Jan 6, 2011 || World News

Thursday, January 6, 2011

U.S. Contains Enough Oil and Gas Reserves to Fuel Country for Decades, Petroleum Institute Says

Scotty Starnes | January 6, 2011 at 11:00 AM | Tags: American Petroleum Institute, API, Congress, domestic oil, economy, Jack Gerard, natural gas reserves, Obama Administration, President Obama | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-412

We would have a lot more oil if the corrupt Obama administration didn't carry out their fraudulent deepwater drilling moratorium.

(CNSNews.com) – Jack Gerard, president and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, said that if the Obama administration and Congress would allow the industry access to domestic oil and natural gas reserves, the United States would get the energy it needs, create hundreds of thousands of jobs, and the government would add more than $1.7 trillion to its coffers.

"The state of American energy must be strong in order for the American economy to thrive," said Gerard in a speech at the Newseum on Tuesday. "How then do we strengthen the state of American energy?"

"For starters, there are vast reserves of domestic resources that are currently off-limits to exploration and production: billions of barrels of oil and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas ... onshore and off," Gerard said. "And those estimates are most likely conservative given our past experience and new advanced technologies."

It is estimated that the United States has enough natural gas to fuel 100 percent of current domestic demand for at least 90 years. In addition, the United States produces about 2 billion barrels of crude oil per year, according to the API.

"Accessing these U.S. resources could improve our energy security by making us less reliant on others, generate an additional $1.7 trillion in government revenue over the life of the resources and create hundreds of thousands of new jobs," Gerard said.

In API's new report, "The State of American Energy," which was released at the event, details how U.S. government projections of oil and natural gas reserves could provide energy for America for many decades to come.

Add a comment to this post

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Publish text, photos, music, and videos by email using our Post by Email feature.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

12 Concealed Carry Guns 12 Ounces Or Less

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=40947

12 Concealed Carry Guns 12 Ounces Or Less

by Bruce N. Eimer, Ph.D

01/04/2011

The question is often asked, "what is the best handgun for concealed carry?" There are many valid answers to this question and they usually begin with, "well, it depends on a number of factors." However, in my humble opinion, there is one universally valid answer, and that is, "it is the gun that you have on you when you need it." With that said, the purpose of this brief article is to make you aware of twelve handguns that are so easy to carry, that there is no excuse to ever go unarmed--never ever. This list of handguns spans a range of calibers: .22 Long Rifle, .22 Magnum, .32 ACP, .380 ACP, .38 Special, and .357 Magnum, and includes revolvers (single action and double action) as well as double action semi-automatic pistols. They range in size from small to palm size, and they all come in under 12 ounces in empty weight. Thus, every one of the guns on this list is easy to carry in a jacket or pant pocket. In addition, every gun I have selected has proven ease of handling in reasonably trained hands, reliability, accuracy for the distance within which the gun is designed to be used, and ease of maintenance (i.e., field stripping and cleaning). There is a gun here for just about everyone.

I myself enjoy shooting small pocket pistols, so I shoot them often and as a result have gotten good at shooting them. However, here stands one essential caveat. Ultra-compact .32 and .380 ACP pocket pistols are not easy to shoot well. They require training and practice. One cannot escape physics. Tiny light guns bark and buck. People with big hands often complain that they cannot get a good grip on them given the fact that the grips are short and thin. Also, the sights on most of these pistols, if they even have sights, are tiny and difficult to use in the reactive situations for which these defensive pistols were designed. Once again, training and practice are the orders of the day.

.22 Long Rifle

#1. The Beretta Model 21 Bobcat is an ultra-compact double action/single action .22 LR semi-automatic pistol that features a 2.4 inch tip-up barrel, fixed sights, a frame mounted manual safety, and a magazine capacity of 7 rounds. It weighs about 11.5 ounces empty. This gun is easy to shoot and the tip-up barrel is a nice feature for those who have difficulty racking the slide to chamber or eject a round. This little gun is maximally effective with good quality high velocity .22 LR ammunition such as CCI 40 grain Mini-Mags, CCI 32 grain hollow point Stingers, or Aguila 30 grain Super Max hollow points. Hammer down, manual safety on carry gives you a double action first shot and single action subsequent shots. This makes this gun relatively easy to shoot for people who do not handle long and heavy double action triggers very well. Street price new: Around $300.

#2. The Smith and Wesson Model 317 AirLite Revolver is a 9.9 ounce 8-round snubby with a 2 inch barrel, chambered for the .22 LR cartridge. It has an abbreviated hammer that does not snag, so it can be fired in either single or double action. I have owned mine for years and have shot all types of .22 LR loads out of it. It has always gone bang when the trigger is pulled and is low maintenance. By that I mean it just goes and goes in between cleanings. This gun is combat accurate in rapid fire out to 15 yards. The trigger is smooth and light, and the gun is easy to handle and shoot—perceived recoil is a non-issue. The serrated ramp front sight and fixed notch rear sight are small, so outfitted with a pair of Crimson Trace Laser Grips, this gun makes a very handy personal defense package. Street price new: Around $600.
.22 Magnum

#3. The North American Arms .22 Magnum Pug Mini-Revolver is a 6.4 ounce single-action 5-shot ultra-small revolver that packs a big fist. Squat and sturdy with a 1 inch barrel and a highly visible XS Tritium Big Dot front sight, the guns pebble texture rubber grips allow its owner to keep a firm leash on this puppy. Nevertheless, this gun is surprisingly easy shooting and accurate out to 7 yards. The single action trigger is light but not too light. Given that this gun is single action, and designed to be carried hammer down on one of five safety slots on the cylinder, this little pocket protector can be safely carried without a holster. Thus, the Pug truly can go anywhere with you—in a pair of gym shorts, a shirt pocket, or pant or jacket front or rear pocket. However, be careful if you also carry your keys in the same pocket. You do not want to snag the hammer. When the hammer is cocked, the cylinder revolves onto a live chambered round. This is the ultimate deep cover hideout gun. At close range, with proper shot placement, the .22 Magnum can probably get the job done. However, in Condition Black, this gun can only give you 5 shots and cannot be reloaded during the fight, as the gun has to be partially disassembled to reload. If you own this sturdy little Pug, there is just no excuse ever to go anywhere without a gun. As North American Arms, also known as NAA says, it really is "convenient, reliable and effective". Street price new: Around $325.

#4. The Smith and Wesson Model 351PD AirLite Revolver is a 10.8 ounce 7-round "Chiefs Special snubby with a 1.875 inch barrel, chambered for the .22 Magnum cartridge. It has a small external hammer that is relatively snag free, but which enables the gun to be fired in single or double action mode. With its HIVIZ Fiber Optic Red front sight, blackened aluminum alloy frame and cylinder, and wood grips, the gun is pretty. This gun is also very reliable--it goes bang whenever the trigger is pulled, and like the Smith Model 317, is low maintenance. However, this gun has a very heavy trigger with a fair amount of creep. This affects one's ability to engage in accurate rapid fire, especially at distances past seven yards. Perceived recoil is a non-issue. Street price new: Around $625-650.

.32 ACP

#5. The 6.6 ounce Kel-Tec P-32 is a double action only, locked breech semi-automatic pistol with a polymer frame, steel slide, 2.68 inch barrel and a 7 + 1 capacity. The lightest .32 pistol ever made, the P-32 is thin and attractive and a trend setter; it is the first of a line of ultra-modern, ultra-compact ultra-light polymer .32 and .380 semi-auto pistols. It has low perceived recoil, a light smooth trigger and excellent accuracy at 7 to 10 yards and in. This little gun even locks open on an empty magazine and magazine changes are easy to accomplish making emergency reloads possible. My extensive experience with this gun is that it is very robust, reliable and fun to shoot. I have not had a hiccup out of two of mine after 500 rounds spent with each without any cleaning—not that I recommend not cleaning your guns. Street price new: Around $260.

#6. The 11.5 ounce Seecamp LWS .32 ACP is dimensionally the smallest .32 ACP on the current market. It is a double action only, flush hammer fired, fixed barrel, retarded blowback, all stainless steel semi-automatic pistol with a magazine capacity of 6 rounds. The gun is a literal work of art—a family heirloom. It is precision designed like a piece of fine jewelry, a fine Swiss watch. But, it isn't just beautiful. It packs a wallop and shoots with reliability and accuracy. However, this gun is not for everyone given its unique features. But tell me, what gun is? The Seecamp has no sights. It is designed for very close-in point shooting. It also has a magazine safety; that is, it will not fire with the magazine removed, nor can the slide be retracted without the magazine in place. The magazine release is European style, at the bottom rear of the grip. It does have a rather limited diet however—it is ammunition finicky. My .32 caliber Seecamps reliably handle Winchester Silvertips, Winchester Q4255 71 gr. FMJs, Hornady 60 grain SJH/XTPs, Speer Gold Dots, Federal Hydra Shoks, and Magsafe frangibles. The Seecamp is smooth, consistent and pleasant to work. It needs to be kept clean and well lubricated. Street price new: Around $525 to $550.

.380 ACP

#7. The 8.3 ounce Kel-Tec P-3AT is a double action only, locked breech semi-automatic pistol with a polymer frame, steel slide, 2.7 inch barrel and a 6 + 1 capacity. This pistol was developed by Kel-Tec from their highly successful P-32. The slidestop was eliminated and the magazine capacity reduced to 6 rounds due to the slightly larger .380 cartridge. Like the P-32, the P-3AT is thin and attractive and a trend setter; again the first of a line of ultra-modern, ultra-compact ultra-light polymer .380 semi-auto pistols. Almost exactly the same size as its older sibling, the P-32, the P-3AT has slightly greater perceived recoil, a slightly heavier but roughly equally as smooth trigger as the P-32, and good accuracy at 7 to 10 yards and in. Sans slidestop, the P-3AT does not lock open on an empty magazine, but nevertheless, magazine changes are easy to accomplish making emergency reloads possible. My extensive experience with this gun is that it is very robust, reliable and fun to shoot. Its little white sights are visible and usable, and this gun will eat anything in .380 ACP. As is the case with my P-32's, my P-3AT's keep working even without cleaning--not that I recommend not cleaning your guns. Street price new: Around $300.

#8. The 11.5 ounce Seecamp LWS .380 ACP is dimensionally the smallest .380 ACP on the current market. Like its older sibling the LWS .32, it is a double action only, flush hammer fired, fixed barrel, retarded blowback, all stainless steel semi-automatic pistol with a magazine capacity of 6 rounds. Like the LWS .32, this pistol is precision designed like a piece of fine jewelry, but it packs a larger wallop with the larger .380 cartridge. Perceived recoil is stouter than with the .32 and the trigger feels slightly heavier. This pistol has the same unique features as its .32 caliber sibling (no sights, a magazine safety, and a European style heel magazine release. The ammunition finicky .380 Seecamp seems to prefer Winchester Silvertips, Speer Gold Dots, and Federal Hydra Shoks. It needs to be kept clean and well lubricated. Street price new: Slightly pricey and hard to get at around $850.

#9. The 9.4 ounce Ruger LCP .380 was one of the biggest hits when it was first introduced at the 2008 SHOT Show. The LCP which stands for "Light Compact Pistol" has a glass filled nylon frame, a blued steel slide and a magazine capacity of 6 rounds. It is similar in size and appearance to the Kel-Tec P-3AT, equally as attractive, but somewhat more rounded at its edges. The LCP adds a manually operated slide stop so the slide can be locked open, although the slide doesn't lock open on an empty magazine. In April of 2010, Texas Governor Rick Perry brought spotlight to this weapon when he used it to bring down, with one .380 ACP hollow point, a coyote that was menacing him and his daughter's Labrador retriever during a morning jog. So much for those who disdainfully minimize the immediate effectiveness of the .380 ACP cartridge. My two personal LCP's are ultra-reliable, accurate, and easy to learn to shoot effectively. Like the Kel-Tec P-3AT, they will eat anything in .380. Their trigger is easy to learn to control—slightly longer and lighter than the P-3AT's trigger. Street price new: Around $310.

#10. The Smith and Wesson Bodyguard .380 is an 11.9 ounce trigger cocking, double action only, hammer fired .380 ACP semi-automatic pistol with a 2.75 inch barrel and a 6 + 1 capacity. It has a polymer frame, a matte back stainless steel slide with a melonite protective coating, and sights that are actually usable. In addition, this state of the art ultra-compact pistol has a frame mounted manual safety and an integrated laser sight operated by an on/off button on the right side of the frame in front of the trigger guard. The gun also has a slide lock lever and the slide does lock back on an empty magazine. This is a lot of gun in a very small package. I have not had my copy long. Heck, the gun just debuted. Thus far, this pistol has proven reliable with different types of hollow point and FMJ .380 ACP ammunition. The trigger is smooth but long. It takes some getting used to, but when you do master the trigger, this gun is an accurate shooter. I really like this gun. Street price new: $425. to $450.

#11. The Kahr Arms P380 is an 11.3 ounce double action only, slide cocking, striker fired locked breech, .380 semi-automatic pistol with sights that are actually usable. It has a 2.5 inch Lothar Walther barrel, a black polymer frame, a stainless steel slide, and has a 6 + 1 capacity. This gun is an excellent shooter with the smoothest trigger of all of the guns reviewed here. That is not surprising—it is a Kahr Arms. The P380 is pleasant to shoot and very accurate out to 15 yards. Perceived recoil is manageable. This ultra-compact pistol handles smoothly and on point in rapid fire—more like its larger caliber, larger sized Kahr cousins (e.g., the P9). However, this gun, like Kahr's other pistols needs a break-in of at least 200 rounds. This pistol also needs to be kept clean and well lubed. It is also more ammunition finicky than its competitors, the Kel-Tec P-3AT and the Ruger LCP. Price is on the more expensive side. Street price new: $550. to $600.

.38 Special and .357 Magnum

#12. The Smith and Wesson Model 340PD and its sibling, the Model 360PD, are 1.875 inch barrel, 11.4 ounce, scandium frame snubnose revolvers chambered for both the powerful .357 Magnum cartridge and the .38 Special +P. The only difference between the siblings is that the "Centennial" Model 340PD has an internal hammer while the "Chiefs Special" Model 360PD has an external hammer. These snubbies hold a special place in my heart and a regular spot in my pockets. These are the ultimate concealed carry handguns in terms of fulfilling all of my criteria: powerful caliber, not ammunition sensitive, light weight, small profile, fits in a pocket, a pleasure to carry, ergonomic, natural pointers, good shooters, very reliable, accurate in trained hands, easy to maintain, long lasting, and pretty. Street price new: $815. to $850.

My Three Personal Favorites

You cannot go wrong with any of the 12 guns we have discussed. I recommend all of them, but which ones you may wonder are my personal favorites? I own all of them and I even have multiple copies of the ones I like best. So, which do I like best? Here are my "Top 3 Picks". Please understand that it was hard for me to pick a "Top 3". My selection criteria are a mix of objective and subjective factors. My objective factors included: caliber, reliability, trigger characteristics, and the gun's handling and accuracy in my hands. My subjective factors included: my desire to own more than two copies of a gun, my frequency of actually carrying a gun, as well as perceived recoil, ease of carry and concealment, ease of maintenance, and beauty in the eyes of this beholder. Also subjective was my algorithm for combining these criteria to choose my "Top 3 Picks". The truth is I like all 12 guns, or else they would not have been included in this article.

#1. Well, by the sheer number I own, my frequency of every day carry, and my love for these guns, I give the #1 spot in "my book", and in my pocket, to Smith and Wesson's Models 340PD and 360PD scandium AirLite snubnose revolvers. It's a beautiful thing to carry in your pocket five .357 Magnums, or five 38 Special +P's, in a reliable 11.4 ounce gun that always goes bang when you pull the trigger (and six reloads in a Bianchi Speed Strip), and to be able to forget it's there. These pretty guns just want to be in your pockets. With no external hammer to snag on clothing, the 340PD (one of S&W's "Centennial" models), if need be, can be fired from one's pocket—quite a handy feature to have for self defense in a close-in lethal force confrontation. I have owned my 340PDs and 360PDs for years and have shot all types of .357 Magnum and .38 Special +P loads out of them. They have always gone bang when the trigger was pulled and they are low maintenance. By that I mean they just keep shooting without even a hiccup in between cleanings. These guns are combat accurate in rapid fire out to 15 yards. In fact, they are more accurate than the shooter. The gist is that their owner must practice with them. As with any gun, especially these little ones, you must learn the trigger, the use of the sights, and the gun's handling characteristics and recoil pattern.

#2. I give the #2 spot in my book to the Kel-Tec P-32—6.6 ounces of personal protection smaller than my loaded key ring. This accurate, reliable, sweet shooting little piece puts 8 rounds of .32 ACP at your immediate service as soon as you need them. With a spare magazine, that's 15 rounds—not bad for a 6.6 ounce gun that is utterly reliable, accurate, and easy and fun to shoot.

#3. I give the #3 spot in my book to the NAA .22 Magnum Pug Mini-Revolver. With this gun, you do not even need a holster. You can totally hide the gun in your hand, which can be a great tactical advantage in certain situations. Also, it is safe to carry this gun in a jacket side pocket, pant back pocket, or in your gym shorts, at the ready in any situation. I really like that. Given the existence of this little jewel, there really is NO reason to ever be unarmed.

So there you have it from me, the "mousegun guy". Watch your 360 and stay safe.

Bruce N. Eimer, Ph.D., is a licensed and board certified, clinical and forensic psychologist, NRA Certified Law Enforcement Firearms Instructor, and professional writer in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The author of Concealed Carry Magazine's 'Armed Senior Citizen" column, Dr. Eimer provides private shooting instruction to law abiding citizens in the defensive use of firearms. Through his company, Personal Defense Solutions, LLC, Dr. Eimer teaches the defensive handgun classes required to obtain the Florida, Virginia, and Utah non-resident, multi-state CCW permits. Dr. Eimer has provided expert witness testimony in numerous court proceedings, and is the founder of www.DefensiveHandguns.net, the online forum for everyone interested in defensive firearms. He can be reached at dr.eimer1@comcast.net.

Reader Comments: I have owned a Walther PPK, in caliber 380, for more than 40 years. I have carried it, both legally and illegally for much of that time.

Although I believe in obeying the law it is more important to be safe. I once worked in a railroad yard office during the 1970s. From time to time a group of four or five men would come around to sell items to the office workers. The items they would sell had all been stolen. The railroad employees euphemistically called them "the merchants." I was the newest employee in the office, having just been transferred from another city.

After witnessing the sale of the stolen items to my fellow employees. I decided that not only was it wrong to buy from them, but that some of the items may have indeed been stolen from our own railroad while in transit. Theft from railroad cars is an ongoing problem throughout the United States. On my day off I went to see the FBI to tell them what I knew. I gave the FBI descriptions of the "merchants," the names they called each other, and the license plate of the car they used. I had also finished out from the garbage can warrantee registration cards containing serial numbers of some of the items they sold. I asked the FBI to keep my identity secret, as I did not wish retribution from fellow workers or the thieves. The "merchants" never came around again. In truth, I don't know what happened to them.

A couple of weeks later I got a call from my local police department. They wanted to know what I could tell them about the theft ring. The FBI had told them about me. I informed the policeman that I've given everything I had to the FBI and knew nothing more that could help. His call scared me. If he knew who else knew? There was no concealed carry permit in those days. However, that did not stop me from packing my Walther for the next several years.

I now have a permit and often carry my PPK. It is one fine gun.

Canadian Tax dollars at work.....

Re: The New Republican Congress Begins....say hello to...........

tommy isn't literate enough to do more than read a newsweek headline

a cautionary tale

I must remember should I ever be tempted (though I am not) not to swallow

bad cum apparently causes mad cow disease

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Mark <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:

Bruce, Tommy is stuck on Marx, Engels for his base ideology and he relies on the new idea man Ayers for dealing with modern times.... Same list as NoBama.

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@gmail.com> wrote:

no tommietard

most of what government does is bad

stopping them from doing things and spending money is good

you are too stupid to understand that, being illiterate

if you spent some time reading a book, something by James Buchanan or Bryan Caplan for instance

and less time spamming airheaded fascist press releases you would know that

at your age I am sure you will die first

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Tommy News <tommysnews@gmail.com> wrote:

No, gridlock is bad, Brucie girl.

It means that NOTHING gets accomplished.

Stagnation and the status quo are bad.

On 1/6/11, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@gmail.com> wrote:
> gridlock is good Tomie
>
> it means nazis like you and your owners don't get to hurt people
>
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Tommy News <tommysnews@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The New Grand Obstructionist Tea Party Republican Congress
>> Begins....say hello to partisan gridlock, obstruction, investigations,
>> the demonization of Unions, legislation to harm the poor and working
>> class, efforts to make the President fail, and un-American bad
>> behavior for the next two years!
>>
>> Most of the Republicans in both the House and the Senate voted against
>> DADT repeal. I predict that they will now obstruct any further
>> Progressive and pro-LGBT legislation for as long as they hold control
>> of the House. We need to demonstrate and protest loudly.
>>
>> A polarized Congress in a US seeking pragmatism
>>
>> PHOTOS Previous Next
>> Outgoing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif. hands the gavel to the
>> new House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio during the first session of the
>> 112th Congress, Wednesday, Jan. 5, 2011, on Capitol Hill in
>> Washington. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak) (Charles Dharapak - AP)
>>
>> House Speaker-desigante John Boehner of Ohio greets House members
>> during the first session of the 112th Congress, on Capitol Hill in
>> Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 5, 2011. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)
>> (Charles Dharapak - AP)
>>
>> President Barack Obama pauses on the tarmac as he arrives at Andrews
>> Air Force Base, Md.,, Tuesday, Jan. 4, 2011, as he returned from
>> vacation in Hawaii. Col. Lee DePlao, commander of the 11th Wing, is
>> second from left. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster) (Carolyn Kaster - AP)
>> Network NewsX Profile
>>
>>
>> View More Activity
>>
>>
>> TOOLBOX
>> Resize Print E-mail Reprints
>> COMMENT
>> 0 Comments
>> Your browser's settings may be preventing you from commenting on and
>> viewing comments about this item. See instructions for fixing the
>> problem.
>> Discussion Policy CLOSEComments that include profanity or personal
>> attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed
>> from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain
>> "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed.
>> Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our
>> posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other
>> policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing
>> commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the
>> content that you post.
>>
>> By LIZ SIDOTI
>> The Associated Press
>> Wednesday, January 5, 2011; 2:32 PM
>>
>> WASHINGTON -- There's an inherent conflict in the country's new
>> political reality: a much more polarized Congress must answer to an
>> increasingly powerful center of the electorate that abhors
>> partisanship or risk its wrath in 2012.
>>
>> Much like President Bill Clinton after his party's disastrous 1994
>> elections, President Barack Obama now has the chance to shift to the
>> middle as leaders on Capitol Hill struggle to strike a balance between
>> the desires of ideological purists in their ranks and the independent,
>> centrist voters who played a significant role in electing them.
>>
>> For Republicans and Democrats, that task began Wednesday when the new
>> Congress was sworn in; Republicans assumed control of the House and
>> padded their numbers in the Democratic-led Senate.
>>
>> "There's going to be politics. That's what happens in Washington. They
>> are going to play to their base for a certain period of time. But I'm
>> pretty confident that they're going to recognize that our job is to
>> govern . My hope is that John Boehner and Mitch McConnell will realize
>> that there will be plenty of time to campaign for 2012 in 2012," Obama
>> said this week about GOP leaders in the House and Senate, casting
>> himself as the compromiser in chief even while maneuvering for his
>> upcoming re-election.
>>
>> The president's tone was in stark contrast to his first two years when
>> he leveraged large Democratic majorities in Congress - and thwarted
>> Republicans - to enact sweeping laws, including an economic stimulus
>> measure and revamps of the health care and financial regulatory
>> systems, that independents greeted skeptically if not derisively.
>> After backing him heavily in his presidential bid, they punished him
>> in November by ending one-party rule in Washington.
>>
>> Now, with no serious Democratic primary challenger emerging to siphon
>> support from his liberal base, Obama already has begun moving to the
>> center. As 2010 ended, he compromised with Republicans to reach
>> bipartisan deals on tax cuts that paved the way for a rush of end of
>> year legislation, including repealing the ban on gays openly serving
>> in the military as well as a new nuclear treaty with Russia.
>>
>>
>> It's clear the 2012 elections are in everyone's sights with obvious
>> objectives: Obama needs to win back middle-of-the-road voters, and
>> Republicans need to keep them happy, or at least not anger them.
>>
>> Their power was strongly felt in the last three elections. In 2006 and
>> 2008, independents furious with Republican governance gave Democrats
>> power in Congress and the White House. By 2010, these voters had grown
>> disillusioned by Democratic rule and sided with the GOP.
>>
>> And their sway is only growing.
>>
>> Today, more Americans are identifying themselves as independent while
>> majorities of the country view both the Democratic and Republican
>> parties unfavorably. Disaffected Republican and Democratic operatives
>> are forming groups to advocate on behalf of - if not organize -
>> unaffiliated voters, indicating that momentum may be building among
>> the center for increased political action.
>>
>> So, given all that, how did the Republican and Democratic caucuses in
>> Congress end up so much more conservative and liberal?
>>
>> The two-party American political system produces polarization in
>> Congress. Both the Republican and the Democratic parties hold
>> primaries to choose general election candidates. Those nominating
>> contests are dominated by the most vocal, active party members -
>> conservatives and liberals who tend to support like-minded people.
>>
>> Last year, that situation was even more pronounced as the tea party
>> coalition roiled GOP primaries and produced Republican nominees who
>> were far more conservative than usual.
>>
>> Now, the House Republican roster includes some seven dozen tea
>> party-backed lawmakers and other staunch conservatives. And moderate
>> "Blue Dog" Democrats are virtually extinct; scores lost their
>> swing-voting districts in a coast-to-coast GOP wave.
>>
>> "Compromise is a dirty word to the new members of Congress and a vital
>> word to the people they were sent to represent," said Matt Bennett, a
>> former Clinton aide and a vice president of the centrist Democratic
>> group Third Way. "It's a more polarized House representing an
>> electorate that is really seeking moderation. There's a big disconnect
>> between their caucuses and their voters."
>>
>> The Senate is arguably less polarized than the House; Democrats
>> succeeded in limiting the number of GOP takeaways to six. Still, new
>> Republican senators include tea party-supported Rand Paul of Kentucky
>> and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, as well as conservatives Pat Toomey of
>> Pennsylvania and Marco Rubio of Florida.
>>
>> From the outset, it's clear that Boehner is trying to strike a balance
>> between his constituents and his members.
>>
>> "This is the people's house. This is their Congress. It's about them,
>> not us," Boehner said after he took the gavel as speaker.
>>
>> Still, in a nod to his caucus' right flank, he scheduled a vote next
>> week on repealing the health care law. Republicans don't expect to
>> kill it. It makes sense for them not to; the GOP wants to run against
>> health care in 2012 and that important constituency - independents -
>> prefer that the law be changed, not repealed. House leaders facing
>> demands from the right to immediately cut spending also indicated they
>> wanted to cut $100 billion from the federal budget. But it didn't take
>> long before GOP leaders bowed to the reality of governing and scaled
>> back their goal.
>>
>>
>> Come February, during debate over a massive spending bill to keep the
>> government running, the country will see how successful Boehner has
>> been at keeping the right in line and how much Obama is willing to
>> compromise.
>>
>> The challenge for Boehner is to avoid what happened after the 1994
>> Republican Revolution when the GOP took control of Congress.
>>
>> Back then, House Speaker Newt Gingrich failed to keep his
>> rabble-rousing conservative warriors in line, leading to a government
>> shutdown. Clinton came out on top, and handily won re-election in
>> 1996.
>>
>> Obama already has signaled a desire to go the route of Clinton,
>> signaling a willingness to work with Republicans on several issues,
>> including trade deals with Colombia and Panama as well as the
>> reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind education act.
>>
>> On Day 1 of the new Congress, the fight for middle-of-the-road voters
>> was well under way. It won't end until November 2012.
>>
>> More:
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/05/AR2011010503216_2.html
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
>> Have a great day,
>> Tommy
>>
>> --
>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>
>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Mark M. Kahle H.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Republican Hot Air

Republican Hot Air
Posted by Laurence Vance on January 6, 2011 09:16 AM

So, the Republicans in the House are now promising to follow the Constitution. Does this mean Social Security and the federal minimum wage will be abolished, to name just two out of hundreds of thousands of unconstitutional federal programs? Don't hold your breath.

I note also that Republicans in the House are going to vote on repealing Obamacare. Does this mean they will also vote to repeal Bushcare, otherwise known as the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003? How about the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act, which makes criminals out of people who want Sudafed for their stuffy nose (see Jeff Tucker's great article on this)? Again, don't hold your breath.

And don't ever mistake Republican hot air for "libertarian themes."

Re: The New Republican Congress Begins....say hello to...........

John-

I do not like calling anyone names, but I do lower myself down to the
level of, and defend myself, from hateful, venemous personal attacks
from the likes of immature fools like Bruce.

On 1/6/11, john sumner <jp33441@gmail.com> wrote:
> bruce i guess you and tommy dont really like each other, i guess you two
> like calling each others names
>
> On 1/6/2011 10:03 AM, Bruce Majors wrote:
>> no tommietard
>>
>> most of what government does is bad
>>
>> stopping them from doing things and spending money is good
>>
>> you are too stupid to understand that, being illiterate
>>
>> if you spent some time reading a book, something by James Buchanan or
>> Bryan Caplan for instance
>>
>> and less time spamming airheaded fascist press releases you would know
>> that
>>
>> at your age I am sure you will die first
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Muslim KFC Employee Goes Apeshit Crazy When Customer Orders Bacon

I want bacon on my chicken sandwich. Im wearing my bacon ribbon when ordering and my money is in my bacon wallet. And I have bacon-flavored air freshners in my home and car. I am waiting on someone to produce a bacon shirt and jacket.

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Keith In Köln <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes, the religion of peace.

I'll have cole slaw on my barbeque sandwich with bacon, a side order of shrimp cocktail, and bring me a beer with that!

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:26 AM, Travis <baconlard@gmail.com> wrote:

Muslim KFC Employee Goes Apeshit Crazy When Customer Orders Bacon

Scotty Starnes | January 5, 2011 at 9:38 PM | Tags: Austrailia, bacon, Islam, KFC, Muslims, religion of peace | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-40u

Holy Allah. These followers of the 'religion of peace' need anger management.

BACON...BACON...BACON...BACON...BACON...BACON...BACON...BACON!!!!!!

Add a comment to this post

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Express yourself. Start a blog.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: The dire negative consequences of health reform repeal

Wrong again, Keithie Keith.

Here is the logical empirical data you request:

http://giveme10.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/budget_deficit_or_surplus1.gif?w=500&h=358

On 1/6/11, Keith In Köln <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tom cannot respond to logical, thoughtful, empirical data and fact
> Mark......Waste of time.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Mark <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Tommy,
>>
>> After you read the real numbers from the US Government Treasury below
>> (please follow the links) your continued cry that Clinton left a surplus
>> would make you an absolute and resolute liar. Facts are a bitch.
>>
>> Here are the facts and how to find them regarding the bogus Clinton
>> surplus
>> as well as a quote from the leading Democratic Congressman of the time:
>>
>> *Both Democrats and Republicans are all running this year and next and
>> saying surplus, surplus.* Look what we have done. *It is false. The actual
>> figures show that from the beginning of the fiscal year until now we had
>> to
>> borrow $127,800,000,000*. - *Democratic Senator Ernest Hollings, October
>> 28, 1999*
>>
>>
>> Fiscal
>> Year Year
>> Ending National Debt Deficit FY1993 09/30/1993 $4.411488 trillion
>> FY1994 09/30/1994 $4.692749 trillion $281.26 billion FY1995
>> 09/29/1995 $4.973982 trillion $281.23 billion FY1996 09/30/1996
>> $5.224810
>> trillion $250.83 billion FY1997 09/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34
>> billion FY1998 09/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion FY1999
>> 09/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion FY2000 09/29/2000
>> $5.674178
>> trillion $17.91 billion FY2001 09/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29
>> billion
>> Looking at the makeup of the national debt and the claimed surpluses for
>> the last 4 Clinton fiscal years, we have the following table:
>>
>> *Fiscal
>> Year* *End
>> Date* *Claimed
>> Surplus* *Public
>> Debt* *Intra-gov
>> Holdings* *Total National
>> Debt* FY1997 09/30/1997 $3.789667T $1.623478T $5.413146T FY1998
>> 09/30/1998 $69.2B $3.733864T $55.8B $1.792328T $168.9B $5.526193T $113B
>> FY1999 09/30/1999 $122.7B $3.636104T $97.8B $2.020166T $227.8B
>> $5.656270T $130.1B FY2000 09/29/2000 $230.0B $3.405303T $230.8B
>> $2.268874T $248.7B $5.674178T $17.9B FY2001 09/28/2001 $3.339310T
>> $66.0B $2.468153T $199.3B $5.807463T $133.3B
>>
>> 1. Go to the U.S. Treasury website: http://www.ustreas.gov/
>> 2. Click on "Bureaus": Takes you to http://www.ustreas.gov/bureaus/
>> 3. Click on "Bureau of the Public Debt": Takes you to
>> http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/
>> 4. Scroll down to the section "The U.S. Public Debt" and click on "See
>> the U.S. Public Debt to the Penny."
>> 5. This takes you to the link:
>> http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Tommy News <tommysnews@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Wrong again, Fool.
>>>
>>> Clinton did indeed leave a surplus, which Dubya squandered away.
>>>
>>> Look it up.
>>>
>>> On 1/5/11, dick thompson <rhomp2002@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>> > Fool, Clinton did not leave a surplus. The Bush recession you keep
>>> > blabbing about started in 2000 under Clinton and was in its 3rd quarter
>>> > when Bush was inaugurated.
>>> >
>>> > On 01/05/2011 10:17 PM, Tommy News wrote:
>>> >> "Obamacare" is an offensive and misleading negative term.
>>> >>
>>> >> Government plans rarely come in on or under
>>> >> budget.
>>> >> W. Bush caused the gigantic deficit and squandered the Clinton
>>> >> surplus. Yes, he did.
>>> >>
>>> >> On 1/5/11, Mark<markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>> Tommy,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Is it not a health care plan championed by Obama ?? On ewould think
>>> >>> he
>>> >>> would
>>> >>> be PROUDER than a peacock to have his name so closely associated.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Please list any and all Government plans that have come in on or
>>> >>> under
>>> >>> budget and accomplished at least 80% of their goals.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I am waiting.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:26 PM, Tommy News<tommysnews@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> That is a plain lie.
>>> >>>> That is another plain lie.
>>> >>>> That is yet another plain lie.
>>> >>>> The derogatory term "Obamacare" is an offensive misnomer, and yet
>>> >>>> another
>>> >>>> lie.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On 1/5/11, dick thompson<rhomp2002@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>> >>>>> That is a plain lie. Your various insurance companies will have to
>>> >>>>> offer the plan as defined by the administration, not the plan the
>>> >>>>> individual may want or need. As an example I would have to buy a
>>> plan
>>> >>>>> that had neo-natal care and pregnancy care even though I am 70,
>>> single
>>> >>>>> and male. That is a change that makes no sense to me. As it
>>> >>>>> stands
>>> >>>>> now
>>> >>>>> I can pick and choose what plan I want or even have a plan that
>>> allows
>>> >>>>> me to pay for most of my current needs and have in addition a plan
>>> for
>>> >>>>> catastrophic care. The Obamacare plan does not allow that at all.
>>> >>>>> That is the lies and false smear that should be fought, not what
>>> >>>>> the
>>> >>>>> Republicans are talking about.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On 01/05/2011 08:47 PM, Tommy News wrote:
>>> >>>>>> Point is, Markie, those plans were unaffordable for many and
>>> >>>>>> unobtainable for those with "pre-existing conditions" like cancer
>>> and
>>> >>>>>> other diseases, and even to pregnant women needing natal care.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> In the United States, under President Obama's health reform bill,
>>> your
>>> >>>>>> ability to choose personally the people to be involved in your
>>> health
>>> >>>>>> care does not change one iota. Not one bit. You still have the
>>> exact
>>> >>>>>> same feeedom of choice you had before. The Reich wing and the
>>> >>>>>> corporate profiteers spread false lies about this and other
>>> provisions
>>> >>>>>> of the bill constantly.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Fight the lies and false smear!
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> On 1/5/11, Mark<markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>> Point is Tommy, the alternative was already in place. A free
>>> >>>>>>> enterprise
>>> >>>>>>> system that allowed every working man, woman in the US to choose
>>> his
>>> >>>>>>> or
>>> >>>>>>> her
>>> >>>>>>> own best policy.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> We simply need to go back to that which worked and was the envy
>>> >>>>>>> of
>>> >>>>>>> the
>>> >>>>>>> world
>>> >>>>>>> as far as health care was concerned.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> I want the people I choose personally to be involved in my
>>> >>>>>>> healthy
>>> >>>>>>> care... I
>>> >>>>>>> do not want to be in a healthcare "queue" managed by faceless
>>> >>>> bureaucrats
>>> >>>>>>> Check those social welfare systems in any socialized medicine
>>> country
>>> >>>> and
>>> >>>>>>> see how many more people are eligible yet add in the numbers that
>>> >>>>>>> literally
>>> >>>>>>> die waiting. All of those countries have developed private
>>> >>>>>>> systems
>>> to
>>> >>>>>>> serve
>>> >>>>>>> the working man.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Tommy News<tommysnews@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>> Wrong. You are not everyone.
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> Does Mr Boehner know about whom he's speaking when he and any of
>>> his
>>> >>>>>>>> conservative cronies say "the American people". I think he and
>>> they
>>> >>>>>>>> mean "it has to be my way". I wonder what their consituents
>>> >>>>>>>> will
>>> do
>>> >>>>>>>> when they learn that they can't get the health care they need
>>> >>>>>>>> because
>>> >>>>>>>> insurance companies ... well, we all know about that part of it.
>>> >>>>>>>> The
>>> >>>>>>>> Republicans have been bitching and moaning about what they like
>>> to
>>> >>>>>>>> derisively call "Obamacare", yet not one of them has come
>>> >>>>>>>> forward
>>> >>>>>>>> with
>>> >>>>>>>> a scintilla of an alternative. I doubt if they have a plan
>>> >>>>>>>> since
>>> it
>>> >>>>>>>> seems to me that they've mostly been concerned with knocking
>>> >>>>>>>> down
>>> >>>>>>>> President Obama at every turn. Our health insurance system is
>>> one
>>> >>>>>>>> of
>>> >>>>>>>> the most cumbersome in the world, since it's really not a system
>>> by
>>> >>>>>>>> subject to the individual money-grabbing whims of the insurance
>>> >>>>>>>> companies. We are supposedly the richest country in the world.
>>> >>>>>>>> While
>>> >>>>>>>> we spend mountains of moolah on every kind of war effort,
>>> >>>>>>>> there's
>>> >>>>>>>> never any money to take care of our citizens. It's interesting
>>> that
>>> >>>>>>>> in all this talk about saving money, it's never once been
>>> >>>>>>>> brought
>>> up
>>> >>>>>>>> that perhaps we should cut back in the war mongering department.
>>> We
>>> >>>>>>>> say we're a peace-loving nation. Our actions do not back up our
>>> >>>>>>>> words. I was born in 1940 and have lived through 5 wars (WW2,
>>> >>>>>>>> Korea,
>>> >>>>>>>> Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan). That seems a bit on the excessive
>>> >>>>>>>> side.
>>> >>>>>>>> I think it's important to remember that when it comes to war we
>>> are
>>> >>>>>>>> not always in the right.
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> On 1/5/11, Mark<markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>> I bought the "rider" on my policy.... that is not an option
>>> >>>>>>>>> they
>>> >>>> have.
>>> >>>>>>>> Free
>>> >>>>>>>>> enterprise means getting what you pay for.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Tommy News<tommysnews@gmail.com
>>> >
>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Markie Mark Mark-
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> And what happens when you get cancer or some other disease
>>> >>>>>>>>>> and
>>> >>>>>>>>>> your
>>> >>>>>>>>>> insurance company "death panel" drops your policy and you
>>> cannot
>>> >>>>>>>>>> buy
>>> >>>>>>>>>> another policy because you now have a "pre-existing
>>> >>>>>>>>>> condition"?
>>> >>>> What
>>> >>>>>>>>>> then, Markie Mark?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 1/5/11, THE ANNOINTED ONE<markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> @@@@ they want to put insurance companies back in charge of
>>> our
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> health
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> care.@@@@
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You bet I want that. I work hard and pay my own bills. I want
>>> to
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> be
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> able to hire any one or any company I choose to meet my
>>> personal
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> needs
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> whether it is health care or which gas station to fill my
>>> tank.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 5, 2:13 pm, Tommy News<tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The dire negative consequences of health reform repeal
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> From Mitch Stewart, BarackObama . com
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tommy --
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Our progress is under attack.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Their majority is not even a day old, but House Republicans
>>> are
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> already getting ready to pass a bill to repeal health
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> reform.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Instead of focusing on the future, they want to put
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> insurance
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> companies back in charge of our health care. To go back to
>>> the
>>> >>>> days
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> when these companies could deny coverage to children based
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> pre-existing conditions, cancel coverage when people would
>>> get
>>> >>>> sick,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> or limit the care you could receive -- even when you needed
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> more.
>>> >>>>>>>> When
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> seniors would be forced to choose between paying their
>>> mortgage
>>> >>>> and
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> paying for their prescription drugs, simply because they
>>> landed
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>> >>>>>>>> the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "donut hole" in coverage.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> They want to turn our progress into a partisan fight.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> But you and I know that the Affordable Care Act and other
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> reforms
>>> >>>> to
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> protect consumers did not pass because of a partisan or
>>> >>>> ideological
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> agenda.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> They passed because millions of Americans stood up and said
>>> we
>>> >>>> were
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ready for commonsense solutions after years of fraud and
>>> abuse,
>>> >>>> for
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> new era of responsibility after unchecked power. They passed
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> because,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> after 100 years of debate and negotiation, we said we would
>>> wait
>>> >>>> no
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> longer for health reform.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> These reforms passed because of you. Now, we must prepare to
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> stand
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> up
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> for them again.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Organizing for America is pulling together a team of
>>> organizers
>>> >>>> and
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> volunteers to defend reform -- and we need you on this team.
>>> >>>>>>>> Together,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> we'll show how our progress is already improving lives
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> across
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> country -- and take on those who are pushing for repeal.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Join the fight to protect our progress and keep Congress
>>> focused
>>> >>>> on
>>> >>>>>>>> the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> future:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://my.barackobama.com/ProtectOurProgress7
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It's clear that's not where House Republicans are looking --
>>> >>>> they're
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> putting the car in reverse and heading straight toward the
>>> ditch
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> we just spent two years climbing out of.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> As the President said this week, we are still emerging from
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> recession that took a toll on millions of families, many of
>>> whom
>>> >>>> are
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> still trying to get their lives back on track. The
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Affordable
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Care
>>> >>>>>>>> Act
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> and Wall Street reform were important steps forward on the
>>> road
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> recovery, and we can't afford to play political games with
>>> them
>>> >>>> now.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> We have an obligation to ensure our progress is not
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> rewritten
>>> by
>>> >>>> the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> insurance industry and big banks.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This year, we'll need to stand by the President as he works
>>> to
>>> >>>> grow
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> our economy, make the United States more competitive, and
>>> keep
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> moving
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> the country forward -- but we're also going to have to work
>>> hard
>>> >>>> to
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> defend what we have already achieved.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Join the campaign to protect our progress:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://my.barackobama.com/ProtectOurProgress7
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mitch
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mitch Stewart
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Director
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Organizing for America
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Have a great day,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tommy
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> For options& help see
>>> >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> * Visit our other community at
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>> >>>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Have a great day,
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Tommy
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>> >>>>>>>>>> For options& help see
>>> >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>> >>>>>>>>>> * Visit our other community at
>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>> >>>>>>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>> Mark M. Kahle H.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>> >>>>>>>>> For options& help see
>>> >>>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> * Visit our other community at
>>> >>>>>>>>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>>> >>>>>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>> >>>>>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>> >>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
>>> >>>>>>>> Have a great day,
>>> >>>>>>>> Tommy
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>> >>>>>>>> For options& help see
>>> >>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> * Visit our other community at
>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>>> >>>>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>> >>>>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>> Mark M. Kahle H.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>> >>>>>>> For options& help see
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> * Visit our other community at
>>> >>>>>>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>>> >>>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>> >>>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>> >>>>> --
>>> >>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>> >>>>> For options& help see
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> * Visit our other community at
>>> >>>>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>>> >>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>> >>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> --
>>> >>>> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
>>> >>>> Have a great day,
>>> >>>> Tommy
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> --
>>> >>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>> >>>> For options& help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> * Visit our other community at
>>> >>>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>>> >>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>> >>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Mark M. Kahle H.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>> >>> For options& help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>> >>>
>>> >>> * Visit our other community at
>>> >>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>>> >>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>> >>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>> > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>> >
>>> > * Visit our other community at
>>> > http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>>> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
>>> Have a great day,
>>> Tommy
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>
>>> * Visit our other community at
>>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mark M. Kahle H.
>>
>> --
>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>
>> * Visit our other community at
>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.