Can Obama Eat the Most Jello With Chop Sticks?

How much Jello can Obama eat with Chinese chop sticks? The Guinness World Records for the most Jello eaten with chopsticks in one minute is 610 g (1 lb 5 oz) and was achieved by Ashrita Furman (USA) at the Panorama Café in New York, New York, USA, on 7 December 2010. Maybe breaking this record will impress Chinese President Hu because so far he sees Obama with less backbone in political power than a bowl of limp schezwan noodles. 

Chinese Navy escorts ships in So China Seas.I recently saw the Mike Huckabee Show coverage on the new Chinese Blue Water Navy Fleet revelation and it struck me that he was talking like it was some big upcoming surprise to everyone. But, it was only new to those who never read about China and their Deep Blue Water Navy as far back as 2002 as I did. It's just like a joke on the ignorant American public as the Obamacare head economist, MIT professor Jonathan Gruber duly noted, "...the stupidity of the American voter to know the difference," as it was here proving once again that voters, like mushrooms, are kept in a dark cellar and fed a lot of shit by politicians. 

If I knew about it for over ten years, then our military knew it all along with everyone in Washington, DC. Why didn't anyone bring it up since then? Because, the politicians were seeing that military expenditures were spiraling up higher, out of control due to Iraq and Afghanistan wars and did not want to tell the voters that our military needed new ships for our future naval defense. People always think of "boots on the ground" instead of "ships on the waters" when fighting our enemies. But, if you understand ocean trade routes in our global economy, the dominate naval fleet controls international politics through goods and services; therefore, it dictates power worldwide. 

Guess what? The Chinese war hawks have now come home to roost while the US acts mind-numbingly so stupid and slow to see them and react. It's no wonder when most Americans are slouched in front of their TVs watching liberal govt censored news, stale worn-out sitcoms, cliché reality shows or trivial video games. Cell phones with texting and social media sites exponentially add to all those crazy distractions too.

I had a blog about this very same China problem back on July 14, 2014. It was actually updated twice from an earlier blog I first published in 2010. It has been a very popular article read by many readers. You can find it at: Obama High Seas Confusion Dooms U.S. Trade

When you see my blog, the map of the ocean passage in the India-China seas shows the big picture of why and what is the China threat to the world and US. In spite of this growing Chinese aggression, the US military's advanced armaments and equipment offer a wide umbrella of defense/offense options as the United States maintains military superiority for the foreseeable future.

Many experts project this lead over the next decade or so is because of devaluation in Yuan currency exchange rates to the US$ due to massive government infrastructure outlays for power, roads, sanitation and housing (over 30 mil still living in caves); fewer jobs and higher unemployment; environmental pollution; mass population shifts from agrarian jobs to urban careers; expansion of higher public education programs; overall public health problems of over 6 mil/yr killed by smoking and heart disease along with care for an ever-growing aging population; and further civil unrest with more disobedience to centralized authorities. 

So this momentary lead is not like a Monopoly game where it gives the US a "Get Out Jail" cardObama Monopoly Money Banker and "Collect $200 As You Pass Go" to continue on the way we have been. It is but a signpost telling us it's time to redress our defense budgets and build it up for the future before it is too late to defend our own sovereignty and preeminence in the world.   

A Good-News and Bad-News facts: China’s symmetric capabilities, the ability to attack on various fronts such as air, land, internet, nuclear weapons, bombs and missiles, and ground troops will have the potential to mitigate or lessen our US military advantage. This could have a positive effect in the sense that both great powers deter each other. China and the United States have grown increasingly economic interdependent, sharing many common interests. This lucrative relationship may reduce the chance for tension. However, everyone should remember in both WW1 and WW2 of the 20th Century, Germany was Britain’s largest trade partner--how did that work out?

Words of Caution: Don't ever think of the Chinese as some 'warm', 'fuzzy', 'compassionate' ally to confide in with a group hug within a 'kumbaya' moment. Maoists philosophically believes the US, a Christian nation cannot coexist with China, a Communist nation. They are a strict Confucian society that believes in order as the people show respect and subservient behavior to all civil authority without question--no American democracy or Constitutional freedom of the people here.

US 1.9 vs. China 4.34 Billion Tons CO2 PollutionWith the Chinese government their competitive, aggressive actions truly show what they are thinking, not by what they're saying. Get over 'being candid or truthful' in any negotiations with the Chinese, they will do whatever it takes, including lies, to accomplish their nationalistic goals, period. There is a great civics lesson for the US voters--pay attention for a change and learn some cold hard facts about China!

Pathetically, President Obama is clueless as he makes more empty non-binding environmental deals limiting US coal useage to reduce carbon pollution output. That's Obama 'speaktalk' for stopping more of US domestic manufacturing to our economic detriment. This is all while China builds two coal-fired plants a week to increase production and create more jobs.

Obama Tags Businesses for Failure Watch

Snoopy is not doing any "Happy Dance" while MetLife is fighting off the "Risk Tag" from the Obama regulators. MetLife is at odds with the overreaching 2010 Dodd-Frank Law providing under the Financial Stability Oversight Council. Its mission first was to identify and combat threats to the nation's financial stability as a banking law, but now it is also charged with identifying non-bank firms with ''risk tags" that warrant scrutiny too. It lets the government intrude into businesses and interfere with any impose laws as it sees fit. MetLife said in a securities filing that it will challenge its designation as a systematically important financial institutions (SIFI).

The Dodd-Frank Law succinctly describes both the Elizabeth Warren and Hillary Clinton's liberal, progressive big government over-reach plans. It is 'Big Brother" not only watching, but also knowing what's best for you. Here is what actually happened in the 2008 Mortgage Crisis, a fault of big government regulations too.

All insurers include a full range of coverage products traditionally have been under state insurance regulators. However, because of the enormous 2008 implosion of AIG, the American International Group, it was their concentration of insuring toxic home loan assets that were due to:

• under-qualified, buyers secure sub-prime mortgage loans in home real estate 
• primary mortgage lenders dealing in risky secondary mortgage resales
• unregulated bond insurance which guaranteed risky collaterallized assets  
• mortgage-bond investments collapsed as buyers default on their toxic loans
• a run-on-the-bank scenario to cash out policies to cover losses to raise cash

Historically, prior to 2008 in the U.S. less than 2% of people lost their homes to foreclosure. However, those statistics were based upon past 'qualified', not bloated 'sub-prime' mortgages numbers. So, those rates climbed far higher due to the federal government pushing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into the idea that everyone deserved to buy a home, regardless of their qualifications or ability to make payments. It was a sub-prime loan rationale formulated for failure, and it did too.

Meanwhile Metlife under the state insurance department rules is capitalized as required for any losses. They are unlike banking institutions with loan instruments tied to volatile systemic risks subject to panicked consumers trying to liquidate assets to raise cash according to the Dodd-Frank Law parameters. So if the Financial Stability Oversight Council were to instruct them to hold back more capital to bolster reserves, it could create a working capital shortfall of meeting competitive pricing pressures in the marketplace to cover higher cost margins by seeking to increase product pricing. It would be a further cost burden that would have questionable value-added protection in the end to the insurer and ultimately to the marketplace seeking guaranteed safety.  

This big government interference amounts to just that, interference.  So the free market has risk, that is why there are bankruptcy proceedings if a business fails. It does not require government to provide a bail-out safety net for every little boo-boo that people get. The Financial Stability Oversight Council has 10 voting members and 5 nonvoting members and will be returning a decision by early January to Metlife. Hopefully, their decision keeps all of our insurance premiums lower which will allow Metlife to breathe and take a break from one more onerous, hidden price increase. Metlife, though, has only been around since 1915, is the largest insurance company and so should have learned a little about economic volatility in the world over those years.

Obama Gives Up Internet to U.N. in 2015

The U.S. only invented, developed and paid for the entire Internet network and we are just giving it away. In another Obama "Kumbayah" (Lord Come By Here) warm, fuzzy moment with a cozy "one-world" global government hug, the United States relinquishes control and global supremacy in Internet information technology and innovation to U.N. International politics and corrupt countries. 

The U.S. National Telecommunications and Information Administration, NTIA, will end its formal relationship with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, ICANN, in late 2015. ICANN is now developing a new global governance model to manage technical functions and IP names and addresses, the NTIA agency said. 

The NTIA plans to let its contract with ICANN to operate key domain-name functions expire in September 2015, while requiring the organization to develop a new global Internet governance model, NTIA administrator Lawrence Strickling said during a press conference.

Under the U.S. Department of Commerce, NTIA is working with other countries' governments and international organizations to discuss and reach consensus on relevant Internet policy issues. Honestly, let me ask you: How has the United Nations worked out for world commerce? Peace and war initiatives? Hmn...I don't hear a lot of enthusiasm from you! So then, How is the NTIA going to arrive at any relevant international Internet policies with these same governmental bodies?--Read below for two actual instances internationally and domestically of 'Free Speech Internet Practices.'

1. Spurring censorship fears, on March 15, 2014 Bejing China's largest listed Internet company, Tencent Holdings Ltd., deleted at least 30 popular accounts that send news updates to users on the WeChat mobile messaging application to "crack down and deal with" any content distributed on WeChat that violated laws, policies and regulations. Coming amid a sustained government crackdown on online discourse, the step appeared to be one of the most public and wide-scale to date taken by Tencent to reign in public discussion of politics on WeChat, which now has more than 270 million monthly active users. 

Does the current U.N. Agenda 21 apply here too? - Every Internet participant is a citizen in the World Internet Global Society and most agree that online piracy is wrong. It stifles creativity as well as stunts growth because it discourages not only original ideas but artistic expressions too. After all, who wants their efforts and works they created stolen by someone unduly assuming original credits or enriching themselves momentarily?--The argument sounds reasonable, or is it?

Of course, this U.N. Plan is "voluntary"; even so, H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton signed it anyway. It is a plan to develop globally, locally and nationally collective population-environmental plans to control municipal planning and individual activities, including personal choices, i.e., Internet network guidelines to control collective ideas a la Orwell's 1984 scenario or like China's empty high-rise cities which are the result of Agenda 21 city planning on a massive scale. (No one lives in any of them) 

2. Waiting for better timing until after the 2012 Presidential elections; in 2013, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) was pushed by Obama. In the pursuit of protection from copyright infringement it cripples Internet freedom as it masks massive underlying problems of government infringement on our free speech rights too. With its intrusive powers it allows heavy-handed enforcement to bully legislation over responsible individuals or Internet sites by exerting onerous, ambiguous regulations and expensive litigation which could accomplish the same damaging effects as piracy by destroying Internet freedoms to create or share information. It was proved to be politically designed by Obama to curb conservative talk radio and television shows and was resoundingly defeated before it became law. 

Obama has pushed for 'Net Neutrality' to have 'balanced programs' for everyone--it's nonsense! That was true in the early era of T.V. aerials and limited 'on-air' broadcasters. But today, we have Broadcast stations, Cable stations and Internet providers who put on their shows with opposing formats over a viewing audience who votes with their own remote controls on which kind of the hundreds of stations they watch: left, right, independent, libertarian or whatever.  Obama hasn't got it passed yet, but he would love to control the program content if he could, so watch out!

WARNING: So what can we foresee?

How about the upcoming restrictive U.N. Internet Agency regulations and controls?

They will be announced upon the U.N. 2015 roll out after the politicians have assured Internet users, 'You'll see no changes.' But, they have already announced that various 'private' organizations and companies will be involved too. What is that vague reference all about?

How about the high exclusionary costs to many Internet users? 

I think that the politicians, by the way, are looking at the Internet as the 21st Century's next version of the U.S. Post Office. It is another rich organization to tax as a 'mail carrier', albeit, 'e-mail.' The U.S. Postal union and SAIC are salivating about those possibilities too--be wary.

It's also a cash cow for the United Nations to charge for the I.P. addresses and names registration fees along with U.N. international access charges, U.N. annual license fees--business & personal rates, U.N. internet band use taxes and U.N. internet carbon taxes and U.N. operations surcharges. Additional local, state and federal surcharges and taxes under the current FCC laws will apply too. 

Get ready for billions of dollars to disappear into corrupt politicians' pockets or for various U.N. countries' regional 'access fees.' 

It's Not Too Late - Contact Your Senator & Tell Him No!

Obama Hands Over A Mandate to Republicans

The 2014 Midterms are finally over! The Democrats are now shouting to the rooftops that the Republicans did not offer any new solutions for anything in this election cycle except to attack Obama. The Democrat TV Campaign ads chided the empty Republican agenda because Republicans had no plan except to say no to every bill as President Obama declared, "They are the party of NO." 

If the Republican party had no plans, then why did so many Republican candidates win in a huge wave landslide election as a rebuke against a sitting President's programs? The Republican National Committee, RNC, wisely didn't say a word to promote the Republican brand or image. Republicans did not run on ideology either. In fact this political party was not promoting a political course nationally in this midterm for their individual candidates as they slugged through fighting their own state campaigns resulting to raise regional voter awareness against Obama policies and remind them of past performance.

Egg on face about Election results.Obama attempted to explain the tremendous Democrat defeats because of the 63.4% registered voters who did not cast ballots were angry at Congress, not him. Obama has blamed no-show voters like the minorities, low income, young people, women and less educated for these losses and not his past six years as President for many failures like legislative Republican gridlock, the economy, healthcare, wages, foreign policies, immigration and terrorism. The significance of this midterm voter turnout really was a net loss of only 4.3% from 2010 to 2014, hardly a reason to dismiss or even invalidate the low vote results so typical in midterms. (See below) Besides, Obama failed to acknowledge that not all the no-shows would have voted Democrat too. 

Midterm Turnouts: put 2014 election at 36.6% of all eligible voters, compared to 2010 with 40.9 %.

Presidential Turnouts: put 2012 election at 57.5% of all eligible voters, compared to 62.3% who voted in 2008 and 60.4% who cast ballots in 2004. In 2000, the rate was 54.2%.

Source: The Center for the Study of the American Electorate

So what did the electorate vote for in this midterm election? Evidently voters were not looking for the Republicans to govern since both sides were being blamed for the gridlock in Washington. Instead, the Republicans were looked upon as the only way to stop Barack Obama and the Democrats from running the country further into the ground. The domestic as well as foreign Obama policies are disasters. There was no other reason why Republicans were elected in this election. Is that good for Republicans? Yes, it is now an opportunity to show Republican leadership now. The voters don't trust the Republicans yet, so they have to earn the trust back by delivering a bold, positive, optimistic agenda.

How Republicans interact with Democrats is important in order to allow egos and ambitions to match the means that will meet the ends to conservative principles and goals. Here are some examples: 

• Allow Obamacare Bill changes. Instead of creating pandemonium on the Hill with a flurry of partisan bills to repeal it, why not take a small bite at a time to unfund or detach sections to bring it down to a workable size? Then look at it like bipartisan issues, for instance: 

1. The prohibitive medical equipment tax that confiscates research money has to be abolished.
2. Preserve the patient rights to keep insurance if changing employment.
3. Improve the administration of low income program exchanges. 
4. Rescind patient subsidies to remove artificial price supports to effect actual unsupportable costs causing it to collapse under its own weight. Both political sides then can win in shaping a manageable health care program while returning it back into the private sector where it can be administered with better patient care and more cost efficiency.   

• Allow Income tax revenue reform overhauls. Reduce rates down for individuals, reduce them to corporations, offer an open corporation foreign profits no income tax return amnesty period, have less passive income tax and capital gains tax so the flood gates would open up the capital markets to more investment, companies and jobs growth creation.  

1. These tax law changes would allow businesses to afford to increase the proposed minimum wage rates to low income workers. 
2. With less capital gains and passive income taxes levied, seniors and pensioners would have more retirement money to live on from savings, 401K accounts, stocks, bonds and home sales.  

• Allow Energy sectors to flourish. It would generate U.S. jobs, build the U.S. economy and sustain U.S. global dominance in the petroleum, coal and gas industry. The U.S. geopolitical influence will help all nations to keep rogue regimes in place by economic pressures to promote peace through purse strings. 

Obama Federal Debt - $18 Trillion Storm Brewing in Washington, DC.The President is already now calling for the Republican Party to come together to help fix his broken system and to make it work. Obama says it can be done through compromise by sitting down and working across the aisle together with the Democrats. He defines compromise as agreement with his policies positions to create an activist government he supports. Obama is so late and absolutely out of touch with reality since the time to have worked with the Republicans was over the past six years, not while the whole country is now in shambles.

Factoid: The top 10% of earners pay over 70% of the taxes. Over 70% of the workers earn $51,900 per year, down from $56,400 when Obama took office in 2008. (8% pay decrease) Over 50% of the electorate pay no income taxes. 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau-Income and Poverty in the United States-September 2014

The election results cannot in any way mean that voters want Republicans to work with Democrats, the winners to work with the losers under their failed Democrat programs. This election was about stopping the losers, not fixing their broken system; in this case, the Democrats from doing further damage before it is way too late. The country is depressed because of Democrats. And anybody who tells you otherwise could not be more delusional after looking at the state of the union under Obama.

The voters have issued a simple mandate to Republicans. They are tired of the dysfunction in Washington and failed policies. The mandate is not to slow down the speed of the country as it is headed over the fiscal cliffs; but that Republicans have to stop Barack Obama, to stop further deployment of Obamacare and to stop government policies that are destroying the private, free-enterprise economy to avoid those cliffs.  

A "Head On" View of ISIS

The Queen of Hearts screamed, "Off with their heads!" So is the Alice in Wonderland Queen's rampage driven more by her passionate uncontrolled anger or rather than from an arrogant omnipotent madness? How does it relate to the Middle East crisis? Unlike the Queen who angrily blows off steam, the Islamic State deliberately conducts planned beheading to incite more regional sectarian volatility. Its omniscient 'God-ordained' jihadi attacks encourage hatred and terror while inciting fear into anyone who challenges them.

For twenty something year old college students who were born a little before the 2001 9/11 NYC terrorist attack were five years olds, certainly too young to remember the biggest terrorist attack on American soil. It had left a lasting emotional and financial scar to many adults, but not those young kids that couldn't remember. Today they are college students who depend on their liberal, left-wing teachers, socialist professors and activist lecturers to recall past facts and present history with footnotes to educate young minds. Sadly, it exploits their ignorance of true U.S. patriotic values while allowing unethical, political agendas to then 'color' history taught--'brainwashed' is a better description. 

The actual carnage and deaths on the sands in the Middle East are not all the human tragedy. It woefully resides within the young minds of our American college students. A recent 2014 Harvard University study revealed shocking off-the-rails views indicating a true lack of any knowledge of U.S. or world history. Thanks to our liberal curriculum from grade school through high school and beyond core subjects, emphasis no longer includes learning about United States history, social studies or civics. It does include a global understanding of how wrong headed American ideals and Constitutional governance lead to wrongfully destroying the ecology of the whole planet and the economies of all its people. Of course, somehow greater redistribution of U.S. resources and wealth are to be shared by all poorer nations too.

An ISIS Muslim with Fence Heads.The uneducated Harvard student citizenry in the study attempted to explain the dynamics of the United States and ISIS roles in the world as they argued there was moral equivalence. While misunderstanding underlying facts, nothing could be farther from the truth as the stark reality of the brutal, ruthless actions by ISIS cannot be equated to U.S. military actions which closely follow the Geneva Conventions for wartime activities. Since ISIS is not recognized either as a country or a standing army it cannot sign the Geneva accords so they're outside the realm of U.N. Law in the World International Court of Justice, ICJ, in the Hague, Netherlands. ISIS may not be a JV team but is still a free agent able to professionally play on anyones' courts under its own set of open barbaric rules.

The Harvard students further blame the United States for how the Middle East has turned into such a volatile region today. However, these college students are totally bereft of biblical perspective due to many who have never read the bible. As a historical religious compendium, the anthologies contained present people, places and events that explain what transpired over the centuries in the Middle East.

In understanding the birth of Islam in 609 CE, God through the angel Jibril (Gabriel) talked to Muhammad who adopted beliefs and tenets from the torah and bible to include into the Quran's major narratives recounted in the Jewish and Christian scriptures. It summarizes some, dwells at length on others and, in some cases, presents alternative accounts and interpretations of events. This pivotal revelation of an interreligious amalgam of beliefs obviously shaped the core of Islam through the Quran, the only revealed book according to Muhammad that has been protected by God from distortion or corruption. How many Harvard students know that Jews' and Gentiles' scriptures were the basis for Islam?

This region of the world is steeped in long traditions, multicultural diversity, and includes the three major religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam that claim this area as the cradle of their religions. The ideological differences, dissensions and discords have existed as long as any Theo-political zeal has existed to control peoples. The Muslims have certainly expressed a militant posture to conquer and rule the world under Sharia Law over the centuries. So do any of those Harvard students really understand Islamic history? I highly doubt many Harvard students are aware of even the facts I have mentioned here or have any clue and instead just bark back liberal TV soundbites.