What an amazing coincidence. After Obama says the most important policy he could address in his second term is climate change, Bank of America announces they pledge $50 billion to combat climate change. Where are they getting $50 billion? Oh thats right, bailout money.
#3
And here I just heard last week that the banks were having a hard time making ends meet after the Feds regulated their fees.
I guess Bank of America has money to burn!
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/13/2012 12:33 Comments ||
Top||
#4
remember that the Dem Convention will be held in Charlotte, NC. The ascension of Emperor Obama to Dem Prez renominee will take place at Bank Of America Stadium there. That is already getting flack. I suspect this is an attempt to buy some concessions from the "I hate BofA/1%" crowd using somebody else's money
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/13/2012 13:44 Comments ||
Top||
#5
"Combat Climate Change:" = let's spend money to wreck what's working in the energy industry in the US, but hope the people working in it are still able to send in their monthly mortgage checks and credit card payments.
In the handling of money and when one acts as a corporate or individual trustee, there is a fiduciary responsibility owed to the principal party. It is defined as a relationship imposed by law where someone has voluntarily agreed to act in the capacity of a "caretaker" of another's rights, assets and/or well being. The fiduciary owes an obligation to carry out the responsibilities with the utmost degree of "good faith, honesty, integrity, loyalty and undivided service of the beneficiaries interest." The good faith has been interpreted to impose an obligation to act reasonably in order to avoid negligent handling of the beneficiary's interests as well the duty not to favor ANYONE ELSE'S INTEREST (INCLUDING THE TRUSTEES OWN INTEREST) over that of the beneficiary. Further, if the agent should find him/herself in a position of conflicting interests, the agent must disclose the dual agency (acting for two parties at the same time) or risk being accused of constructive fraud in regards to both or either principals.
The lot of the board and operators should be sacked.
Barack Obama is facing calls from Democratic allies to urgently change course in his re-election campaign, following a new low in poll ratings, worsening economic conditions and a daunting haul of donations by his opponents.
The Presidents approval rating has slipped to 47 per cent, its lowest level since January, an Ipsos poll found. The proportion of voters saying that the US was on the wrong track rose six points to 63 per cent.
Discontent with Mr Obamas leadership has seen his national lead over Mitt Romney, his Republican challenger, fall from seven percentage points to one virtually a tie in the past month. Meanwhile Mr Romney has overtaken him in the money race.
Amid indications that he may seek to strike a humbler tone beginning with a major economic speech Thursday, Mr Obama told donors at a fund-raiser in Pennsylvania late on Tuesday: I hope you still believe in me.
His comments came as he was overtaken by Mr Romney in polls in North Carolina, a battleground state that he won in 2008 and which his campaign chiefs still claim he can hold again.
Support there for Mr Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, was put at 48 per cent by a PPP survey, compared to 46 for Mr Obama. Two months ago, the President led in the state by five points.
[Breitbart] The US Department of Justice announced Monday it will sue Florida to stop the state from purging ineligible voters from its voter rolls. The DOJ statement came after Florida filed suit against the Department of Homeland Security for failing to cooperate with efforts to clean up the state's voter registration records.
A preliminary comparison between drivers license records and voter registration has flagged as many as 182,000 registered voters who may not be US citizens. Florida officials sought access to the DHS immigration database (SAVE) to verify their matches but DHS has refused to respond to the state's requests.
At least 141 non-citizens have been found on the voter rolls and 47 on this list have cast ballots in previous elections. More than 500 on the list have been identified as citizens and lawful voters.
#3
Just ignore Holder and keep on purging illegal Democrats from the rolls. What are they going to do about it? If the feds cut off funds to anything, it will just upset the voters. Besides, FL can also cut off federal taxes. It doesn't seem to me that the feds have time to process this anyway.
#4
Holder is a worthless, narcissistic snik just like his golfing boss. His Fast and Furious testimony before the congress clearly illustrates his total contempt for them and the system. The sooner we are rid of both of them, the better.
I am beginning to wonder if this entire Fast and Furious fiasco will eventually find it's origins with the leadership of the US State Department. The Beast is stearing clear of the Beltway, visiting every foreign country she has ever heard of, and Slick is somewhat reluctantly stumping for The One. What am I missing?
#5
I've been wotching Morgan Freeman's Thru the Wormhole. recently, the show was about 'are there parallel universes?'
Clearly, Holdner and his boss are in another part of the multi-verse!
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/13/2012 9:20 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I am beginning to wonder if this entire Fast and Furious fiasco will eventually find it's origins with the leadership of the US State Department
Unlikely. Doesn't mean that State wasn't a player in the F&F fiasco, either willingly or through incompetence. Either way it will not reflect well upon the Secretary.
#10
All he needs to do is to stave off voter roll cleanup until the election. After that, he has 4 years to find another way to build the Dem's voter cadres.
A critical document from President Barack Obama's free trade negotiations with eight Pacific nations was leaked online early Wednesday morning, revealing that the administration intends to bestow radical new political powers upon multinational corporations, contradicting prior promises.
Wonder how long it will take to cross-match those names with the donors to the Obama campaign. Of course, if we had a Republican president that would already have been done and published in the New York Times...
The leaked document has been posted on the website of Public Citizen, a long-time critic of the administration's trade objectives. The new leak follows substantial controversy surrounding the secrecy of the talks, in which some members of Congress have complained they are not being given the same access to trade documents that corporate officials receive.
"The outrageous stuff in this leaked text may well be why U.S. trade officials have been so extremely secretive about these past two years of [trade] negotiations," said Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch in a written statement.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) has been so incensed by the lack of access as to introduce legislation requiring further disclosure. House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) has gone so far as to leak a separate document from the talks on his website. Other Senators are considering writing a letter to Ron Kirk, the top trade negotiator under Obama, demanding more disclosure.
You guys could always vote 'no' when the FTA comes to Congress for approval...
The newly leaked document is one of the most controversial of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact. It addresses a broad sweep of regulations governing international investment and reveals the Obama administration's advocacy for policies that environmental activists, financial reform advocates and labor unions have long rejected for eroding key protections currently in domestic laws.
Under the agreement currently being advocated by the Obama administration, American corporations would continue to be subject to domestic laws and regulations on the environment, banking and other issues. But foreign corporations operating within the U.S. would be permitted to appeal key American legal or regulatory rulings to an international tribunal. That international tribunal would be granted the power to overrule American law and impose trade sanctions on the United States for failing to abide by its rulings.
That is extra-constitutional. That places an international tribunal higher than our own Article III courts. That just isn't allowed.
The terms run contrary to campaign promises issued by Obama and the Democratic Party during the 2008 campaign.
"We will not negotiate bilateral trade agreements that stop the government from protecting the environment, food safety, or the health of its citizens; give greater rights to foreign investors than to U.S. investors; require the privatization of our vital public services; or prevent developing country governments from adopting humanitarian licensing policies to improve access to life-saving medications," reads the campaign document.
Yet nearly all of those vows are violated by the leaked Trans-Pacific document. The one that is not contravened in the present document -- regarding access to life-saving medication -- is in conflict with a previously leaked document on intellectual property (IP) standards.
"Bush was better than Obama on this," said Judit Rius, U.S. manager of Doctors Without Borders Access to Medicines Campaign, referring to the medication rules. "It's pathetic, but it is what it is. The world's upside-down."
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative insists that while broad standards require many medical patents and IP rules that would increase the price of medications, the U.S. intends to work with countries involved in the Trans-Pacific talks to ensure that the agreement does not restrict access to life-saving drugs.
USTR was not immediately available to comment on the newly leaked investment chapter of the Trans-Pacific deal, and has previously stated that it cannot comment on the terms of an allegedly leaked document.
That statement is belied somewhat by recent American efforts in other international negotiations to establish controversial medical patents that grant companies long-term monopolies on life-saving medications. Those monopolies increase drug prices, which impede access to medications, particularly in developing nations. The World Health Organization and dozens of nonprofit public health groups have objected to the standards sought by the Obama administration. Two United Nations groups recently urged global governments not to agree to trade terms currently being advocated by the Obama administration, on the grounds that such rules would hurt public health.
Such foreign investment standards have also come under fire at home, from both conservative sovereignty purists and progressive activists for the potential to hamper domestic priorities implemented by democratically elected leaders. The North American Free Trade Agreement, passed by Congress in 1993, and a host of subsequent trade pacts granted corporations new powers that had previously been reserved for sovereign nations and that have allowed companies to sue nations directly over issues.
But while the current trade deal could pose a challenge to American sovereignty, large corporations headquartered in the U.S. could potentially benefit from it by using the same terms to oppose the laws of foreign governments. If one of the eight Pacific nations involved in the talks passes a new rule to which an American firm objects, that U.S. company could take the country to court directly in international tribunals.
Public Citizen challenged the independence of these international tribunals, noting that "The tribunals would be staffed by private sector lawyers that rotate between acting as 'judges' and as advocates for the investors suing the governments," according to the text of the agreement.
In early June, a tribunal at the World Bank agreed to hear a case involving similar foreign investment standards, in which El Salvador banned cyanide-based gold mining on the basis of objections from the Catholic Church and environmental activists. If the World Bank rules against El Salvador, it could overturn the nation's domestic laws at the behest of a foreign corporation.
Ordinarily you'd think the Progressives would be thrilled that an international organization gets to order around a sovereign state, but it's all about the goals, my friend, it's all about the goals...
Basic public health and land-use rules would be subject to challenge before an international tribunal, as would bank regulations at capital levels that might be used to stymie bank runs or financial crises. The IMF has advocated the use of such capital controls, which would be prohibited under the current version of the leaked trade pact. Although several countries have proposed exceptions that would allow them to regulate speculative financial bets, the U.S. has resisted those proposals, according to Public Citizen.
Trans-Pacific negotiations have been taking place throughout the Obama presidency. The deal is strongly supported by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the top lobbying group for American corporations. Obama's Republican opponent in the 2012 presidential elections, Mitt Romney, has urged the U.S. to finalize the deal as soon as possible.
#1
American corporations would continue to be subject to domestic laws and regulations on the environment, banking and other issues. But foreign corporations operating within the U.S. would be permitted to appeal key American legal or regulatory rulings to an international tribunal. That international tribunal would be granted the power to overrule American law and impose trade sanctions on the United States for failing to abide by its rulings
If I'm reading this correctly this treasonous bastard is plotting to turn over American sovereignty to an international tribunal which can over-turn American law.
How is this not treason?
Is he planning on getting this new treaty through the Congress or implementing it through some sleazy maneuver of his own?
The board hand-picked by Mayor Michael Nanny Bloomberg that must approve his ban of selling large sugar-filled drinks at restaurants might be looking at other targets.
The New York City Board of Health showed support for limiting sizes of sugary drinks at a Tuesday meeting in Queens. They agreed to start the process to formalize the large-drink ban by agreeing to start a six-week public comment period.
At the meeting, some of the members of board said they should be considering other limits on high-calorie foods.
One member, Bruce Vladeck, thinks limiting the sizes for movie theater popcorn should be considered.
"The popcorn isn't a whole lot better than the soda," Vladeck said.
Another board member thinks milk drinks should fall under the size limits.
"There are certainly milkshakes and milk-coffee beverages that have monstrous amounts of calories," said board member Dr. Joel Forman.
Mayor Bloomberg says the drink rules are an attempt to fight obesity in the city. It would limit food service establishments in the city from serving drinks bigger than 16 ounces but would allow refills.
The New York City Restaurant Association is fighting the proposal and is considering legal action of it goes into effect.
New York City voters oppose 51 - 46 percent Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposed ban on the sale of over-sized sugary soft drinks, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2012 09:50 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Apparently oxygen is in short supply in NY, perhaps they should ban that as well.
Watch Nanny Bloomers this morning. He is a charming narcissist who will lie to your face with a smile so long as he has a bit of statistic or factoid.
Enjoy your hell New Yorkers, or at least those of you weak enough to be patrolled for a cafe au lait, cuz you know the tough hoods are exempt. Or going to the concession stand four times during your 150 minute movie, or six times during the yanquis game, especially if you take the kids. What do you suppose the price of a bottle of water will go for?
Governor William J. Le Petomane: [pointing to a member of his cabinet] I didn't get a "harrumph" out of that guy!
Hedley Lamarr: Give the Governor harrumph!
Politician: Harrumph!
Governor William J. Le Petomane: You watch your ass.
#4
Bloomberg approved - Just like Grandmas used to taste.
The year is 2022. The world has grown more crowded each year, and as the population has grown, the means to feed that population have dwindled. We couldn't go hungry; something had to be done. That's where the Soylent Corporation stepped in and saved us all. Forget their Soylent Red and Yellow - their crowning achievement has been Soylent Green. And now we share their wondrous invention with you: Soylent Green Crackers.
Prepare and boil the beets in Orange Juice until soft. Mash.
Crumble the crackers into a pie dish. Layer the mashed beets, then top with the shredded arugula. After setting, cut a slice and go watch the Food Network and pretend you are eating what is on the show.
#3
Audio presentation. Private sector doing well but Romney indicates it was not a slip, that he went on with that subject. Where is point man Joe Biden when you need him.
#4
Mods- this is Tom-Pa.. I'm sorry if I 'mistakenly' tried to post this 6.5 minute "PODCAST" on your website. I frequented rantburg early in the 2000's. There is no video, this is merely a 6.5 minute PODCAST by my local radio host. I'm getting confidence each day that BHO will not be able to win 270 electoral votes. BHO will be 'out of here' come post election day. I've learned much in hanging out in Rantburg. With your articles/ reader comments. Thank you. The MSM has been withholding info from the US population, and certain stories (specifically, this Fast & Furious). Eric Holder has been questioned much recently. Those members of the committee are being 'stonewalled' asking for information, even as far back as a year ago. I'm a big Issa fan, along with other members of the REPUBLICANS sitting on the commitee. The DEMOCRATS are going with the strategy that the investigation is just politically motivated on the part of the REPUBLICANS. They simply claim that the REPUBLICANS are simply on an unnecessary WITCH-HUNT. The lower level agents have testified previously. My understanding is that the liberals are against the second amendment. Strategy they were using was it's too easy to get guns. To prove this, the US Government and agencies( I know of at least the ATF) procured I think it was 6000(?) guns supplied/bought at US mexico border and turned over to Mexican Drug cartels. Most of the weapons headed south into Mexico (GOD only knows how many poor Mexican citizens) have been killed by these weapons. However, in 2010, US border agent, Brian Terry was killed at the border. The serial number on the gun that killed Terry, matched one that was involved in the purchase of the original 6000.
I also remember by one of the testifiers, the US didn't even co-ordinate this operation with the Mexican authorities. Agents testified that the US agents(?) were going to keep a close eye on the shipment(s) to see where they were headed. At that time, the US would notify Mexican authorities. Up to this time, only the lower agents have been reprimanded. But where did the orders start from? That is where Issa has been making continuos requests of the administration for some time now. As an aside, has anyone here been watching on c-span the recent questioning of Eric Holder by the commitee? and to go back further in time, has anyone watched the questioning of the lower level agents giving details of the operation? Just wonderring, because nothing/minimal details have been reported by the 'state controlled media'. You have to remember, if they don't report it, it never happenned. (censorship). Sorry to really go off on a tangent here, after all my original posting had to do with a MITT ROMNEY interview on the radio yesterday. Off the record here, since I don't even watch the news anymore has any of my above 'short-story'(ha-ha, short) appeared on CBS, or NBC, or ABC, or CNN, or MSNBC, or even FoxNews?? I'm hoping the proverbial "shit hits the fan" sooner/rather than later(post election)- Who knows these days?
As an aside again, I was trying to find out how many of the 'sheeple' has ever heard about this?
I would introduce myself, go one on one with that person and ask them, "If I mention the term 'Fast and Furious', does it mean anything to you." Most of my respondence from that person would be, "you mean the movie?" So, I figured that person didn't know.. If this makes RANTBURG pages, I would welcome your comments. You people here are astute as to what goes on, and would appreciate some feedback.. GOD BLESS the USA, obama's out of here come november. BTW, whats the intrade on the election right now?
Prediction here is Pres Romney, along with Republican controlled Senate and House. Not sure though with world middle east events, along with world financial crisis. About five months to election. Sidenote, recently had 'spine surgery' on 6/1 and am recovering at home. I have 'seen the light', dr's say I could have been left paralyzed. Often I see postings by Steve White over at Professor Jacobson's 'LegalInsurrection'.
So is anybody else following this? I am going to blame the long story on my backpain meds! thank you for your time...
#6
Tom-Pa, they made me a moderator while you were away, so I was speaking above in that capacity. (Life is full of surprises, I know.) I wasn't the one who published your plea, though, so another mod thought it worth sharing with our gentle readers.
We've been following the Fast & Furious story from the earliest days, thanks in part to moderator Sherry, who also came on board after you turned your attention elsewhere. I think it was ABC that's been reporting the story -- one of their reporters has a stubborn streak. Also, our own badanov has been doing independent reporting on the drug war and politics in Mexico, where they are not pleased about their citizens dying from F&F guns about which they were not informed.
You'll want to send a note to Fred (see the front page in the right margin for the link) to regain access to the articles in the archive, so you can get caught up on the subject. Fred tightened that up during the Righthaven excitement -- he was one of the bloggers they went after, which was not fun despite the generous support of some of our clever Rantburg lawyers and business people, and quite generous donations from the readership.
I'm glad your surgery went well, and welcome back! I was just reading through the older bits of the archives yesterday, and found myself wondering what had happened to you and some others. :-)
#7
Trailing Wife... Check out this link for Fast and Furious Ad. Hope it works. Let me know if doesn't! I'm unfamiliar how to post links on this site to youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3Wk2n8P6dQ
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/13/2012 21:07 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Check out this link for Fast and Furious Ad.
That worked, Tom -- thank you! I'm still working on figuring out the quirks of the iPad that replaced my last laptop, and am handicapped by a decided lack of technical ability, about which my family, now including two professors of computer science (my sister just got the offer yesterday!!) find highly amusing.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
