NEVER TOLERATE TYRANNY!....Conservative voices from the GRASSROOTS.

The White House Community Organizer is rounding up his masses of GOONS!

********************************************************

YIKES! Listen to the violence in this song - of course it's on the SEIU website. They are working with other unions and labor federations to have the song available to be played at rallies across the country. Here are some of the lyrics: Ya got take the bastards down. Let them know. We got to smash them to the ground. Let them know. We got to take the bastards down. When the boss comes calling you got to stand your ground. When the boss comes calling don't believe their lies. When the boss comes calling we got to organize. When the boss comes calling we will stand and fight we can't let them win." With lyrics like that, it's no wonder the violent SEIU took special notice of the song... http://www.seiu.org/2011/02/the-dropkick-murphys.php?fb_ref=seiuorg...

********************************************************

Sometimes it's necessary to get out on the streets and "get a little bloody," a Massachusetts Democrat said Tuesday in reference to labor battles in Wisconsin. Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Mass.) fired up a group of union members in Boston with a speech urging them to work down in the trenches to fend off limits to workers' rights like those proposed in Wisconsin. "I'm proud to be here with people who understand that it's more than just sending an email to get you going," Capuano said, according to the Statehouse News. "Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary." Political observers have been the lookout for potentially incendiary rhetoric in the wake of January's shooting in Tucson, Ariz., where Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D) survived an assassination attempt, six were killed, and 12 others were injured. On Wednesday afternoon, Capuano issued a brief apology: "I strongly believe in standing up for worker rights and my passion for preserving those rights may have gotten the best of me yesterday in an unscripted speech. I wish I had used different language to express my passion and I regret my choice of words." Political rhetoric has become especially heated in Madison, Wis., where Republican Gov. Scott Walker has proposed major labor reforms that sparked more than a week's worth of rowdy protests at the state capitol. "We take security seriously, whether it's for me, the lieutenant governor and all 132 members of the state legislature, Democrats or Republicans alike, because there's a lot of passion down here," Walker said Tuesday on MSNBC about his safety in Wisconsin. "And particularly when we see people coming in being bussed in from other states, that's what worries us." Capuano made his remarks before a crowd of union members in Boston, along with other members of the state's congressional delegation. Massachusetts has an influential union population that could loom large over the 2012 Senate race. Capuano is considering getting in that race to challenge Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) next fall. "This is going to be a struggle at least for the next two years. Let's be serious about this. They're not going to back down and we're not going to back down. This is a struggle for the hearts and minds of America," Capuano told union members. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/145627-dem-lawmake...

*********************************************************

As a large and furious demonstration was under way outside and inside the Capitol in Madison last week, Barack Obama invited in a TV camera crew from Milwaukee and proceeded to fan the flames. Dropping the mask of The Great Compromiser, Obama reverted to his role as South Chicago community organizer, charging Gov. Scott Walker and the Wisconsin legislature with an "assault on unions." As the late Saul Alinsky admonished in his "Rules for Radicals," "the community organizer ... must first rub raw the resentments of the people; fan the latent hostilities to the point of overt expression." After Obama goaded the demonstrators, the protests swelled. All 14 Democratic state senators fled to Illinois to paralyze the upper chamber by denying it a quorum. Teachers went on strike, left kids in the classroom and came to Madison. Schools shut down. Jesse Jackson arrived. The White House political machine went into overdrive to sustain the crowds in Madison and other capitals and use street pressure to break governments seeking to peel back the pay, perks, privileges and power of public employee unions that are the taxpayer-subsidized armies of the Democratic Party. Marin County millionairess Nancy Pelosi, doing a poor imitation of Emma Goldman, announced, "I stand in solidarity with the Wisconsin workers fighting for their rights, especially for all the students and young people leading the charge." Is this not the same lady who called Tea Partiers "un-American" for "drowning out opposing views"? Is not drowning out opposing views exactly what those scores of thousands are doing in Madison, banging drums inside the state Capitol? Some carried signs comparing Walker to Hitler, Mussolini and Mubarak. One had a placard with the face of Walker in the cross hairs of a rifle sight. Major media seemed uninterested. These signs didn't comport with their script. In related street action, protesters, outraged over Congress' oversight of the D.C. budget, showed up at John Boehner's residence on Capitol Hill to abuse the speaker at his home. And so the great battle of this generation is engaged. Between now and 2013, the states are facing a total budget shortfall of $175 billion. To solve it, they are taking separate paths. Illinois voted to raise taxes by two-thirds and borrow $12 billion more, $8.5 billion of it to pay overdue bills. The Republican minority fought this approach, but was outvoted and accepted defeat. Wisconsin, however, where Republicans captured both houses and the governor's office in November, and which is facing a deficit of $3.6 billion over the next two years, has chosen to cut spending. Walker and the legislature want to require state employees, except police, firemen and troopers, to contribute half of their future pension benefits and up to 12.6 percent of health care premiums. Wisconsin state workers and teachers enjoy the most generous benefits of state employees anywhere in America. According to the MacIver Institute, the average teacher in the Milwaukee public schools earns $100,000 a year -- $56,000 in pay, $44,000 in benefits -- and enjoys job security. More controversially, Walker would end collective bargaining for benefits while retaining it for salaries and wage hikes up to annual inflation. This would ease the burden on local governments and school districts faced with the same budget crisis but less able to stand up to large and powerful government unions. Other new governors like John Kasich of Ohio are looking at the Wisconsin approach to save their states from bankruptcy. They, too, are now facing massive street protests instigated by Obama and orchestrated by his agents operating out of the DNC. The Battle of Madison, where Obama, Pelosi, the AFL-CIO, Jackson, the teachers unions and the Alinskyite left are refusing to accept the results of the 2010 election and taking to the streets to break state governments, is shaping up as the first engagement in the Battle for America. What will be decided? Can the states, with new governments elected by the people, roll back government to prevent a default? Or will the states be forced by street protests, work stoppages by legislators, and strikes by state employees and teachers to betray the people who elected them? Will they be forced to raise taxes ad infinitum to feed the government's insatiable appetite for tax dollars? In short, does democracy work anymore in America? What Obama has done will come back to haunt him. He has encouraged if not incited an angry and alienated left that lost the country in a free election to overturn the results of that election by street protests and invasions of state capitols. As the huge antiwar demonstrations in the 1960s broke the presidency of Lyndon Johnson and sought to break the presidency of Richard Nixon, Obama and his cohorts are out to break Wisconsin. One hopes the people of Wisconsin will stand up to this extortion being carried on with the blessing of their own president... http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=41929

********************************************************

Just about a month ago John Heileman wrote an article in New York Magazine reporting that President Obama hasn't yet conferred with some half dozen cabinet members during the first two years of his administration. The more pointed variant of this critique was directed specifically at Obama. Unlike 42-who loved to stay up late, jabbing at the speed dial, spending countless hours gabbing with local pols and businesspeople around the country to gauge the political wind and weather-44 not only eschewed reaching out to governors, mayors, or CEOs, but he rarely consulted outside the tiny charmed circle surrounding him in the White House. "What you had was really three or four people running the entire government," says the former White House strategist. "I thought they put a pretty good Cabinet together, but most of those guys might as well be in the witness-protection program." A funny line, no doubt, but an overstatement, surely? Well, maybe not. "I happen to know most of the Cabinet pretty well, and I get together with them individually for lunch," says one of the most respected Democratic bigwigs in Washington. "I've had half a dozen Cabinet members say that in the first two years, they never had one call-not one call-from the president. We're not talking about group cabinet meetings, we are about the slightest phone call from their boss or a one-on-one personal sit down. Imagine working at a job where you haven't spoken to your boss for two years. But now we have a reason why the President has no time for his cabinet secretaries, in the video below AFL/CIO boss Richard Trumka brags about how he speaks to the White House every day and visits 2-3x a week. Is Trumka telling the truth? Or is this simply the bragging of a union bully? Do you think that anyone in the press is going to ask the White House about this? It would be nice to know if our president has more time for a union boss than he has for his own cabinet. Certainly Trumka's relationship with the White House is working as the president has gone out of his way to protect unions. Be it the waivers given to unions for Obamacare or the support the President's PAC has given to the Wisconsin protesters. Sadly it seems that our national government is not being run for the good of the American people but for the benefit of Big Labor, less than 12% of the population... http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2011/02/white-house-has-no-time-for-...

********************************************************

In an attempt to follow their European counterparts, public-sector unions in Wisconsin are endorsing a call for a general strike if Governor Scott Walker's plan passes and is signed into law. As the Wisconsin Legislature reconvened this morning, a key federation of nearly 100 labor unions in the state is calling for a general strike for about 45,000 people if Gov. Scott Walker's budget repair bill is signed into law. The South Central Federation of Labor is calling for a general strike if the bill becomes law. Sources told BizTimes that other labor unions that would be affected by Walker's bill also are pondering going out on strike if the proposal is approved. While Wisconsin has been deemed to be "ground zero" by the unions, if union bosses' bullying tactics succeed in shutting down the state of Wisconsin, they will be emboldened to shut down other states as well... http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2011/02/22/wisconsin-union...

********************************************************

The Indiana senate passed a sweeping immigration bill that echoes Arizona's tougher measures on illegal immigrants and despite opposition from some of the largest employers and business groups in the state. The measure, passed on Tuesday night by a vote of 31-18, would allow state and local police to ask a person stopped for infractions like traffic violations for proof of legal residency if the officer has a "reasonable suspicion" they may be in the country illegally. Another provision would call for, with some exceptions, the use of English only in public meetings, on Web sites and in documents. The bill still needs to be adopted by state's House of Representatives, where opponents say they will now turn. The vote "was a key step in the legislative process," the bill's author Sen. Mike Delph said in a statement, adding that the bill will "send a clear message that Indiana will no longer be a sanctuary for people who are in our state and country illegally because of our federal government's failure to act on illegal immigration." Greater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce officials say the measure would have a chilling effect on business, particularly convention business. "It will have a negative economic impact on the state of Indiana," Chamber Public Policy Director Angela Smith-Jones said, adding that immigration issues should be handled on the federal level. The Chamber feels it has a good chance of lobbying enough House members to block the bill, Smith-Jones said... http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Indiana-lawmakers-pass-rb-1922441018....

*********************************************************

The nation's immigration battle returned to the state Capitol on Tuesday as a key legislative committee passed two major bills that could significantly impact illegal immigrants living in Arizona. The Senate Appropriations Committee became the first state legislative committee in the nation to pass a package of bills intended to challenge the practice of granting citizenship to children born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants. It also approved an "omnibus" bill that would prevent undocumented children from attending school, prohibit illegal immigrants from driving or buying a vehicle and deny illegal immigrants the ability to obtain a marriage license in Arizona. Hundreds of protesters and supporters gathered outside the chambers Tuesday while dozens waited late into the night to speak to lawmakers. Late Tuesday, the committee had still not heard two remaining immigration-related bills, including one that would force hospitals to ask about citizenship status at some point during admission or treatment. The bills before the Senate Appropriations Committee would alter citizenship for children born in the United States to non-citizens, prevent undocumented children from attending school, prohibit illegal immigrants from driving or purchasing a vehicle and force hospitals to ask about citizenship before providing medical care. Late Tuesday, the committee advanced two of the bills, becoming the first state legislative committee in the nation to pass legislation intended to challenge the practice of granting citizenship to children born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants. Committee members voted 8-5 to approve a controversial package of bills, which would challenge the 14th Amendment interpretation about citizenship. Senate Bill 1308 seeks permission from Congress to set up a system in which states can create separate birth certificates for children who meet a new definition of a citizen and those who do not. SB 1309 creates that new definition of citizen, defining children as citizens of Arizona and the U.S. if at least one of their parents was either a U.S. citizen or a legal permanent U.S. resident. The two bills now go to a vote of the full Senate. The immigration bills -- some of which were added to the agenda at the last minute -- were sent to this committee by Senate President Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, because its Republican members are the Senate's most conservative. But the committee is the first step in a long process, and the bills' ultimate fate is unclear. They still need the support of a majority of the full Senate, a House committee and the full House before reaching the governor or becoming law. Public surveys indicate many Arizonans support increased efforts to combat illegal immigration, and many political experts say Brewer's decision to sign another immigration bill, Senate Bill 1070, helped keep her in office and elect many of the conservative lawmakers now supporting this new crop of bills. But Democrats and some more moderate Republicans say the bills distract from the state's efforts to attract jobs and restore the economy. "We recognize the concern that individuals have in Arizona about the undocumented-worker problem and the costs to the state government," said Sen. Paula Aboud, D-Tucson. "But if jobs are our focus, if the economy and turning our economy around in Arizona is what's critical, these immigration bills don't do it. They hurt our image." The legislative sponsors of the birthright-citizenship bills have said the goal is to get the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on the issue. Sen. Ron Gould, R-Lake Havasu City, the primary sponsor of the Senate bills aimed at challenging the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, said at least one parent of all children born in Arizona would have to prove their legal status under the bill "It won't be any more difficult than their parents proving they are eligible to vote in Arizona," Gould said. Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, disagreed, saying the bill may deny citizenship to children born to parents who both have dual citizenship and owe allegiance to the U.S. and a foreign country. Brenda Rascon, a Mesa resident and biology doctoral student, spoke against the bill. "I reject your policies, which I find rationally and morally insulting," she said. "Do not undermine the Constitution." Valerie Roller, Republican chairwoman of Legislative District 14 in Phoenix, supported the bill. "We should never give away something as valuable as our American citizenship cheaply," she said. The Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce opposed the bills, saying the matter needs to be addressed at the federal level. "I don't think anyone can make the argument that Arizona is the right place to discuss the meaning of the 14th Amendment," Arizona Chamber CEO Glenn Hamer said. "This will put Arizona through another trial and hurt innocent businesspeople who are just trying to get ahead." Gould accused Hamer's organization of being "open border because you like cheap labor." Sen. Rich Crandall, R-Mesa, was the only Republican to vote no on the pair of bills. He said he doesn't believe the dozen or so other states considering similar bills will actually pass them, leaving Arizona standing alone again, referring to Arizona's tough immigration measure, Senate Bill 1070. "This is not a conversation about what the intent was of a conversation that happened over 200 years ago," Crandall said. "This is a vote about whether we are going to be the first and only state to have two birth certificates." Sen. Rick Murphy, R-Glendale, voted for the bill, asking how long Arizona should wait for the federal government to take up the issue before giving up and trying to fix the issue itself. Senate Bill 1611, which Pearce introduced about 24 hours before the hearing, passed on a 7-6 vote. Among other things, the "omnibus" bill would make it a crime for illegal immigrants to drive in Arizona, require proof of citizenship to enroll in K-12 public or private schools as well as community colleges and universities, and ban illegal immigrants from buying a vehicle. Pearce said his bill does not contain new ideas but strengthens existing laws. "It tightens up the laws and makes sure illegal is illegal," Pearce said. "This is about protection of the taxpayer." Sinema objected, saying the bill includes 16 substantive changes, many of which are similar to bills Pearce has unsuccessfully proposed in prior years. Crandall voted against the measure, saying he was concerned about the bill's effect on tourism. "This is not what we stand for," he said. "We don't want people to fly in for a big golf tournament or auto auction and have to bring their birth certificate. I think we're better than this." Committee Chairman Sen. Andy Biggs, R-Gilbert, voted for the measure. "We need to have the moral courage to deal with this issue when there's a vacuum at the federal level," he said. However, Biggs also said he had concerns about some of the language and would work with Pearce to address those issues. Gov. Jan Brewer on Tuesday said she had not yet read the bill and declined to say whether she would support it. "I'll be watching and listening and learning as it moves through the process," Brewer said...http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2011/02/23/2...

********************************************************

Writing in the Washington Post, George Will begins a splendid profile of Governor Scott Walker by reminding us that Madison, Wisconsin used to style itself as "the Athens of the Midwest." These days, the similarities are indeed pronounced, and not at all flattering. In the city of Athens, Greece, an interesting new mutation of anarchy has appeared: the "I Won't Pay" movement. As described by the Associated Press, it's a combination of labor union members and Communist Party activists (funny how those flavors of collectivism combine so readily!) who prevent people from paying for municipal transportation, highway tolls, and even fees at state hospitals. They do this by blockading toll booths, sabotaging ticket machines, and encouraging other Greek citizens to stiff the government for public services, any way they can. Greece lies in a pool of her own blood at the base of socialism's cliff, crushed on the rocks of unsustainable government spending and a moribund economy. The "I Won't Pay" crowd is upset by the government's new austerity measures, and (justifiably) angered by years of widespread corruption. It's grimly amusing to watch socialists wail in surprise and fury when they discover their government is corrupt. Of course it is. So was every other socialist and communist government on the planet, throughout the sad history of collectivist thought. Corruption is an inherent feature of collectivism. There are no large, honest governments, and there never will be. When political power becomes one of the most valuable commodities in an economy, it will be bought, sold, and traded. "The people have paid already through their taxes, so they should be able to travel for free," an activist told the Associated Press while picketing a metro ticket booth. That's a fine example of the kind of thinking that turned Greece into a basket case, and music to a communist's ears. An atmosphere of anarchy provides excellent acoustics for the siren song of collective ownership. Things may seem desperate now, oppressed workers, but serve and obey the State, and everything will be provided for "free!" The vastly more efficient principle of expecting the people who actually ride a train to pay for the service is confusing to childlike minds. Newspaper columnist Dionysis Gousetis made an interesting point in criticizing the idealistic freeloaders: "The course from initial lawlessness to final wanton irresponsibility is like a spreading cancer." This is always a danger with civil disobedience. What better word for the crowds of public union employees marching around "the Athens of the Midwest" than "irresponsible?" From teachers using their students as political props and tossing around Hitler references, to doctors writing fraudulent excuses to obtain paid sick leave for union shock troops, to Democrat politicians fleeing the state to shut down a vote, the Wisconsin Left abandoned all responsibility to the people it wishes to subjugate. Prosperity flourishes in an environment of trust, established through mutual respect for the law. No government or private corporation could afford to provide services for very long, if people felt free to use them without paying. It doesn't take much imagination to see the "I Won't Pay" movement as exactly the kind of poison that will murder the deformed economy of Greece in its basket. The notion being pushed against the capitols of Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, and other American states wrestling with powerful and desperate public unions is a related toxin. Call it the "You Will All Pay" movement. It is the idea that taxpayers have no say whatsoever in how public unions are compensated. Union demands override the outcome of the democratic process, to the point where democratic government itself will be shut down, if it seems likely to produce an outcome the union leadership doesn't like. The people may be able to vote for new representatives, but those representatives are not allowed to adjust the relationship between government and the unions. The "right" of public employees to collective bargaining - which has only existed for about fifty years - is now even more immutable than the Constitution, which at least has an amendment process. These "public employees" obviously don't recognize their Republican governors, or the people who voted for them, as "employers" they must respectt and serve. It's a trait they have in common with the Greek anarchists who are sabotaging ticket booths. Using public services without paying for them. forcing the public to pay for civil servants they don't want and cannot afford. Two sides of the same coin, really. Both are demands made in the absence of responsibility, made by people who feel no allegiance to those who sustain them. Both involve the selfish use of public resources, while disregarding inconvenient laws and requirements. They are two separate trails that converge on the road to serfdom. The "I Won't Pay" movement is a little confused about who will end up as the serfs. The public unions of America suffer from no such confusion... http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=41954

*******************************************************

Muammar Gaddafi, Libya's long-standing ruler, has reportedly lost control of more cities as anti-government protests continue to sweep the African nation despite his threat of a brutal crackdown. Protesters in Misurata said on Wednesday they had wrested the western city from government control. In a statement on the internet, army officers stationed in the city pledged "total support for the protesters". The protesters also seemed to be in control of much of the country's east, and an Al Jazeera correspondent, reporting from the city of Tobruk, 140km from the Egyptian border, said there was no presence of security forces. "From what I've seen, I'd say the people of eastern Libya are the ones in control," Hoda Abdel-Hamid, our correspondent, said. She said there were no officials manning the border when the Al Jazeera team crossed into Libya. "All along the border, we didn't see one policeman, we didn't see one soldier and people here told us they [security forces] have all fled or are in hiding and that the people are now in charge, meaning all the way from the border, Tobruk, and then all the way up to Benghazi. "People tell me it's also quite calm in Bayda and Benghazi. They do say, however, that 'militias' are roaming around, especially at night. They describe them as African men, they say they speak French so they think they're from Chad." Major-General Suleiman Mahmoud, the commander of the armed forces in Tobruk, told Al Jazeera that the troops led by him had switched loyalties. "We are on the side of the people," he said. "I was with him [Gaddafi] in the past but the situation has changed - he's a tyrant." Benghazi, Libya's second largest city, was where people first rose up in revolt against Gaddafi's 42-year long rule more than a week ago. The rebellion has since spread to other cities despite heavy-handed attempts by security forces to quell the unrest. With authorities placing tight restrictions on the media, flow of news from Libya is at best patchy. But reports filtering out suggest at least 300 people have been killed in the violence. But Franco Frattini, the Italian foreign minister, said there were "credible' reports that at least 1,000 had died in the clampdown. Amid the turmoil, a defiant Gaddafi has vowed to quash the uprising. He delivered a rambling speech on television on Tuesday night, declaring he would die a martyr in Libya, and threatening to purge opponents "house by house" and "inch by inch". He blamed the uprising in the country on "Islamists", and warned that an "Islamic emirate" has already been set up in Bayda and Derna, where he threatened the use of extreme force. He urged Libyans to take to the streets and show their support for their leader. Several hundred government loyalists heeded his call in Tripoli, the capital, on Wednesday, staging a pro-Gaddafi rally in the city's Green Square. Fresh gunfire was reported in the capital on Wednesday, after Gaddafi called on his supporters to take back the streets from anti-government protesters. But Gaddafi's speech has done little to stem the steady stream of defections from his side. Libyan diplomats across the world have either resigned in protest at the use of violence against citizens, or renounced Gaddafi's leadership, saying that they stand with the protesters. Late on Tuesday night, General Abdul-Fatah Younis, the country's interior minister, became the latest government official to stand down, saying that he was resigning to support what he termed as the "February 17 revolution". He urged the Libyan army to join the people and their "legitimate demands". On Wednesday, Youssef Sawani, a senior aide to Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, one of Muammar Gaddafi's sons, resigned from his post "to express dismay against violence", Reuters reported. Earlier, Mustapha Abdeljalil, the country's justice minister, had resigned in protest at the "excessive use of violence" against protesters, and diplomat's at Libya's mission to the United Nations called on the Libyan army to help remove "the tyrant Muammar Gaddafi". A group of army officers has also issued a statement urging soldiers to "join the people" and remove Gaddafi from power... http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/02/201122312525669914...

*******************************************************

Must See Video: No-Go-Zones (neighborhoods that are labeled as dangerous to whites and non-Muslims who enter them) in France - near civil war. This is scary stuff! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1fcgSvu6xM

********************************************************

While many people are cheering the revolts going on throughout the Middle East and shudder at the horrible violence few people are discussing the possible effect that these revolts will have on the world/US Economy. Should these revolts continue to spike up the cost of oil, the world will be thrown into an economic crisis worse than the recession that began in 2007. Certainly the crash of the sub-prime housing boom, which was caused by the progressive belief that owning a home was a right, is the primary reason behind the financial crisis and what was to become known as the "great recession." The part that most people forget is that the "pin" that pricked the housing bubble, and led us down the economic abyss was oil prices. In fact every rescission we have had since the mid-1970s has shown an accompanying spike in oil prices. It is not a coincidence that the worst recession in that period has been accompanied by the largest oil price spike. Economist Jeffrey Rubin said in 2008: Curiously, an over-500% increase in the real price of oil gets virtually ignored as a culprit behind today's economy, eclipsed by the ongoing crisis in financial markets. Yet the run-up in real oil prices this cycle is over twice the spike in oil prices that occurred during the first or second OPEC oil shock. And those oil shocks produced two of the deepest recessions in the entire post-war period, including the 1980-82 double dip. The price of oil influences more than just how you heat your house or drive your car. Since most manufacturing uses oil in at least some of their manufacturing process, even if it just to get product to the market, when the oil began to spike in 2006, people who could barely afford their mortgages began to have to choice between their bank payments or basic staple items whose costs were driven up by their energy costs. A few months later, when the price increases led to interest hikes in existing mortgages, the house of cards holding up the housing market collapsed. Crude Oil prices peaked during the summer of 2008 as it hit $145 in July 2008. Prices began to fall immediately after President Bush lifted the executive ban on offshore oil drilling on July 14th. By the end of December 2008, crude oil spot price fell to $30.28 a barrel. Its interesting that just the threat of new drilling drove down costs. During the past two years prices has slowly risen to the middle $80s per barrel, but with the beginning of the protests in Egypt the cost rose more sharply and yesterday with the violence in Libya, produces 2% of the world's oil supply (and has the most significant reserves in Africa) prices spike up 9% in one day. Benchmark crude for March delivery was up $4.80 a barrel, or 5.6 percent, at $92.55 a barrel in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Earlier, it had it had been even higher above $94 a barrel. Before the Middle East protests began, Jeffrey Rubin was already warning about the increase in oil prices: Oil prices caused the last recession, and oil prices will cause the next one as well. Energy inflation is already on the march. In fact, this time around oil prices are rising much earlier and much more rapidly than they did last cycle. Inflation is already running at nearly a five per cent rate in China; as oil prices go on to set new record highs, it's only a matter of time of before we see those inflation rates in North America and in the rest of the OECD. If the price spiked to $94/a barrel from Libya just imagine what will happen when the wave of protests reach Saudi Arabia (there are already calls on Facebook for protests against the Saudi Government the third week of March). Should that occur that $145/barrel will be a fond memory. The oil spike in 2007/8 took down what was then a strong US economy. Should a similar or worse spike happen now, while the economy is barely keeping its head above water the United States may face and economic disaster worse than what was caused by the crash of the housing bubble. All this is happening while the United States sits on a major oil reserve. A 2009 study by the non partisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) sheds light on America's energy resources. It shows show the U.S. supply of recoverable oil to be 167 billion barrels of oil, the equivalent of replacing America's current imports from OPEC countries for more than 75 years. Sadly, the progressives in Congress and the White House, refuse to open up our reserves to drilling--in fact we have gone backwards. One of the Obama administration's first moves was to cancel contracts to exploit our shale oil reserves: Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has canceled leases for energy exploration on 77 parcels of federal land in Utah, confirming that this White House is indeed a Small Oil administration. The previous administration, which was not beholden to environmental special interests and seemed to understand the importance of energy, had released 130,000 acres of largely uninhabited - and uninhabitable - land for oil and gas exploration. Some of the parcels are in or near the Green River Formation, an oil-rich region in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming that has the largest known oil shale deposits in the world, holding from 1.5 trillion to 1.8 trillion barrels of crude. The over reaction to the BP oil spill, a hiatus of all offshore drilling, and the follow-up rules changes represents another retreat from exploiting our own natural resources. As the United States continues to struggle through a weak, jobless recovery we are approaching the next economic crisis caused by higher oil prices, a crises whose start date has been moved forward due to the unrest in many of the Arab Middle East countries. Sadly, even if we survive the coming economic collapse, we are doomed to confront them over and over, until we begin to search for and exploit our own energy reserves... http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2011/02/current-middle-east-revolt-w...

********************************************************

The community organizer who became president has launched a massive pre-reelection year campaign to assemble and train an army of new community organizers to carry Obama's "movement forward for years to come." Strengthening "our democracy" presumably has something to do with reelecting the revered leader in 2012. However, the Organizing for America recruiting message says nothing about politics or election campaigns and strangely talks in military terms of "a grassroots program that aims to put boots on the ground and help foster a new generation of leaders -- not just to help win elections but to strengthen our democracy in communities across the country." The same Obama campaign group was reported to be involved in stirring the ongoing Wisconsin protests against Gov. Scott Walker's budget plans. The message about what it calls the "Summer Organizing Fellowship" adds: "Effective organizing doesn't happen in a vacuum. It takes commitment, time, and hard work to build a movement around a cause." It does not specify what the "cause" is, other than promoting Obama and his agenda. News of the community organizer drive went out in an e-mail to millions of supporters and past donors Tuesday night by the ongoing arm of the Obama campaign, Organizing for America. It appealed for workers of all ages to volunteer to undergo professional organizational training this summer for stationing in communities all over the nation to drive President Obama's social and political agenda. The cadres "will be assigned to a specific community," the message informs, "where they'll work to organize supporters street by street, neighborhood by neighborhood." Their job will involve recruiting additional Obama workers, running Obama-related events, knocking on doors to talk of Obama "and lay new groundwork to carry this movement forward for years to come." "In the end," the Obama campaign appeal says of the community organizer corps, "their work will take our grassroots power to an impressive new level." The appeal cites as one role model Nikki Giancola who underwent the training, then quit her middle school teacher's job to become a regional Obama field director and the satisfaction she felt "in helping millions of people." Another community organizer, Paras Patel, tells of one unforgettable moment actually meeting the leader for whom they all labor, President Obama. "He shook my hand," Patel recounts, "and told me that he was proud of me." No mention of an Obama organizer flag, uniform -- or salute... http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/02/obama-campaign-c...

********************************************************

Surely something must be terribly wrong with a man who seems to be far more concerned with a Jew building a house or an extra room in Israel than with a Muslim building a nuclear bomb in Iran

________________________________________________

Thanks to Yitzchok D., for sharing the above post content.