Tag Archives: Obama’s Scandals

After Obama Killed Our Space Program, Putin Can Now Charge The US More To Hitch A Ride

Cavuto: Putin Just Stuck It Back To Us; U.S. Paying Dearly For Trips To Space.
Image Credit: Video Screen Shot Youtube.com

March 25, 2014 – Cavuto: Putin Just Stuck It Back To Us; U.S. Paying Dearly For Trips To Space. More FoxNews.com

When Obama Attacked NASA, He Violated His Oath

This article appears in the April 8, 2011 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.


[PDF version of this article]

April 2—Two days after President Obama announced his intention to end the U.S. commitment to manned space flight, Lyndon LaRouche issued a call, on Feb. 3, 2010, for Obama’s impeachment. As LaRouche and LaRouchePAC have elaborated many times since, the President’s announcement to take down the U.S. space program, which has proceeded apace since that time, was prima facie evidence that he was in violation of his solemn oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Since that time, the growing evidence of Obama’s mental instability has only added greater urgency to the need for his removal from office, based on the provisions of Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the Constitition.

We reprint here LaRouche’s call, which first appeared in the Feb. 12, 2010 issue ofEIR, followed by an elaboration of Obama’s crimes against NASA, and the space program more broadly; the British role behind Obama’s policy; and reactions from leading NASA astronauts in defense of America’s space program. In light of the role NASA would necessarily have to play in defense against the galactic dangers mankind faces, LaRouche’s conclusions are even more important today.

LaRouche: Why Obama Must Be Impeached

President Barack Obama’s stated intention, to shut down and destroy the NASA program at its root, when added to the Hitler-like health-care policy, and the general, destructive features of all other leading Obama policies, is one step too far to bear. There is no longer room on this planet for a United States and a President Obama to occupy the same space.

The need for Obama’s ouster, either by resignation or impeachment, is now an existential issue for both our republic and the welfare of the planet generally.

Since the founding of our republic, the existence of our nation has depended upon surges of science-driven and related increases of the productive powers of labor, per capita and per square kilometer of our territory. Now, especially since the reign of former President George W. Bush, Jr., and now that of Obama, the very means, of science and technology, by which the existence of our republic had formerly prospered, has been destroyed, step, by step, by step. Our industries have gone, the security of our food supplies has been undermined, and now the last bastion of the means of technological progress, the space program, is scheduled for obliteration.

Simply, the time has come, that President Obama must go, either by his own choice, or ours. The intention of our Federal Constitution demands this.
—Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

Killing NASA

“This decision is a decision to abandon humanity’s future,” LaRouche charged in February 2010, in reference to Obama’s NASA policy. “This comes on top of a lot of evil, coming out of the same administration, and from this administration’s masters in London. This is a turning point in history, which humanity can no longer tolerate: what Obama, as a puppet of the British, represents.”

The NASA budget submitted by the President, through his fascist budget director Peter Orszag, on Feb. 1, has a number of elements. First, and most crucially, it cancels the Constellation program, which includes the space capsules and rockets that are in the process of being built in order to return to the Moon. The explicit reason for the cancellation is the immediate cost of the program.

What the Administration is doing here, is killing the manned space flight program, while claiming that it is simply being postponed. Immediately, there will soon be no vehicle other than the Russian Soyuz to take astronauts to the International Space Station, since the space shuttles are scheduled to be decommissioned this year. More fundamentally, the whole mission of human space colonization is being dumped—with no goals or destinations being established, the scientific manpower being scattered to the winds, and the whole idea of manned space-flight being downgraded to a column in the cost-accounting chart.

Second, the budget allocates $6 billion over five years to amateur private companies, which have never produced rockets for manned flight, to develop space vehicles, especially for use in low-orbit flight.

This is a cynical crap-shoot. Initial surveys of astronauts, who have not gone insane, show that over 60% of them would not fly on such rockets, due to safety concerns. It follows the privatization (read: looting) program which creatures such as George Shultz and Felix Rohatyn have applied to the U.S. military, more generally, with (probably intentional) disastrous results.

Third, the budget increases by 61% funding for so-called Earth science, which will go for sensors and other programs based on the fraudulent assumption of global warming. This anti-science waste of funds and manpower, is what Obama’s pro-genocide Science Czar, John Holdren, calls a “return to science.”

Other aspects of the budget are a mix of useful investments in technology, including robotic missions which are necessary precursors to manned flight, and an extension of funds for the International Space Station, and dead weight. Not surprisingly, the projects being funded are targetted to areas which are important to Senators with clout on the NASA budget—in order to blunt their opposition to the overall direction.

British Goal Achieved?

So far, the Obama NASA budget has gone through, and thousands of skilled scientists and technicians have lost their jobs—or are about to once the Shuttle no longer flies. This represents a major victory for the British, who have worked from the 1960s on, to destroy the U.S. space program. As elaborated in a recent LaRouchePAC video, “The Destruction of NASA” (http://www.larouchepac.com/node/13392), the British have been determined to kill the technological optimism and leadership of the United States, which is represented by the U.S. achievement in space, especially manned space flight. They are now feeling triumphant.

The London Economist was the first to applaud what they called Obama’s “radical overhaul” of the NASA orientation. Its article started with a chortle over the death of the Moon-Mars mission, which has been a goal among space visionaries for decades (and of the United States, officially, since 2004), and proceeded to praise the privatization and global warming emphases.

Other London mouthpieces, including so-called liberals in the United States, have followed suit. For example, the April 18, 2010 Financial Times, while applauding Obama’s decision to scrap Constellation and the Moon program, wrote that he “flunked the opportunity to drop it entirely,” and takes particular aim at what they call “NASA’s fuzzier ‘Dan Dare’ mission, based on the idea of man’s ‘need to discover’ “—i.e., the quest for scientific knowledge per se which is the very basis of NASA’s true achievements, and which the British so hate. Instead, the FT advises that the U.S. should do as Britain did, and reduce its space program to “practical initiatives designed to benefit life on Earth.”

Sources tell EIR that it was British conduit Peter Orszag who played the critical role in formulating the shape of the budget, based upon his London School of Economics, utilitarian convictions.

The Astronauts Speak Out

No group of people understand the profound loss Obama’s policy represents more than the astronauts themselves and some key NASA officials. Hear what they had to say:

  • Former NASA Administrator Mike Griffin, in a statement released on Jan. 27, 2010, stated that Obama’s proposal to end manned space flight was “even worse” than President Nixon’s ending of the Apollo program, which Griffin characterized as “one of the most significant, yet strategically bankrupt, decisions in human history.” At least Nixon “left us with the Space Shuttle,” Griffin said. The Obama program “leaves NASA and the nation with no program, no plan, and no commitment to any human spaceflight program beyond that of today…. The president has chosen to recommend that the nation abandon its leadership on the space frontier.”
  • On Feb. 2, 2010, Apollo 17 astronaut Gene Cernan denounced Obama’s “space program to nowhere.” Cernan, the last man to walk on the Moon, said, “We have a responsibility to our country to inspire our kids to do bigger and better and greater things. “He [Obama] is somehow unwilling to invest in the future of this country…. I won’t be here in 20, 30, 40 years from now, but my grandkids will. I want them to have the country I had. I want something better for them.”
  • On Feb. 15, 2010, Scott Carpenter (Mercury), Gene Cernan (Gemini and Apollo), and Charlie Duke (Apollo) wrote an open letter to all Americans, to help rally opposition to Obama’s attempt to kill NASA’s manned space program:

“Dear Mr. & Mrs. America:

“There has never been, and likely never will be, another government program that expedites technological innovation so much as the U.S. space program. There is not another program that has so successfully rallied a nation, inspired youngsters toward academic achievement or established the U.S. as the world leader in technology.

“The manned space program has, in particular, been a source of our nation’s strength and character. But an Achilles heel in the form of our country’s executive branch threatens a mortal wound. Under the Obama 2011 budget, the U.S. will no longer ferry humans into space—no Moon, no Mars. The source of so much of America’s inspiration and spirit, the impetus for so much discovery, technology and imagination, is in jeopardy. The demise of America’s space program is just another step in the dismantling of our nation.

“Where’s the vision put so eloquently in 1962 when President Kennedy said, ‘serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills.’ President Kennedy delivered a vision to the American public that demanded courage, imagination and follow-through….

“We are the only country to ever conquer the high ground, the moon…. The national security implications are starkly real. From the high ground, foreign governments will have greater access to monitor U.S. technology assets in Earth orbit. Whoever controls the high ground becomes the world’s leader in technology.

“We ask you to join those members of Congress who have the fortitude and courage to embrace the vision that has become part of our nation’s signature and who are advocates of returning to the moon and maintaining America’s leadership role in the exploration of space.”

  • Apollo 7 astronaut Walt Cunningham, in an op-ed in the Feb. 27, 2010Houston Chronicle, wrote: “Except in wartime, there has never been another government program that produced as much technological innovation as the U.S. space program, and there likely never will be….” Cunninghman juxtaposed the ending of Constellation to the proposed “increased spending on the discredited global warming hypocrisy.”

“Have we really degenerated as a country to the point where we can no longer fund our own exploration? Did we spend $460 billion becoming pre-eminent in space, only to stupidly surrender it?”

  • On April 12, 2010, nineteen astronauts, whose service spanned from the early 1960s Mercury program to the Space Shuttle, joined by former NASA Administrator Mike Griffin, legendary flight director Gene Kranz, and Apollo-era director of the Johnson Space Center Chris Kraft, sent a letter to President Obama, expressing their outrage at the attempt to shut down manned space exploration, as the nation’s space program is “reduced to mediocrity.”

“For those of us who have accepted the risk and dedicated a portion of our lives to the exploration of outer space, this is a terrible decision. America’s greatness lies in her people: she will always have men and women willing to ride rockets into the heavens.

“Too many men and women have worked too hard and sacrificed too much to achieve America’s preeminence in space, only to see that effort needlessly thrown away…. This is not the time to abandon the promise of the space frontier for a lack of will or an unwillingness to pay the price.”

Since that is true, Obama has to go.

Tags: Space Race, Obama Destroying America, Obama’s Scandals, Sci-Tech, Space, Astronauts

Video: Disillusioned Obama Supporter Absolves Self By Burning Her Obama T-Shirt

Former Female Obama Supporter Calls Him Out For Being A Fraud, Burns Her Obama T-Shirt

Screen Shot 2014-03-18 at 7.06.49 PM
Former Female Obama Supporter Calls Him Out For Being A Fraud, Burns Obama T-Shirt
Opinion: Carey Wedler has been an Obama supporter since the beginning, but she has had a change of heart after discovering what a fraud and liar he is. She burns her Obama T-shirt as an act of self-absolution.

Tags: Obama’s Scandals, Carey Wedler

Obama’s Former Adviser Brzezinski Said In 1997 that the U.S. Had to Gain Control of Ukraine

Obama’s Former Foreign Policy Adviser Said – In 1997 – that the U.S. Had to Gain Control of Ukraine

Washington’s Blog
March 16, 2014

"Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire." -- Zbigniew Brzezinski “Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.” — Zbigniew Brzezinski

The Battle for Ukraine Was Planned in 1997 … Or Earlier

Neoconservatives planned regime change throughout the Middle East and North Africa 20 years ago. Robert Parry correctly points out that the Neocons havesuccessfully “weathered the storm” of disdain after their Iraq war fiasco.But the truth is that Obama has long done his best to try to implement those Neocon plans.

Similarly, ever since the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the U.S. has pursued a strategy of encircling Russia, just as it has with other perceived enemies like China and Iran.

In 1997, Obama’s former foreign affairs adviser, and president Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser – Zbigniew Brzezinski – wrote a book called The Grand Chessboard arguing arguing that the U.S. had to take control of Ukraine (as well as Azerbaijan, South Korea, Turkey and Iran) because they were “critically important geopolitical pivots”.

Regarding Ukraine, Brzezinski said (hat tip Chris Ernesto):

Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.


However, if Moscow regains control over Ukraine, with its 52 million people and major resources as well as access to the Black Sea, Russia automatically again regains the wherewithal to become a powerful imperial state, spanning Europe and Asia.

And now Obama is pushing us into a confrontation with Russia over Ukraine and the Crimea.

As Ernesto notes:

Late last year when Ukraine’s now-ousted president Viktor Yanukovych surprisingly canceled plans for Ukrainian integration into the European Union in favor of stronger ties with Russia, the US may have viewed Ukraine as slipping even further out of its reach.

At that point, with the pieces already in place, the US moved to support the ousting of Yanukovych, as evidenced by the leaked phone conversation between US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland [arch-NeoconRobert Kagan‘s wife]  and US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt.  When peaceful protests were not effective in unseating Yanukovych, the violence of the ultra-nationalist Svoboda party and Right Sector was embraced, if not supported by the west.

In today’s Ukraine, the US runs the risk of being affiliated with anti-Semitic neo-Nazis, a prospect it probably feels can be controlled via a friendly western media. But even if the risk is high, the US likely views it as necessary given the geopolitical importance of Ukraine, as Brzezinski mapped out in 1997.

In other words, Obama is following the same old playbook that the Neocons have been pushing for more than a decade.

Tags: Obama’s Scandals, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Ukraine,


U.S. to relinquish remaining control over the Internet

By ,

Poll Tanking Obama Gets To Vacation & Golf Like A MadmanU.S. officials announced plans Friday to relinquish federal government control over the administration of the Internet, a move that pleased international critics but alarmed some business leaders and others who rely on the smooth functioning of the Web.

Pressure to let go of the final vestiges of U.S. authority over the system of Web addresses and domain names that organize the Internet has been building for more than a decade and was supercharged by the backlash last year to revelations about National Security Agency surveillance.

The change would end the long-running contract between the Commerce Department and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a California-based nonprofit group. That contract is set to expire next year but could be extended if the transition plan is not complete.

“We look forward to ICANN convening stakeholders across the global Internet community to craft an appropriate transition plan,” Lawrence E. Strickling, assistant secretary of commerce for communications and information, said in a statement.

The announcement received a passionate response, with some groups quickly embracing the change and others blasting it.

In a statement, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) called the move “consistent with other efforts the U.S. and our allies are making to promote a free and open Internet, and to preserve and advance the current multi-stakeholder model of global Internet governance.”

But former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) tweeted: “What is the global internet community that Obama wants to turn the internet over to? This risks foreign dictatorships defining the internet.”

The practical consequences of the decision were harder to immediately discern, especially with the details of the transition not yet clear. Politically, the move could alleviate rising global concerns that the United States essentially controls the Web and takes advantage of its oversight position to help spy on the rest of the world.

U.S. officials set several conditions and an indeterminate timeline for the transition from federal government authority, saying a new oversight system must be developed and win the trust of crucial stakeholders around the world. An international meeting to discuss the future of Internet is scheduled to start on March 23 in Singapore.

The move’s critics called the decision hasty and politically tinged, and voiced significant doubts about the fitness of ICANN to operate without U.S. oversight and beyond the bounds of U.S. law.

“This is a purely political bone that the U.S. is throwing,” said Garth Bruen, a security fellow at the Digital Citizens Alliance, a Washington-based advocacy group that combats online crime. “ICANN has made a lot of mistakes, and ICANN has not really been a good steward.”

Business groups and some others have long complained that ICANN’s decision-making was dominated by the interests of the industry that sells domain names and whose fees provide the vast majority of ICANN’s revenue. The U.S. government contract was a modest check against such abuses, critics said.

“It’s inconceivable that ICANN can be accountable to the whole world. That’s the equivalent of being accountable to no one,” said Steve DelBianco, executive director of NetChoice, a trade group representing major Internet commerce businesses.

U.S. officials said their decision had nothing to do with the NSA spying revelations and the worldwide controversy they sparked, saying there had been plans since ICANN’s creation in 1998 to eventually migrate it to international control.

“The timing is now right to start this transition both because ICANN as an organization has matured, and international support continues to grow for the multistakeholder model of Internet governance,” Strickling said in a statement.

Although ICANN is based in Southern California, governments worldwide have a say in the group’s decisions through an oversight body. ICANN in 2009 made an “Affirmation of Commitments” to the Commerce Department that covers several key issues.

Fadi Chehade, president of ICANN, disputed many of the complaints about the transition plan and promised an open, inclusive process to find a new international oversight structure for the group.

“Nothing will be done in any way to jeopardize the security and stability of the Internet,” he said.

The United States has long maintained authority over elements of the Internet, which grew from a Defense Department program that started in the 1960s. The relationship between the United States and ICANN has drawn wider international criticism in recent years, in part because big American companies such as Google, Facebook and Microsoft play such a central role in the Internet’s worldwide functioning. The NSA revelations exacerbated those concerns. Read More

Tags: Internet, ICANN, Takeover, Obama’s Scandals

Investigative Journalist Resigns Over CBS Censoring Her Anti-Obama Reports

CBS Journalist Resigns After Being Pressured Over ‘Anti-Obama’ Reporting

But don’t expect a Liz Wahl-style media circus

Paul Joseph Watson
March 10, 2014

CBS journalist Sharyl Attkisson resigned today after facing pressure over reports she filed that were deemed to be overly critical of President Obama, but don’t expect the mainstream media to create a circus around Attkisson’s resignation like they did that of RT host Liz Wahl.

Image: Sharyl Attkisson (YouTube).

“Attkisson, who has been with CBS News for two decades, had grown frustrated with what she saw as the network’s liberal bias, an outsized influence by the network’s corporate partners and a lack of dedication to investigative reporting, several sources said. She increasingly felt like her work was no longer supported and that it was a struggle to get her reporting on air,” reports Politico, noting that Attkisson’s work was characterized as “agenda-driven” because she was hard on the Obama administration.

In the world of American state media, there is no room for adversarial reporting. Despite the fact that it used to be the role of the fourth estate to speak truth to power, Attkisson’s apparent unwillingness to let White House talking points go unchallenged has cost her her job.

Attkisson’s work over the past five years has primarily focused on Obama scandals such as the Fast and Furious gunrunning controversy and the attack in Benghazi, but she did also skewer Republicans. A source close to Attkisson told Politico that she was frustrated as CBS’ lack of support for anti-Obama investigative reporting.

While RT’s Liz Wahl received global attention and a slew of mainstream media appearances after she quit the Russian network for similar reasons, don’t expect the corporate press to afford Attkisson anything like the same level of attention.

As is documented in the video below, Wahl’s resignation was a cynical pre-planned stunt that had little to do with Russia’s actions in Crimea and everything to do with Wahl putting herself in the shop window for a job with CNN.

However, it was exploited by the establishment media as a tool with which to bash RT, which is stealing a good chunk of audience share from the likes of CNN and MSNBC, which have both lost around 50% of their viewership in the last year alone – precisely because they employ so few hard-hitting journalists like Sharyl Attkisson.

Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71

Tags: CBS journalist, Sharyl Attkisson, Obama’s Scandals

Obama Lied His Way To The White House And His Election Is Null And Void?

Judge Jeanine Pirro Opening Statement - Did Obama Lie His Way To WH & Is His Election Null & VoidJudge Jeanine Pirro Opening Statement – Did Obama Lie His Way To WH & Is His Election Null & Void.

Tags: Barack Obama, Election Fraud, Obama’s Scandals, George Soros, Obama’s Crimes, Obama’s Lies

Lois Lerner Takes The Fifth, Again – Refuses To Testify About Obama IRS Targeting Of Tea Party

Lois Lerner Takes The Fifth, Again
Lois Lerner Takes The Fifth, Again
Obama’s Alarming IRS Scandal – Lois Lerner Refuses To Testify At House Hearing On IRS Targeting Of Tea Party.

Tags: IRS Scandal, IRS, Lois Lerner, Tea Party, The Tea Party, Obama’s Scandals, Election Fraud, Barack Obama

The Obamas Exposed For Ripping Off Tax Payers With Unnecessary Luxurious Vacations And Travel

Obamas set new record for vacation travel expenses; stonewalled documents finally released

Source: Bizpacreview.com

It took filing a lawsuit, but Judicial Watch discovered Friday that President Obama has set a new record for travel on the taxpayer dime.

The conservative watchdog group obtained travel records from the U.S. Department of the Air Force that show the Obamas racked up $7.4 million during just three trips in 2013 – in flight expenses only.

The records, revealed Friday, include the Obama family’s Christmas vacation in Hawaii from Dec. 21, 2012, to Jan. 5, 2013. During that stay, the president took a short break and flew back to Washington to work on a budget deal, then returned for the rest of his vacation.

Obama vacation Marthas VineyardPhoto credit: Cape Cod Times/Steve Heaslip

The second trip was in early August, 2013, when Obama flew to California for a private fundraiser with DreamWorks CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg, then appeared with Jay Leno on the “Tonight Show.” Later that month, the Obama family vacationed in Martha’s Vineyard, Mass.

Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in August 2013, after repeated stonewalling by the White House. The group reported:

*    The outbound flight to Honolulu for the Obamas’ 2012-13 Christmas vacation cost taxpayers $2, 214, 393.60. The return flight to Washington cost $1,871,961.60. Flight expenditures alone came to $4,086,355.20.

*    The outbound flight to California in August, 2013 for Obama to dine with Katzenberg and appear on the “The Tonight Show” cost taxpayers $1,209,926.40. The return flight to Washington cost $935,980.80. Flight expenditures alone came to $2,145,907.20.

*    The outbound flight to Martha’s Vineyard for the Obama family’s August vacation cost taxpayers $890,323.20. The return flight to Washington cost $273,945.60. Flight expenditures alone came to $1,164,268.80.

*   The grand total of $7,396,531.20, Judicial Watch pointed out, only accounted for flight expenses for the three trips.

“The fact is, the Obamas are abusing the public trust and the taxpayers with unnecessary luxurious vacations and travel,” Judicial Watch said in its report. “These staggering costs show why these documents were covered-up and we had to sue in federal court to get them.  Another transparency fail for the Obama gang, but thanks to our federal lawsuit it is another accountability win for the American taxpayer.” Read More

Tags: Vacations, Barack Obama, Obama’s Scandals, Election Fraud, Obama’s Crimes

Crazy Obamacare Now Appearing On Your Restaurant Bill

Obamacare: Now Appearing On Your Restaurant Bill

Zero Hedge
March 1, 2014

That the bulk of Americans (especially those 4+ million whose insurance policies have recently been cancelled as a result of the ACA) have to pay more for healthcare as a result of Obamacare, is now largely accepted and well-known. But did you know that the cost of Obamacare is slowly metastasizing to other places? Such as your restaurant bill.

Presenting Exhibit A.

ACA Surcharge

From CNN:

Several restaurants in a Florida chain are asking customers to help foot the bill for Obamacare. Diners at eight Gator’s Dockside casual eateries are finding a 1% Affordable Care Act surcharge on their tabs, which comes to 15 cents on a typical $15 lunch tab. Signs on the door and at tables alert diners to the fee, which is also listed separately on the bill.

The Gator Group’s full-time hourly employees won’t actually receive health insurance until December. But the company said it implemented the surcharge now because of the compliance costs it’s facing ahead of the Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate kicking in in 2015.

“The costs associated with ACA compliance could ultimately close our doors,” the sign reads. “Instead of raising prices on our products to generate the additional revenue needed to cover the costs of ACA compliance, certain Gator’s Dockside locations have implemented a 1% surcharge on all food and beverage purchases only.”

The company employs a total of 500 people, with about half working full-time. Currently only management receives health benefits, but the restaurant will have to offer coverage to all full-timers once the mandate takes effect. The fee will allow the company to continue offering full-time hours to many workers, according to Sandra Clark, the group’s director of operations.

I’m just trying to keep the employees I have that I’ve worked hard to train,” Clark said.

In addition to the costs of providing health care, the company hired one additional staffer and a consulting firm to make sure it is complying with the law and to assist in the additional tracking of workers’ hours and wages required by Obamacare, said Clark.

Clark is not sure how much the company is spending on compliance, but estimates that it will cost $500,000 a year to extend insurance to its full-time hourly restaurant workers. The surcharge may bring in about $160,000 a year, she hopes.

So more surcharges coming then.

The bottom line decision for businesses: fire your workers, or pass through the costs to other consumers. Many have done the former, or converted full-time workers to part-time status. Increasingly more are opting for the latter. How long until the popular outcry that this latest “freebie” by the government was anything but.

Tags: ObamaTAX, Obama’s Scandals, Obama’s Lies, Obama, Election Fraud, Obama Crimes

More On Ted Nugent’s ‘Subhuman Mongrel Obama Should Be Convicted Of Treason’ Comments

Video Opinion: Alex Jones says he describes Barack Obama better than Ted Nugent. ‘Drone Killer Obama Is A Failure Puppet’

Ted Nugent: 'Subhuman Mongrel' Obama Should Be Convicted Of TreasonTed Nugent: ‘Subhuman Mongrel’ Obama Should Be Convicted Of Treason ~> Video 

National Rifle Association board member and Outdoor Channel spokesman Ted Nugent called Obama a “subhuman mongrel” and argued that he and other liberal politicians should be punished for treason.

Nugent made the comment during a January 17 interview with Guns.com at the 2014 Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade Show (SHOT Show), an annual gun industry trade show that draws 60,000 firearms industry professionals.
Source: http://barracudabrigade.blogspot.com/2014/01/ted-nugent-subhuman-mongrel-obama.html

Tags: Ted Nugent, Obama’s Scandals, Communist, Treason