Well, we are back home now. Had a nice time (not that much sadness and crying) at the funeral. It was nice that everyone talked about the good things about Aunt Louise. Plus my wife and her siblings did sing a couple of songs that Aunt Louise loved. Then to the cemetery. Service there was really short and sweet. Hey, Aunt Louise had it spelled out in writing what to do and not do for her funeral! One and most important, no eulogy…underlined twice by her! Had a bit of fun with some of the granddaughters when I told them, you do know you are standing where someone is buried? Ack and double ack they went! Told them, to get from the vehicle to here, you had to walk over buried people also. They thought that was downright icky! LOL.
Then we went and had a nice time visiting and eating. Over 100 odd people, maybe about 150 total. Was nice to again meet up with those members of my wife’s family I only see like once a year at most. Plenty of food and no one left unfed or empty.
Came back home to tornado warnings for our area.Very cloudy and just a bit on the dark side. But according to the radar, the storm should pass north of us. Coming from the southwest and heading northeast. So we should be okay.
Reminds me, the weather cooperated today for everything. With no rain and just a bit on the warm side. (64 if one can call that warm). So thus no need for the umbrellas my wife wanted ready to go in the van.
Later we will go to our daughter’s. One of our granddaughters turned 14 just three days ago, so we will be celebrating this happy event. She was the one who was not quite a month old when my wife and I came up from Texas (couple of months after I had come up to Iowa and carted her down there, so we still had about a year before we got married). So anyways, I had the granddaughter, not a month old, plus our oldest grandson who was 7 at the time, and of course my soon to be wife and we all went to an Italian restaurant in Des Moines and that is when I met Aunt Louise for the first time. She welcomed me as though I was always part of the family. She was that way, she loved everyone who she came into contact with.
Barack Obama has declared war on the wealthy (with motherhood coming under fire in one of those Democrat attacks) while clucking at Republicans during his $35,000-a-plate dinners and fundraisers at the homes of Hollywood elite. They haven’t added a photo of Obama to the dictionary entry for “shameless” but word is they’re considering it.
“Graft” and “cronyism” may also get photos of the Won. Those who donated big bucks to his 2008 run have benefited directly from their investment, in the form of government loans to their pet enterprises.
We all know about Solyndra, the “no es bueno” loan that cost Americans about $500 million. That loan is only the beginning. Of the $20.5 billion that Obama’s Department of Energy has loaned out, well over half went to companies with connections to Obama through donations or advocacy.
Here’s a list of the loanees, pay attention to the loans under the 1705 program. Loanees tied to Obama and/or the Democrats include:
Beacon Power, beneficiary of a $43 million federal loan guarantee via the stimulus, in November 2009. Beacon Power got a return of $17,500 for every dollar it invested in Obama and various other Democrats. It filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2011 and is selling out to another company.
Nevada Geotherman/Ormat received $79 million in loan guarantees and a $66 million tax-free grant. It employs a whopping 22 people and is burning through its cash reserves. Paul Thomsen and Kai Anderson are top execs with Ormat, which has partnered up with Nevada Geothermal. They’re both former aides to none other than Sen. Harry Reid. Maybe that connection will help shield Ormat from its numerous legal problems. Legal complaintshave been filed against Ormat Nevada for attempting to circumvent licensing agreements to avoid the California Energy Commission’s licensing authority. Regulation for thee, but not for me. Long-term shareholders have filed a lawsuit against company executives for “breaches of fiduciary duties,” including securities laws violations. Regulation for thee, but not for me. These include making “false and/or misleading statements” about finances. This came about because Ormat admitted that its Annual Report 10-K forms between 2008 and 2010 were no longer “reliable” and needed to be restated. Four other lawsuits were filed in a separate action on the same case.
There’s MORE, of course.
President Obama’s campaign is all about class warfare. He wants to raise taxes on the wealthy, even though it will do nothing to help the economy. He tells us he’s the one looking out for the poor and middle class, yet his policies are keeping people unemployed while driving up the cost of living. He tells us his policies will bring down the cost of driving, but what good will that do if new cars are priced out of reach for millions of Americans?
“While you can mandate what automakers must build, you can’t dictate what customers will buy, nor can you dictate if a bank will make a loan,” New Mexico Ford dealer Don Chalmers said today.
Obama’s proposed CAFE standards, which will begin taking effect in 2017, raise minimum average vehicle fleet fuel efficiency to 54.5 mpg by 2025. The Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimate that this regulation will raise the average price of passenger cars and light trucks by $3,000.
“The unintended consequences of the proposed fuel economy increases are clear,” NADA Used Car Guide analyst David Wagner said. “If the price of a vehicle goes up by the government estimate of almost $3,000, millions of people will no longer be able to finance a new vehicle.”
Last weekend I visited the U.C. Berkeley campus and on a whim attended a lecture with the provocative title “Teaching as a Subversive Activity — Revisited.”
Because this was a presentation aimed at education insiders only, the lecturer, retired professor H. Douglas Brown from S.F. State, seemed perfectly willing to let the cat out of the bag about political indoctrination on college campuses. Fortunately, I had my trusty camera with me, so I was able not only to snap a few pictures but also record several key portions of his speech, which I found so eye-opening that I felt the general public deserved to hear it as well.
The timing couldn’t have been better: A devastating new report issued by the National Association of Scholars had just been issued a few days beforehand, which documented with exquisite and irrefutable detail the extreme liberal bias at the University of California. However, the main problem with the NAS report (which you can download in full here if you’re interested) is that it’s too overwhelming and too technical to deliver the kind of emotional impact needed to sway public opinion. To drive home the point in a more personal way, the NAS report needed an introductory companion anecdote of a professor frankly confessing the rationale behind what is essentially the “theory of indoctrination.” As if on cue, Professor Brown stepped into that role, unwitting though he may have been.
Let it be noted that Professor H. Douglas Brown is no wild-eyed extremist; in fact, he’s rather bland and respectable and not the most thrilling of speakers, as you will soon hear. But that’s what made his presentation so disturbing: radical and self-admittedly “subversive” attitudes that affect the future of society are discussed with matter-of-fact nonchalance. The main drawback of Professor Brown’s verbal style (at least from my point of view) is that he often resorts to the academics’ tried-and-true escape hatch, which is to rephrase statements as questions, so as to have plausible deniability if later confronted. Thus, for example, instead of just flatly saying something like “We should indoctrinate students with leftist ideologies,” he asks“Should we indoctrinate students with leftist ideologies?” and only after five minutes of talking in circles eventually concludes “Yes.”
North Korea’s lame failed attempt to launch a rocket drew condemnation from the White House, with press secretary Jay Carney saying in a statement that the “provocative action threatens regional security, violates international law and contravenes its own recent commitments.”
“The President has been clear that he is prepared to engage constructively with North Korea,” Carney said. “However, he has also insisted that North Korea live up to its own commitments, adhere to its international obligations and deal peacefully with its neighbors.”
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.) was a little more dramatic.
“Never before has so much been put in jeopardy for so little,” Kerry said in a statement.
“This failure to launch should be a moment of reconsideration and introspection for the North Koreans,” he continued. “No one in the world, including North Korea’s allies, believed this was just an attempt to launch a satellite and no one will accept their pledges to cooperate on denuclearization and lasting peace while they’re conducting rocket launches.”
Kerry said that the “continued provocations” will further isolate Pyongyang.
“Worst of all for them, it was an international spectacle that violated UN Security Council resolutions, violated recent bilateral understandings, posed a threat to regional stability and sends, at best, a mixed message about North Korea’s desire to change its relationship with the international community,” the chairman said.
Kerry’s counterpart in the House said that the rocket attempt so soon after the deal to suspend missile tests for food aid “illustrates once again that trying to negotiate with the regime is a fool’s errand.”
David “Poofter” Plouffe is demanding Mitt Romney release more of his tax statements.
If I were Romney, not only would I tell him to go fuck himself but that the only way he’d see more of them is if Obama presents his ORIGINAL birth certificate (not a doctored copy), opens all his school transcript records, provide copies of his selective service records and open up the Harvard Law Review archives to everything he did while there.
White House adviser David Plouffe doubled down Friday on Democrats’ call for Mitt Romney to release more of his tax returns.
“If he’s got nothing to hide, then there’s nothing to lose,” Plouffe said in an interview with Bloomberg TV set to air Friday night. “I think it’s a simple question of they’re sitting there, they’ve all [been] prepared. I’m sure a lot of accountants spent a lot of time on these tax returns. Just release them.
“And what’s important is, listen, the American people want to have trust in their leaders.”
The White House released the tax returns for President Obama and Vice President Biden on Friday, and, in turn, called for Romney to release more of his tax returns. The former Massachusetts governor has already released tax returns for 2010 and and an estimate of his 2011 tax returns.
In response to Plouffe’s comments the Romney campaign said the White House was just trying to distract from focusing on other issues, like the economy.
“Gov. Romney has already released his 2010 return and an estimate of his 2011 income and taxes. He will release his full 2011 return when it is filed,” Romney spokesperson Amanda Hennenberg said in a statement.
Romney’s tax returns for those years showed that he paid $6.2 million in taxes on an income of $42.5 million. Most of Romney’s income for those years came from investments, and he paid a tax rate of 13.9 percent.
This is a real breakfast (except I need more eggs!)….
Note how they call UMB a “small regional bank,” that’s pure BS, they are blatantly lying to their readers.
UMB Financial Corporation is an American financial services company based in Kansas City, Missouri with operations in seven, mostly Midwestern, states. The company owns commercial banks, a brokerage company, a community development corporation, a consulting company, a mutual fund servicing company, and 16 other subsidiaries. As of December 31, 2009, it had over $11 billion in assets.
UMB’s share are currently trading at $43.40 on the NASDAQ.
Via The Blaze
This guy can’t keep his stories straight, just last week he was claiming Reagan would back his proposals.
(CNN) – While the federal income tax deadline looms, President Barack Obama used his weekly address to argue for the so-called Buffett Rule, a provision that millionaires and billionaires should pay a tax rate no less than that paid by middle-income families.
The proposal, named for billionaire Warren Buffett who has urged Congress to ask more of the wealthy, enjoys high support in polls, and the president said, “We just need some Republican politicians to get on board with where the country is.”
“So we’ve tried this trickle-down experiment before,” Obama continued, critical of the Bush-era tax cuts and previous tax policy. “It doesn’t work. And middle class families have seen too much of their security erode over the past few decades for us to tell them they’re going to have to do more because the wealthiest Americans are going to do less.”