Pastor A

The following article is amazing! This is Judge Jeanine’s comments on her show… WOW! We need more to stand up and speak the truth…

My mom knew everything.  She knew when  I was down the street arguing with my sister Lulu about whose turn it was to  walk the new dog or ride the new bike.

And when I listen to the Obama White House,  I give her even more credit.

No one in this administration knows  anything.

The president didn’t know that the  inspector general was investigating his IRS for targeting political enemies.

The president didn’t know anything about  his Justice Department’s seizure of Associated Press records.

The attorney general didn’t know anything  about his department’s subpoena of AP records, but then again, Holder’s the one  who didn’t know anything about Fast and Furious, either.

And of course, Hillary didn’t know anything about requests for help in  Benghazi.

And Joe Biden, well he just doesn’t know  anything about anything!

So who’s running the joint?   I’m convinced my mom could do a  better job.

This week, on full display, the White House  is reeling after revelations that the IRS targeted political enemies.  And  the Justice Department engaged in the wholesale seizing of press phone  records.

What to do?

President Obama said, “We are out there  trying to hunt down the folks who carried this out, and we are trying to make  sure that we fix the system so that it doesn’t happen again.”

Weren’t you going to do that with Benghazi?  Not only did you not get the facts there, truth is, you lied about the  facts, didn’t you?  Truth is, you didn’t even send your investigators there  for three weeks, giving the terrorists, the press, and anyone who wanted the  chance to rummage through the classified documents that Ambassador Chris Stevens  didn’t have that golden hour to destroy, because your consulate didn’t meet  minimum security standards.

But to the IRS. You really want to hunt  down the folks that carried this out?  I’ll tell you where to look.   Start with IRS agents at the Cincinnati office – the guys you first tried  to blame.  Put them in a grand jury.  And ask them under oath which  supervisors told them to withhold tax exempt status from anyone who might  criticize your administration.  You feds know how to do that.  You do  it all the time.  And by the way, the system doesn’t need to be fixed. Your  administration needs to be fixed.

If you want the truth, tell your director  of the IRS exempt division — the learned Lois Lerner, the one who says she’s  not good at math — not to lie to Congress, which she did when she said  that her screening process was unbiased.  When in truth, two years ago, she  knew her agents were flagging all cases of anyone who criticized your  administration.  But of course, Mr. President, you’ll get to the bottom of  this.

So now you tell Steven Miller, acting  director of the IRS, that he has to go? With all due respect Mr. President,  mindless Miller wasn’t even there when this all happened.

And, he was leaving in a couple weeks  anyway!

So you fire the acting commissioner who  wasn’t even there when the wrongdoing occurred.

Instead, you give Sarah Ingram, the tax  exempt division commissioner, who was there — implementing this abuse of  power — a plum assignment in charge of the tax agency that oversees the  ObamaCare office.

And you want her to do what?  You want  her to oversee my healthcare?

You want my health, my life in her  hands?

You who look at me through political filters?

You who want to know what books I read?  What candidates I  support.  And whether I might someday run for office?

You and your IRS and ObamaCare henchmen – or, in the case of Benghazi, a lack  thereof?

You and your IRS ObamaCare henchmen decide if I get that  mastectomy?

Or a prosthesis for my limb that got blown  off because you can’t listen to another country that goes out of its  way.

Give us a tip about the Boston bomber – not  once, but twice – about two terrorist dirt bags who you’re housing, educating,  and funding?  Who want to kill us…

And who gets to do it because your FBI and  ICE agents can’t for the life of them figure out how to identify and stop  someone from coming back into our country after spending 6 months in the country  from which they supposedly sought political refuge?

But maybe I’m spending too much time on  Benghazi.

Then you engage in a massive, unprecedented  intrusion of the phone records of journalists and editors offices, home phones  and cell phones.  This is serious stuff.  We are not North  Korea.  This is not Iran.

A little primer here.  If law  enforcement wants press records, you notify the press, you negotiate with the  press, and you give them a chance to challenge in court.

Unless… There is a substantial threat to  the investigation.

You were in negotiations with the AP. They  agreed to embargo or hold back your story.

There are always two reasons for  things.  The given reason, and the real reason.  Mr.  President, you were in the middle of a very tight presidential race, and  you planned a press conference to beat your drum about how you dashed another  terrorist plot.  And when the very people you asked to embargo the story  heard you were about to do the same story, they scooped you, and did it  first.

Time to get even and target the  press?

President Obama said, “US national security  is dependent on those folks being able to operate with confidence that folks  back home have their backs. So they’re not just left out there high and dry … I  don’t think the American people would expect me, as the commander in chief, not  to be concerned about information that might compromise their missions or might  get them killed.”

Gee, too bad you didn’t use that reasoning  in Benghazi when you had a chance but still left American soldiers high and dry.

How can you say that you didn’t notify  anyone because it was a threat to national security when you were about to  disclose the very same information? Might you have done it in a more self  serving way?

Now your attorney general, in-over-his-head  Holder, is the one who has to personally sign off on this kind of  subpoena.  He says he knows nothing about it because he recused himself.  Really?  Where’s the  recusal letter?  Where’s the  memo?  Where’s the phone call?

Okay.  So we know you lied about one  stylistic change on Benghazi.  And by the way, it was nice of you to  do an email dump on Friday afternoon, in the midst of two other burgeoning  scandals.  I’ve read those emails.  Why were they classified in the  first place?  There’s nothing confidential in them, unless of  course confidential means it makes you look bad.

And even Petraeus,  who may be a philanderer, was honest enough to say: Frankly, I’d just assume not  use this. Translation: lie.

Interesting how word of his affair comes to  light right after that.  Sounds like a classic Obama Chicago squeeze plan.  Excuse my pun.

But maybe I’m spending too much time on  Benghazi.  According to righteous Harry Reid, the  president was right to call Benghazi a sideshow.

Harry Reid said, “They’re hyperventilating  about Benghazi. President Obama was absolutely right to call this a sideshow.  This is about smear politics and nothing else.”

Hyperventilating?  I’ll tell you what  Mr. Reid, and no due respect intended here:

There were only two people hyperventilating  in Benghazi.  They’re the ones painted by Al Qaeda-linked lasers – two men  on a roof who disobeyed your order to stand down, waited hours for help  that never came because you wouldn’t give the cross border authority order, and  instead, fired up Air Force One for your Las Vegas fundraiser, and went to  bed.

So don’t give me your holier than thou  rhetoric, and your arrogant condescending hogwash that you’re going to  get.

Rid of all the wrongdoers or throw us a few  crumbs like the grainy pictures of terrorists 8 months after an attack.  Or  give me your “I’m going to fix it” riff.

And do us all a favor - explain a few  things.

Why is it that you apologize to Muslims and  you lie to Americans?  Why is it that you use the IRS to silence political  dissent and the DOJ to threaten the press?  Why is it that you mobilize the  IRS to go after political enemies, but can’t mobilize troops to save American  lives in Benghazi?

Greg Hicks said it best.  He’s the man  who fought to get help for Americans, put his life on the line in Benghazi, who  you demoted to a desk job.

You can’t continue to embarrass us  anymore.

The American people want the truth.   The American people can handle the truth.  We don’t need your Jack  Nicholson moment:

We have the right to know it.  We have  the right to expect it.

In fact, we have the right to demand  it.

I’m still convinced my mom could do a  better job.

On Monday, after NBA player Jason Collins revealed to Sports Illustrated that he is a gay athlete, Chris Broussard of ESPN had some commentary that has been pretty heavily picked apart by many members of the sports media.

Broussard said:

“I’m a Christian. I don’t agree with homosexuality. I think it’s a sin, as I think all sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is.

“I believe that’s walking in open rebellion to God and to Jesus Christ. I would not characterize that person as a Christian because I do not think the Bible would characterize them as a Christian.”

2012 Master champion Bubba Watson responded Tuesday to Broussard’s thoughts on Twitter:

✔          @bubbawatson        Thanks @Chris_Broussard for sharing your faith & the bible!! #GodIsGood

Watson is one of the most outspoken Christians on the PGA Tour and hasn’t shied away in the past from a good controversial topic. This one on homosexuality seems to be no different.

by Stephen Bedard | March 25 2013

Social media is ablaze with recent comments by Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz on those who support traditional marriage.  The headline I have seen all over Facebook is “If You Support Marriage, We Don’t Want Your Business.”  I found that strange, not because I doubted that Schultz supported same-sex marriage but I found it hard to believe that he was really rejecting all the business of those who support traditional marriage.  From a purely financial perspective, that is rather foolish.  Since I am skeptical by nature, I decided to look into it.

Doing a search, I discovered that it was not really an attack on customers who support traditional marriage (he doesn’t even mention customers), but a discussion with a shareholder.  One article titled “Starbucks CEO: No Tolerance for Traditional Marriage Supporters” expresses the outrage that conservatives have toward what the CEO said.  If there is no tolerance for traditional marriage supporters, conservatives should be upset.  But what did Schultz really say?

It really would be good to find out what he says rather than just read about how upset people are.  You can find the actual comments by Schultz here. Please pay careful attention to what Schultz says.  The shareholder makes note that Starbuck’s endorsement of same-sex marriage has had some financial implications.  How does Schultz respond?

“Not every decision is an economic decision. Despite the fact that you recite statistics that are narrow in time, we did provide a 38% shareholder return over the last year. I don’t know how many things you invest in, but I would suspect not many things, companies, products, investments have returned 38% over the last 12 months. Having said that, it is not an economic decision to me. The lens in which we are making that decision is through the lens of our people. We employ over 200,000 people in this company, and we want to embrace diversity. Of all kinds.”

Schultz then goes on to make the statement that has gotten everyone all upset:  “If you feel, respectfully, that you can get a higher return than the 38% you got last year, it’s a free country. You can sell your shares in Starbucks and buy shares in another company. Thank you very much.”

What is Schultz saying here?  Is he saying that he does not want Starbucks customers who support traditional marriage?  No.  Is he saying that he does not want shareholders who support traditional marriage?  No.  He is saying that if a shareholder is not happy with the financial consequences of the company supporting same-sex marriage, there are other companies that they can invest in.  That is not an offensive comment at all.

Let me make things clear.  I am a supporter of traditional marriage.  As an ordained minister, I have never performed a same-sex wedding and I never will.  However, I am also someone who values the truth.  I understand that Christians want to stand up for the biblical worldview.  That is my desire and there are plenty of battles for us to fight.  But it does not help our case at all to twist the facts.

What does a non-Christian think when they hear Christians proclaiming that the Starbucks CEO has stated he does not want any business from traditional marriage supporters when he has not said anything like that at all?  They are going to question other things we say.  How often have we twisted the facts or neglected to do our homework for the sake of a claim with rhetorical punch?  I urge my Christian brothers and sisters to fight for the truth, but do it by getting the facts right and not by making statements that just feel right.

If you are interested in more, I have a short podcast episode called “When It Feels True” that relates to this issue.

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama’s socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class  on Obama’s plan”.. All grades will be averaged and everyone will  receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A …. (substituting grades for dollars – something closer to home and  more readily understood by all).

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B.  The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied  little were happy.

As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had  studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a  free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame  and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that  socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great,  the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the  reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.

Could not be any simpler than that. (Please pass this on) These are  possibly the 5 best sentences you’ll ever read and all applicable to  this experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the  wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must  work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government  does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work  because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the  other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody  else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the  end of any nation.

I do further declare that the doctrine of the churches of England and Scotland, of the Calvinists, Huguenots and others of the name Protestants or Liberals to be damnable and they themselves damned who will not forsake the same.

I do further declare, that I will help, assist, and advise all or any of his Holiness’ agents in any place wherever I shall be, in Switzerland, Germany, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, England, Ireland or America, or in any other Kingdom or territory I shall come to, and do my uttermost to extirpate the heretical Protestants or Liberals’ doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, regal or otherwise.

I do further promise and declare, that notwithstanding I am dispensed with, to assume my religion heretical, for the propaganda of the Mother Church’s interest, to keep secret and private all her agents’ counsels from time to time, as they may entrust me and not to divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing or circumstance whatever; but to execute all that shall be proposed, given in charge or discovered unto me, by you, my ghostly father, or any of this sacred covenant.

I do further promise and declare, that I will have no opinion or will of my own, or any mental reservation whatever, even as a corpse or cadaver (perinde ac cadaver), but will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive from my superiors in the Militia of the Pope and of Jesus Christ.

That I may go to any part of the world withersoever I may be sent, to the frozen regions of the North, the burning sands of the desert of Africa, or the jungles of India, to the centers of civilization of Europe, or to the wild haunts of the barbarous savages of America, without murmuring or repining, and will be submissive in all things whatsoever communicated to me.”

The following oath is taken word-for-word by a Jesuit Priest. It sounds so peaceful!

by Paul Joseph Watson | Editor for Prison Planet

The Department of Homeland Security is set to purchase a further 21.6 million rounds of ammunition to add to the 1.6 billion bullets it has already obtained over the course of the last 10 months alone, figures which have stoked concerns that the federal agency is preparing for civil unrest.

A solicitation posted yesterday on the Fed Bid website details how the bullets are required for the DHS Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Artesia, New Mexico.

The solicitation asks for 10 million pistol cartridge .40 caliber 165 Grain, jacketed Hollow point bullets (100 quantities of 100,000 rounds) and 10 million 9mm 115 grain jacketed hollow point bullets (100 quantities of 100,000 rounds).

The document also lists a requirement for 1.6 million pistol cartridge 9mm ball bullets (40 quantities of 40,000 rounds).

An approximation of how many rounds of ammunition the DHS has now secured over the last 10 months stands at around 1.625 billion. In March 2012, ATK announced that they had agreed to provide the DHS with a maximum of 450 million bullets over four years, a story that prompted questions about why the feds were buying ammunition in such large quantities. In September last year, the federal agency purchased a further 200 million bullets.

To put that in perspective, during the height of active battle operations in Iraq, US soldiers used 5.5 million rounds of ammunition a month. Extrapolating the figures, the DHS has purchased enough bullets over the last 10 months to wage a full scale war for almost 30 years.

Such massive quantities of ammo purchases have stoked fears that the agency is preparing for some kind of domestic unrest. In 2011, Department of Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano directed Immigration and Customs Enforcement to prepare for a mass influx of immigrants into the United States, calling for the plan to deal with the “shelter” and “processing” of large numbers of people.

The federal agency’s primary concern is now centered around thwarting “homegrown terrorism,” but information produced and used by the DHS to train its personnel routinely equates conservative political ideology with domestic extremism.

A study funded by the Department of Homeland Security that was leaked last year characterizes Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.

In August 2012, the DHS censored information relating to the amount of bullets purchased by the federal agency on behalf of Immigration & Customs Enforcement, citing an “unusual and compelling urgency” to acquire the bullets, noting that there is a shortage of bullets which is threatening a situation that could cause “substantial safety issues for the government” should law enforcement officials not be adequately armed.

As we highlighted last month, the DHS’ previous ammunition solicitation was awarded to Evian Group, an organization that was formed just five days before the announcement of the solicitation and appeared to be little more than a front organization since it didn’t have a genuine physical address, a website, or even a phone number.

While Americans are being browbeaten with rhetoric about the necessity to give up semi-automatic firearms in the name of preventing school shootings, the federal government is arming itself to the teeth with both ammunition and guns. Last September, the DHS purchased no less than 7,000 fully automatic assault rifles, labeling them “Personal Defense Weapons.”

by Kurt Nimmo | Infowars.com

On February 20, 2013, the Tucson, Arizona City Council passed a resolution allowing the U.S. Air Force to “make appropriate decisions when balancing National Security and community needs when it comes to their existing and future military mission and assignments.”

Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson, Arizona. Photo: U.S. Air Force.

In other words, the resolution allows the military to reject decisions made by the people of Tucson.

The resolution is posted on the Tucson government website (as of this writing) and further states that it “is necessary for the preservation of the peace, health and safety of the City of Tucson that this Resolution become immediately effective, an emergency is hereby declared to exist and this Resolution shall be effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.”

In short, the Council has imposed what for all practical purposes is a declaration of martial law on the residents of Tucson.

According to the Military Law Dictionary, “Martial law is defined as the imposition of military rule over a particular region on an emergency basis” and the privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus is routinely denied during its tenure.

The resolution does not, however, implement full-blown martial law but rather a limited version that permits the Pentagon to decide what municipal laws it will obey when dealing with civilians.

The public was not allowed to voice its opposition and Council members were not permitted to discuss the resolution, as noted by the meeting notice and agenda posted on the city government website.

“Matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion and one vote,” the agenda states. “There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired by members of the governing body, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and will be considered separately.”

The Department of Defense initially made the power grab in response to civilian complaints about military flights over the city.

“This resolution will allow DM to increase by at least two-fold or more, the number of overflights of the very densely populated midtown Tucson, and allow round-the-clock overflights, and the introduction of whatever aircraft they wish, in whatever numbers they wish…. including the hearing-damaging accident-waiting-to-happen-experimental F-35!” Occupied Tucson Citizen reported.

“The use of the term ‘emergency’ is particularly despicable! In this case, it is not even stated what constitutes the so-called “emergency”, but is obviously being used to get around the fact that it was passed in great haste and secrecy, so as not to alert citizens of how they are being shafted!”

by Michael Snyer | March 1, 2013

Is “discretionary income” rapidly becoming a thing of the past for most American families?  Right now, there are a lot of signs that we are on the verge of a nightmarish consumer spending drought.  Incomes are down, taxes are up, many large retail chains are deeply struggling because of the lack of customers, and at this point nearly a quarter of all Americans have more credit card debt than money in the bank.  Considering the fact that consumer spending is such a large percentage of the U.S. economy, that is very bad news.  How will we ever have a sustained economic recovery if consumers don’t have much money to spend?  Well, the truth is that we aren’t ever going to have a sustained economic recovery.  In fact, this debt-fueled bubble of false hope that we are experiencing right now is as good as things are going to get.  Things are going to go downhill from here, and if you think that consumer spending is bad now, just wait until you see what happens over the next several years.

Even though the Dow is surging toward a record high right now, everyone knows that things are not good for the middle class.  A recent quote from CPA Howard Dvorkin kind of summarizes our current state of affairs very nicely…

“The fact of the matter is that America is broke — whether it’s mortgages, student loans or credit cards, we are broke. The old rule of thumb is that people should have six months’ of savings,” Dvorkin says.”If you talk to people, most don’t have two pennies.”

These days most Americans are living from paycheck to paycheck, and thanks to rising prices and rising taxes, those paychecks are getting squeezed tighter and tighter.  Many families have had to cut back on unnecessary expenses, and some families no longer have any discretionary income at all.

The following are 16 signs that the middle class is rapidly running out of money…

#1 According to one brand new survey, 24 percent of all Americans have more credit card debt than money in the bank.

#2 J.C. Penney was once an unstoppable retail powerhouse, but now J.C. Penney has just posted its lowest annual retail sales in more than 20 years…

J.C. Penney Co. (JCP) slid the most in more than three decades after the department-store chain lost $4.3 billion in sales in the first year of Chief Executive Officer Ron Johnson’s turnaround plan.

The shares fell 18 percent to $17.40 at 11:28 a.m. in New York after earlier declining 22 percent, the biggest intraday drop since at least 1980, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. J.C. Penney yesterday said its net loss in the quarter ended Feb. 2 widened to $552 million from $87 million a year earlier. The Plano, Texas-based retailer’s annual revenue slid 25 percent to $13 billion, the lowest since at least 1987.

How much worse can things get?  At this point the decline has become so steep for J.C. Penney that Jim Cramer of CNBC is declaring that they are in “a true tailspin“.

#3 In the United States today, a new car has become out of reach for most middle class Americans according to the 2013 Car Affordability Study…

Looking to buy a new car, truck or crossover? You may find it more difficult to stretch the household budget than you expected, according to a new study that finds median-income families in only one major U.S. city actually can afford the typical new vehicle.

The typical new vehicle is now more expensive than ever, averaging $30,500 in 2012, according to TrueCar.com data, and heading up again as makers curb the incentives that helped make their products more affordable during the recession when they were desperate for sales. According to the 2013 Car Affordability Study by Interest.com, only in Washington could the typical household swing the payments, the median income there running $86,680 a year.

#4 The founder of Subway Restaurants, Fred Deluca, says that the recent tax increases are having a noticeable impact on his business…

“The payroll tax is affecting sales. It’s causing sales declines,” he said, estimating a decline of about 2 percentage points off sales at his restaurants. “There are a lot of pressures on consumers,” Deluca said, adding “I think this is on the permanent side, but I think business will adjust to it.”

#5 Many other large restaurant chains are also struggling in this tough economic environment…

Darden Restaurants, which owns the casual dining chains Oliver Garden, LongHorn Steakhouse and Red Lobster, said blended same-store sales at its three eateries would be 4.5 percent lower during its fiscal third quarter.

Clarence Otis, Darden’s chairman and chief executive, said that “while results midway through the third quarter were encouraging, there were difficult macro-economic headwinds during the last month of the quarter.”

“Two of the most prominent were increased payroll taxes and rising gasoline prices, which together put meaningful pressure on the discretionary purchasing power of our guests,” he added.

#6 The CFO of Family Dollar recently admitted to CNBC that this is a “challenging time” because of reduced consumer spending…

At Family Dollar where the average customer makes less than $40,000 a year, the combination of a two-percent hike in the payroll tax, rising gas prices and delayed tax refunds has created a “challenging time and an uncertain time for the consumer right now,” said Mary Winston, the company’s chief financial officer.

“In our case, anything that takes money out of our customer’s wallet gives them less money to spend in our stores,” she told CNBC. “So I think all of those things create nervousness for the consumer, and I think there are sometimes political dynamics going on that they might not even fully understand the details, but they know it’s not good.”

#7 Even Wal-Mart is really struggling right now.  According to a recent Bloomberg article, Wal-Mart is struggling “to restock store shelves as U.S. sales slump“…

Evelin Cruz, a department manager at the Wal-Mart Supercenter in Pico Rivera, California, said Simon’s comments from the officers’ meeting were “dead on.”

“There are gaps where merchandise is missing,” Cruz said in a telephone interview. “We are not talking about a couple of empty shelves. This is throughout the store in every store. Some places look like they’re going out of business.”

This all comes on the heels of an internal Wal-Mart memo that was leaked to the press earlier this month that described February sales as a “total disaster”.

#8 Electronics retailer Best Buy continues to struggle mightily.  Best Buy just announced that it will be eliminating 400 jobs at its headquarters in Richfield, Minnesota.

#9 It is being projected that many of the largest retail chains in America, including Best Buy, will close down hundreds of stores during 2013.  The following is a list of projected store closings for 2013 that I included in a previous article…

Best Buy

Forecast store closings: 200 to 250

Sears Holding Corp.

Forecast store closings: Kmart 175 to 225, Sears 100 to 125

J.C. Penney

Forecast store closings: 300 to 350

Office Depot

Forecast store closings: 125 to 150

Barnes & Noble

Forecast store closings: 190 to 240, per company comments

Gamestop

Forecast store closings: 500 to 600

OfficeMax

Forecast store closings: 150 to 175

RadioShack

Forecast store closings: 450 to 550

#10 Another sign that consumer spending is slowing down is the fact that less stuff is being moved around in our economy.   As I have mentioned previously, freight shipment volumes have hit their lowest level in two years, and freight expenditures have gone negative for the first time since the last recession.

#11 Many young adults have no discretionary income to spend because they are absolutely drowning in student loan debt.  According to the New York Federal Reserve, student loan debt nearly tripled between 2004 and 2012.

#12 The student loan delinquency rate in the United States is now at an all-time high.  It is only a matter of time before the student loan debt bubble bursts.

#13 Due to a lack of jobs and high levels of debt, poverty among young adults in America is absolutely exploding.  Today, U.S. families that have a head of household that is under the age of 30 have a poverty rate of 37 percent.

#14 According to one recent survey, 62 percent of all middle class Americans say that they have had to reduce household spending over the past year.

#15 Median household income in the United States has fallen for four consecutive years.  Overall, it has declined by more than $4000 during that time span.

#16 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the middle class is currently taking home a smaller share of the overall income pie than has ever been recorded before.

Are you starting to get the picture?

Retailers are desperate for sales, but you can’t squeeze blood out of a rock.

For much more on how the middle class is absolutely drowning in debt, please see this article: “Money Is A Form Of Social Control And Most Americans Are Debt Slaves“.

But if you listen to the mainstream media, they would have you believe that happy days are here again.

Right now, everyone seems to be quite giddy about the fact that the Dow is marching toward an all-time high.  And I actually do believe that the Dow will blow right past it.  In fact, it is even possible that we could see the Dow hit 15,000 before everything starts falling apart.

But at some point, the financial markets will catch up with economic reality.  It is just a matter of time.

In the meanwhile, those that are wise are taking advantage of these times of plenty to prepare for the great economic drought that is coming.

Don’t be caught living paycheck to paycheck and totally unprepared when the next wave of the economic collapse strikes.  Anyone that believes that this debt-fueled bubble of false hope can last indefinitely is just being delusional.

by Mike Adams | Natural News | February 26, 2013

You probably already know that the FDA has declared war on raw milk and even helped fund and coordinate armed government raids against raw milk farmers and distributors. Yes, it’s insane. This brand of tyranny is unique to the USA and isn’t even conducted in China, North Kora or Cuba. Only in the USA are raw milk farmers treated like terrorists.

But now the situation is getting even more insane than you could have imagined: the International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) have filed a petition with the FDA asking the FDA to alter the definition of “milk” to secretly include chemical sweeteners such as aspartame and sucralose.

Importantly, none of these additives need to be listed on the label. They will simply be swept under the definition of “milk,” so that when a company lists “milk” on the label, it automatically includes aspartame or sucralose. And if you’re trying to avoid aspartame, you’ll have no way of doing so because it won’t be listed on the label.

This isn’t only for milk, either: It’s also for yogurt, cream, sour cream, eggnog, whipping cream and a total of 17 products, all of which are listed in the petition at FDA.gov.

As the petition states:

IDFA and NMPF request their proposed amendments to the milk standard of identity to allow optional characterizing flavoring ingredients used in milk (e.g., chocolate flavoring added to milk) to be sweetened with any safe and suitable sweetener — including non-nutritive sweeteners such as aspartame.

This is all being done to “save the children,” we’re told, because the use of aspartame in milk products would reduce calories.

Milk industry specifically asks to HIDE aspartame from consumers

Astonishingly, the dairy industry is engaged in extreme doublespeak logic and actually arguing that aspartame should be hidden from consumers by not listing it on the label. Here’s what the petition says:

IDFA and NMPF argue that nutrient content claims such as “reduced calorie” are not attractive to children, and maintain that consumers can more easily identify the overall nutritional value of milk products that are flavored with non-nutritive sweeteners if the labels do not include such claims. Further, the petitioners assert that consumers do not recognize milk — including flavored milk — as necessarily containing sugar. Accordingly, the petitioners state that milk flavored with non-nutritive sweeteners should be labeled as milk without further claims so that consumers can “more easily identify its overall nutritional value.”

In other words, hiding aspartame from consumers by not including it on the label actually helps consumers, according to the IDFA and NMPF!

Yep, consumers are best served by keeping them ignorant. If this logic smacks of the same kind of twisted deception practiced by Monsanto, that’s because it’s identical: the less consumers know, the more they are helped, according to industry. And it’s for the children, too, because children are also best served by keeping them poisoned with aspartame.

Consumers have always been kept in the dark about pink slime, meat glue, rBGH and GMOs in their food. And now, if the IDFA gets its way, you’ll be able to drink hormone-contaminated milk from an antibiotics-inundated cow fed genetically modified crops and producing milk containing hidden aspartame. And you won’t have the right to know about any of this!

The FDA confirms this “secret” status of aspartame, stating, “If the standard of identity for milk is amended as requested by petitioners, milk manufacturers could use non-nutritive sweeteners in flavored milk without a nutrient content claim in its labeling.”

This is a clue to stop drinking processed milk and milk products altogether

There’s a bigger story here than just the industry hoping to get FDA approval to secretly put aspartame in milk products while not listing aspartame on the label.

The bigger question is this: If an industry is pushing to hide aspartame in its products, what else is it already hiding?

by Steve Watson | February 22, 2013

The states of Virginia and Washington moved  significantly closer to banning spy drones yesterday, making legislative  progress that has angered government agencies and law enforcement.

The Washington Times reports that the Virginia General Assembly  approved a moratorium on drone aircraft in the state, sending the legislation to  Gov. Bob McDonnell’s desk.

The Senate passed their version of the bill, which  advocates a blanket ban on the use of drones except where missing person  searches are concerned, for the next two years. Members voted by a 40-0 vote  after accepting an amendment from the House, which passed their bill, HB2012, Wednesday.

“We are pleased that it’s on the way to the  governor with strong bipartisan support,” bill sponsor Delegate Benjamin L.  Cline, Augusta Republican, told reporters in Charlottesville, Va. “We hope that  the governor will also share our support for a breathing period to get some  rules in place.”

Although the bill does not go quite as far as Delegate Todd Gilbert’s legislative push last year for a permanent strict ban on surveillance by drones, it is a step in the right direction as far  as privacy advocates are concerned.

Gov. McDonnell is expected to approve the  moratorium, despite comments he made last year when he described warrantless drones as “great”, citing “battlefield  successes”.

“If you’re keeping police officers safe, making it  more productive and saving money… it’s absolutely the right thing to do.”  McDonnell said on the deployment of drones in the state.

The approval of the moratorium on drones comes in  the wake of the passage of legislation by city officials in Charlottesville,  Va to keep drones out of their airspace altogether, making it the first US  city to enact such a ban. Whether city officials will be able to extend their  ban to federal drone aircraft or not remains to be seen.

In a similar move in Washington State yesterday,  legislation to limit drone use was approved 9-1 by a House Committee, and will move forward  to the Rules Committee before potentially heading to the floor of the House.

“I’m pleased the Committee moved H.B. 1771 with a  ‘Do Pass’ recommendation. We’ve been working on the issue for several months and  we have a lot of work left to do, but we passed the first hurdle today. It’s a  great day for freedom and liberty in Washington State,” said Rep. David Taylor  (R), the primary sponsor of the bill.

Much like the Virginia push, the Washington legislation  allows for drones to be used for surveillance, by government agencies and law  enforcement, only if a warrant is issued, or in search and rescue  situations.

“This bill quite simply provides protection to the  citizens of Washington state from warrantless surveillance. That’s our intent  here. To start a conversation and say if these things are going to be used, you  will protect the Constitutional rights of the citizens,” said Rep.Taylor.

“The entire drone issue is not going to be solved with just  this one bill, but this will get the law enforcement side under control because  there are no clear guidelines out there right now for the use of these drones  and we could put the state on the hook with liability if these drones are used  in an improper manner,” said Rep. Matt Shea (R), another sponsor.

“Drones are the equivalent of King George the III’s General  Warrants. We must get their use by public agencies and law enforcement under  control now to protect the people of Washington from warrantless searches and  seizure. Just imagine what state environmental agencies could do with drones  …. Tyranny,” said another sponsor, Rep. Jason Overstreet (R).

Many testified in support of the drone ban, including a  former FBI official, as well as regular citizens. Officials from government agencies and drone manufacturers expressed anger, and argued that the ban would cost jobs, hinder safety efforts,  and lead to over-regulation of law enforcement searches.

The Washington state push comes in the wake of a  scrapping of plans by Seattle city officials to roll out drones. Mayor Mike  McGinn ordered the city police department to abandon extensive plans  it had to roll out drones it has already acquired through federal grant  money.

Several other states and cities are considering legislation to prohibit the use of drones in domestic skies. Oregon became the latest state to do so recently with the introduction of a bill setting out licensing requirements for drone use in the state. The bill would fine those who use unlicensed drones to conduct surveillance. New limitations are also being proposed for federal evidence collected by drone use in a state court.

Meanwhile, in related news, Rolling Stone notes that the drone industry is set to launch  an all out PR offensive to convince Americans that the unmanned vehicles are  more than just tools for spying and assassinations.

As a Christian, it truly is time to stand up and boycott those who assault our faith with such ferociousness. The following article should alarm-you-to-action.  I’ve decided to no longer watch NBC or MSNBC ever again… even if there is a sporting event or news program on the channel. I am just one of 300 million in our country; however, if several million were to be as distressed as I am over the unrelenting assault on our values as Christians, we can make a difference. Will you join me and turn off NBC?

The following article is by Todd Starnes

Does NBC hate Christians?

That’s what I was wondering over the weekend as I watched “Saturday Night  Live” blaspheme Jesus Christ in a violent and bloody Quentin Tarantino parody – just three days after Ash Wednesday.

The fake movie trailer for “Djesus Uncrossed” featured the Savior brandishing  guns and blowing away Romans in classic Tarantino-style. Blood and gore and  profanity spewed across flat screens from coast to coast; at one point Jesus  sliced a man’s head in half.

“Critics are calling it a less violent ‘Passion of the Christ,’” the  announcer declared. “I never knew how much Jesus used the N-word.”

Offending Christians is apparently what passes for entertainment these  days.

A few days before the SNL episode, NBC Sports blogger Rick Chandler wrote a  scathing smear against a prominent Christian church in Dallas.

The First Baptist Church in Dallas had invited Tim Tebow to speak at an  upcoming service. Chandler urged the outspoken Christian football player to  reconsider.

“Tim Tebow to speak at virulently anti-gay, anti-Semitic Dallas mega-church,” read the headline on Chandler’s hit piece.

Sing Oldham, a spokesman for the Southern Baptist Convention, told me he’s  not surprised by NBC’s blistering assault on American Christians.

“It’s open season on those who profess personal faith in Jesus Christ and  pattern their lives by biblical morality,” he said. “Evangelical Christians are  treated with contempt and targeted for ridicule.”

And at the Peacock Network, the contempt and ridicule are on steroids.

NBC removed the words “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance during a  produced video that aired during the U.S. Open.

NBC medical editor Nancy Snyderman infamously denounced the religious part of  Christmas during an episode of Today.

“I don’t like the religion part,” said Snyderman. “I think religion is what  mucks the whole thing up.”

The “religion” she was referring to is celebrating the birth of Jesus  Christ.

The network has also produced religion-bashing shows like “The New Normal” and “The Book of Daniel.” That particular show as so offensive it led American  Family Radio Chairman Donald Wildmon to declare, “We are tired of NBC’s  anti-Christian bigotry.”

I wish I could tell you that this sort of anti-Christian bigotry is an  anomaly. Sadly, it is not.

We’ve seen the networks and national news publications denigrate the  Christian faith with great flair  — from the “Good Christian B****es” of  ABC to Newsweek’s Christmas essay about the “The Myths of Jesus.”

I find it interesting that the networks always mock and ridicule Christianity – but they give other religions a pass.

Why aren’t the writers at SNL churning out weekly skits about Islam – or the Prophet Mohammed? Where’s the mock movie trailer for “Jihad Undetonated?” Where’s the television show called “Good Muslim B****es?” Or the magazine essay about “The Myths of Mohammed?”

I suspect we all know the answer to why.

I’ve often wondered why the people at 30 Rock hold Christians in such  contempt. Maybe they choose to attack Christians because we are easy  targets.

Southern Baptist spokesman Oldham said it should come as no surprise that  networks like NBC target Christians for ridicule.

“Jesus said, ‘the world will hate you because of my name,’” he said,  referring to a passage in the New Testament.

As best as I can tell, the folks over at NBC are either ideological bullies  or religious bigots.

Either one is enough for me to change the channel.

 Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary and the author of  “Dispatches  from Bitter America: A Gun Toting, Chicken Eating Son of a Baptist’s Culture War  Stories.”

by Leah Barkoukis | Editor for Townhall

As the gun control debate rages on, we’ve seen a host of gun-rights advocates standing up for the Second Amendment. In addition to citizens, the NRA, the National Sheriffs Association and countless others, a number of companies—including gun manufacturers, sporting good retailers and gunsmiths—are now taking a stand by refusing to sell to law enforcement in New York and other states with restrictive gun laws.

The message in these companies’ statements is essentially about equality—local law enforcement and government agencies should not have rights that citizens do not.  Thus, if states such as New York choose to adopt restrictive gun laws and exempt law enforcement from those laws, the companies will no longer serve them as customers.  Breitbart compiled a list of the statements:

LaRue Tactical

Effective today, in an effort to see that no legal mistakes are made by LaRue Tactical and/or its employees, we will apply all current State and Local Laws (as applied to civilians) to state and local law enforcement / government agencies. In other words, LaRue Tactical will limit all sales to what law-abiding citizens residing in their districts can purchase or possess.

Olympic Arms

Due the passing of this legislation, Olympic Arms would like to announce that the State of New York, any Law Enforcement Departments, Law Enforcement Officers, First Responders within the State of New York, or any New York State government entity or employee of such an entity – will no longer be served as customers.

In short, Olympic Arms will no longer be doing business with the State of New York or any governmental entity or employee of such governmental entity within the State of New York – henceforth and until such legislation is repealed, and an apology made to the good people of the State of New York and the American people.

Extreme Firepower Inc, LLC

The Federal Government and several states have enacted gun control laws that restrict the public from owning and possessing certain types of firearms. Law-enforcement agencies are typically exempt from these restrictions. EFI, LLC does not recognize law-enforcement exemptions to local, state, and federal gun control laws. If a product that we manufacture is not legal for a private citizen to own in a jurisdiction, we will not sell that product to a law-enforcement agency in that jurisdiction.

Templar Custom

We will not sell arms to agents of the state of New York that hold themselves to be “more equal” than their citizens.

As long as the legislators of New York think they have the power to limit the rights of their citizens, in defiance of the Constitution, we at Templar will not sell them firearms to enforce their edicts.

Templar Custom is announcing that the State of New York, any Law Enforcement Departments, Law Enforcement Officers, First Responders within the State of New York, or any New York State government entity or employee will no longer be served as customers.

York Arms

Based on the recent legislation in New York, we are prohibited from selling rifles and receivers to residents of New York. We have chosen to extend that prohibition to all governmental agencies associated with or located within New York. As a result we have halted sales of rifles, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, machine guns, and silencers to New York governmental agencies.

Cheaper than Dirt

Recently, companies such as LaRue Tactical and Olympic Arms have announced that they will no longer sell prohibited items to government agencies and personnel in states that deny the right to own those items to civilians. It has been and will continue to be Cheaper Than Dirt’s policy to not to sell prohibited items to government agencies and/or agents in states, counties, cities, and municipalities that have enacted restrictive gun control laws against their citizens. We support and encourage other companies that share in this policy.

Of course, there are some big names missing—Smith & Wesson, Glock and Sig Sauer, which as The Blaze points out, are the “trio of manufacturers recommended by the NYPD for use by their officers.” Gun rights groups are urging their supporters to pressure these companies into joining the others in protest.

While New York is the main focus in many of these statements, gun rights advocates should also keep an eye on what’s happening in New Jersey.  The Democratic-led New Jersey Legislature took up a package of 20 extreme gun-control bills this week and a floor vote will be held by the full Assembly on February 21. It is reassuring, however, that Gov. Christie has the ability to veto any measures that do pass.

by Guy Benson | Political Editor

Last week, Lindsey Graham’s unrelenting line of questioning compelled Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to confirm under oath that not a single military asset was deployed to help rescue besieged US personnel in the course of a terrorist raid in Benghazi, Libya.  The September 11, 2012 attack lasted nearly eight hours, during which four Americans died, including our sitting ambassador.  Multiple requests for increased security in the weeks and months leading up to the massacre were denied.  Urgent warnings that the Benghazi consulate couldn’t withstand a sustained attack were ignored.  (The compound didn’t even meet minimum security standards for American diplomatic outposts anywhere in the world).  An eleventh-hour cable accurately predicting an imminent attack resulted in…nothing.  Explicit calls for help during the prolonged raid went unheeded amidst a flurry of “stand down” orders.  One of many lingering questions regarding this outrageous episode is what our Commander-in-Chief was doing throughout the ordeal, during which America’s real-time response was evidently paralyzed by chaotic indecision.  Yesterday, the White House finally shed some light on this question by releasing a letter describing what President Obama was not doing as American diplomats’ lives hung in the balance:

President Obama didn’t make any phone calls the night of the Sept. 11 attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, the White House said in a letter to Congress released Thursday. “During the entire attack, the president of the United States never picked up the phone to put the weight of his office in the mix,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, who had held up Mr. Obama’s defense secretary nominee to force the information to be released. Mr. Graham said that if Mr. Obama had picked up the phone, at least two of the Americans killed in the attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi might still be alive because he might have been able to push U.S. aid to get to the scene faster. The White House has said Mr. Obama was kept up to date on the attack by his staff, though after being alerted to the attack in a pre-scheduled afternoon meeting he never spoke again with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin E. Dempsey or then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

And there’s this, which (a) re-confirms what we’ve known for some time, and (b) begs the question of why the administration approved false talking points for public consumption:

Mr. Panetta told Congress last week that he knew immediately the attacks were a terrorist assault, though the White House downplayed that notion in the first five days after the attack.

Who conceived of the false talking points and why were they employed at all, let alone for days?  Why were requests for security upgrades repeatedly turned down, especially since our intelligence knew of at least ten active jihadi groups operating in Benghazi at the time?  If the Commander-in-Chief wasn’t in contact with his top people throughout the raid, and if he wasn’t ordering the full might of the United States military into motion to protect the lives of our diplomats (which he’s claimed is his “number one” priority), what was he doing over those eight hours?  Our only clue is a campaign rally in Las Vegas the next day, which the president attended as scheduled — having blown off another daily intelligence briefing, which was a habitual occurrence.  That these questions have not been sufficiently answered — or even asked, in some cases — is less a product of masterful White House stonewalling as it is a profoundly vexing indictment of our media.

But hey, “what difference does it make?“

by Bob Livingston | February 1, 2013

The Department of Homeland Security has new advice for those unfortunate enough to find themselves in a situation where their workplace is being shot to pieces by a crazed gunman: cower under the desk, lock the door, grab the scissors, hope you don’t get shot.

In a ridiculously simplistic propaganda video entitled “Options for Consideration,” DHS mentions recent mass shootings — all of which occurred in gun-free zones — and gives instructions on the best ways to cower in fear and hope you don’t get shot. The video description claims it “demonstrates possible actions to take if confronted with a (sic) active shooter scenario. The instructive video reviews the choices of evacuating, hiding, or, as an option of last resort, challenging the shooter.” The challenge makes no mention of pulling out your own personal protection firearm, but does suggest grabbing a pair of scissors.

The ultimate irony is that at the end of the video, a group of law enforcement officers wielding personal defense weapons enter the workplace looking for the shooter. Anyone running out of the workplace with hands in the air is allowed to pass. Meanwhile, officers are going into office carrying the very weapons the gun grabbers want to deny lawful gun owners.

The overall message of DHS is clear: Take no action beyond pretending to be a herd animal and hope law enforcement gets there before everyone in the building is dead or dying.