyzing images of make-up artist Paolo Ballesteros transforming
himself into different female celebrities, including the first lady. (Por que dijo "openly gay", para que sepan que el es
'parte del grupo' de ellos?)
While reviewing the image of Ballesteros as Obama with
a side-by-side image of the first lady herself, the
host said: "Mind
you, you know that Michelle Obama looks like she's part of the cast of
"Planet of the Apes," the film."
This post originally
appeared on HuffPost Voces and was translated by Carolina Moreno. It
was adapted for an English-speaking audience.
Also on The Huffington
Post
More:
Rodner Figueroa Rodner
Figueroa Apology Rodner
Figueroa Michelle Obama Apology Rodner
Figueroa LetterRodner
Figueroa Apology Letter Rodner
Figueroa Open Letter Rodner
Figueroa Univision
Suggest
a correction
What
The Judge Who Blocked Amnesty Order Just Did Could Blow Up Obama’s Plan
This
could expose a big lie told to the court...
The federal judge in Texas who blocked President Obama’s
executive amnesty order is calling government lawyers on the carpet.
Judge Andrew Hanen late Monday
ordered Obama’s legal team to appear in the judge’s courtroom to explain how
and why they allegedly lied about what the government has already done with
regard to granting rights and privileges to some 100,000 illegal immigrants.
Several days ago, Western
Journalism reported
that lawyers for the Justice Department had made an astonishing admission —
that the Obama administration had misled the federal judge about actions
already undertaken as a result of the president’s executive order on amnesty.
Now, as U.S.
News & World Report tells
us, the federal judge is none too happy and has just told government lawyers
thay must appear in court on March 19th.
“The hearing is in response to
a filing last week in which the government acknowledged three-year deportation
reprieves were granted before Hanen’s Feb. 16 injunction, which temporarily
halted Obama’s action, sparing from deportation as many as 5 million people in
the U.S. illegally.”
The coalition of 26 states
which had convinced Judge Hanen to temporarily block Obama’s executive amnesty
charges that the government misled the judge about not implementing part of the
plan before the judge halted it, giving the states more time to argue against
the president’s unilateral action on immigration.
As Breitbart notes: “Government attorneys had
previously said officials wouldn’t accept such requests under Obama’s action
until Feb. 18.”
The Reuters news agency says that Judge Hanen had
been asked by the administration to decided by Monday whether he would put on
hold his previous decision to block Obama’s executive action. Instead of
answering that administration request, the judge made his own demand of the
Obama legal team.
Judge Hanen’s decision to block
Obama’s amnesty oder was an initial victory for the states that brought the
case alleging Obama had exceeded his powers by using his pen to let close to 5
million illegal immigrants stay without threat of deportation and also be
granted Social Security numbers, work permits and possible federal
tax “refunds” even
though they had never paid income taxes.
Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/breaking-judge-blocked-amnesty-order-just-blow-obamas-plan/#b2Ct3kar3IDgspPj.99
Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/breaking-judge-blocked-amnesty-order-just-blow-obamas-plan/#b2Ct3kar3IDgspPj.99
WATCH
This Outraged Sheriff Blast Judges Who Told Him To Remove Patriotic American
Flag Display
"To
me, that’s a slap in the face.”
Bill Watson has been the sheriff in Portsmouth, Virginia, for close to ten
years. What he was just told by a group of judges, says the outspoken lawman,
was “the most asinine thing I’ve ever heard in my life.”
According to a report by WTKR-TV,
Sheriff Watson was told by the judges that a unique American flag display his
department was given by local firefighters could not be mounted on the wall in
the lobby of the courthouse. In fact, the outraged sheriff claims, the judges
told him they don’t want it to be shown anywhere in the public building…except
in the sheriff’s own office.
The image of the flag in the framed display
is made of old fire hoses. A sign beneath it reads, “A Tribute to Public
Safety.”
Advertisement-content
continues below
On the TV news report, Sheriff Watson says:
“They
expect my deputies to put their life on the line for a judge. If somebody was
going to come into a courtroom with a gun, the deputy is supposed to stand in
front of the judge and take a bullet, but yet they won’t let us have our flag,
saluting public safety? To me, that’s a slap in the face.”
By clicking on the video above, you can watch
the report on the flag controversy and the sheriff’s vow to go to jail rather
than take down the display.
Advertisement-content
continues below
Portsmouth, by the way, is an historic city
in the Hampton Roads region of southeast Virginia, with a very large military
presence. Portsmouth is home to the Norfolk Naval Shipyard, one of the few
facilities in the world with the capability to dry dock an aircraft carrier.
Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/watch-outraged-sheriff-blast-judges-told-remove-patriotic-american-flag-display/#D6KTYrcL5KXXjC57.99
“En mi opinión”
No comments:
Post a Comment