A Chinese group known as “Sino-Michigan Properties LLC” has bought up 200 acres of land near the town of Milan, Michigan. Their plan is to construct a “China City” with artificial lakes, a Chinese cultural center and hundreds of housing units for Chinese citizens. Essentially, it would be a little slice of communist China dropped right into the heartland of America.

This “China City” would be located about 40 minutes from both Detroit and Toledo, and it would be marketed to Chinese business people that want to start businesses in the United States. Unfortunately, this is not just an isolated incident. In fact, Chinese companies have been buying up land and businesses all over the country in recent years. There has even been talk of establishing “special economic zones” inside the United States modeled after the Chinese city of Shenzhen. It was inevitable that the Chinese were going to do something with the trillions of dollars that they have made flooding our shores with cheap products. Now they are rapidly buying up pieces of America, and many of our politicians are welcoming them with open arms.

The town of Milan, Michigan is a small farming community of only about 6,000 people, but big changes are coming their way. The following is from a recent Dayton Daily News article about this new project….

A group of mainland Chinese known as Sino-Michigan Properties LLC paid $1.9 million for 200 acres of farmland on Milan city limits in purchases this year and in 2011, according to local officials and property records.

Unfortunately, the goal does not appear to be to integrate this new “city” into the existing community in and around Milan.

Rather, it appears that all of the new housing will be sold to people coming over from China. According to the Milan News Leader newspaper, the new housing units “would be marketed to Chinese business people who want to start companies in the United States”.

In essence, we would be looking at a new Chinese city right in the middle of Michigan.Doug Smith, senior vice president for business and community development for the Michigan Economic Development Corp., recently said the followingabout what the Chinese group plans to do….

“It’s a group that wants to build a China city, starting with housing over there in Milan”

Milan is not far from the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, which is a very popular destination for Chinese students. Apparently that is one reason why Milan was chosen.

This new project would be a Chinese community built by Chinese and specifically designed for Chinese.

But isn’t this supposed to be America?

Fortunately, the project does not have final approval yet. It still must be approved by the two townships outside of Milan where the land is located.

For some reason, the Chinese seem to be particularly interested in this area of the country.

For example, a different Chinese investment group has been busy buying up chunks of real estate over in nearby Toledo, Ohio. The following is from an article in the Toledo Blade on May 26th, 2011….

Dashing Pacific Group Ltd., which has already purchased the nearby Docks restaurant complex for $2.15 million, put its $3.8 million offer to buy the southern 69 acres at the Marina District in East Toledo back on the table for approval by Toledo City Council. Additionally, Dashing Pacific Chairman Yuan Xiaohong, in a letter signed in Hangzhou, said the firm wants a two-year option to buy the decommissioned Toledo Edison power plant property on the site.

So should we be alarmed that the Chinese are buying up pieces of America?

Well, if they simply wanted to enjoy living in America and wanted to integrate into the wider community that would be one thing.

But it is another thing altogether to start dropping slices of communist China inside of U.S. territory.

In a previous article entitled “China Wants To Construct A 50 Square Mile Self-Sustaining City South Of Boise, Idaho”, I discussed a potential deal that Sinomach (a company controlled by the Chinese government) was exploring with the government of Idaho. The following is a description of that potential project from an article in the Idaho Statesman….

A Chinese national company is interested in developing a 10,000- to 30,000-acre technology zone for industry, retail centers and homes south of the Boise Airport.

There was talk that this “technology zone” would be modeled after the “special economic zones” that have been developed in China. The city of Shenzhen is perhaps the most famous example of this.

Fortunately that deal appears to have stalled, but other mammoth deals have been moving forward in other parts of the country.

For example, the Chinese have been very busy gobbling up oil and gas fields. The following is a quote from a local Texas news source about a deal that a company owned by the Chinese government did with Chesapeake Energy down in Texas….

State-owned Chinese energy giant CNOOC is buying a multibillion-dollar stake in 600,000 acres of South Texas oil and gas fields, potentially testing the political waters for further expansion into U.S. energy reserves.

With the announcement Monday that it would pay up to $2.2 billion for a one-third stake in Chesapeake Energy assets, CNOOC lays claim to a share of properties that eventually could produce up to half a million barrels a day of oil equivalent.

You can read more about that particular deal right here.

So is it really a good idea to be allowing the Chinese to buy up our precious energy resources?

The answer to that question is obvious.

Sadly, the examples noted above are not isolated incidents. The truth is that the Chinese have been snapping up real estate and business assets all over America as a recent Forbes article explained….

According to a recent report in the New York Times, investors from China are “snapping up luxury apartments” and are planning to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on commercial and residential projects like Atlantic Yards in Brooklyn. Chinese companies also have signed major leases at the Empire State Building and at 1 World Trade Center, the report said.

So get ready – the Chinese are buying up U.S. land and they are moving in whether you like it or not.

So what will the long-term consequences be of allowing a communist superpower to buy up large sections of America?

That is a very good question.

Businessman Frank Vandersloot, the CEO of Melaleuca, has been targeted by the Obama campaign after donating money to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign. “Three weeks ago, an Obama campaign website, ‘Keeping GOP Honest,’ took the extraordinary step of publicly naming and assailing eight private citizens backing Mr. Romney,” Kim Strassel of the Wall Street Journal reported. “Titled ‘Behind the curtain: a brief history of Romney’s donors,’ the post accused the eight of being ‘wealthy individuals with less-than-reputable records.’ Mr. VanderSloot was one of the eight, smeared particularly as being ‘litigious, combative and a bitter foe of the gay rights movement.’”

The attacks are working. Vandersloot revealed in an interview on Fox News that his business practice is being hurt by the attacks from the Obama team.

“Those people that I know well weren’t affected by this [attack],” said Vandersloot. “But for people who didn’t know me, who are members of our business or customers, and they were reading this, then we got a barrage of phone calls of people cancelling their customer memberships with us.”

“Really?,” the Fox News host asked. “How many did that?”

“A couple hundred that we can track,” Vandersloot replied.

Again, the host asked, “Really? Do you have any grounds to sue?”

“I suppose we do,” Vandersloot said. The businessman says he’s been accused of being anti-gay, an accusation he says that couldn’t be further from the truth.

Watch the interview here:

I do not comment much on politics, society and the rest of the world. Generally I think much of this is beyond my control and try not to stress over it. BUT, lately there seems to be quite a bit that I have read or heard and has gotten me thinking.

Let’s begin:

8.1% Unemployment – 8.1% is not anything to get excited over but it is better than a year ago. Isn’t it? Well the problem is how the government records this numbers. The overall work force – those seeking jobs or working – has shrunk. If the unemployment rate was calculated using the SAME overall work force as was in existence in 2008 the current unemployment rate would be over 11%. Yes – 11%!!! The current administration knows this but still boasts of the “moderately” improving economy.

Food Prices – Although not included in the US Governments official inflation numbers – food continues to go up in price. I am really surprised there is not more of an uproar about it especially from those on government assistance. Just yesterday my local grocery store has Bush’s Baked Beans for $2.29 per can. That is crazy. Just a few years ago these could be found for $1.00 a can. Fresh fruit of all kinds is more expensive. Soups are still trending up. Beef is very expensive and out of reach for many folks. Currently lean hamburg runs in excess of $3.50 per pound in my area. I used to by ribeye steak on sale for $3.99 per pound and now a good sale price is $6.99.

Fuel Prices – As I write this fuel prices are dropping rapidly. The volatile prices at the gas pump are not good for the economy as families try to budget their expenses and business sign contracts for transportation costs of goods and services. The thing is – prices come down but they seem to just climb back up HIGHER than previous – then drop back down just not quite so low.Seems like someone is easing citizens into paying more….and more….and more. Ridiculous that the solutions to reduces fuel prices are out there and this government cannot get their act together for the benefit of the people. So frustrating…….and costly.

Society – In my area a 6 year old kid got suspended form elementary school for 3 days for sexual harassment. This is insanity. There are far too many rules, policies, procedures, and laws governing over what is common sense. Holy crap!!!! I have had my own dealings with the public school system with my 13 year old boy and it makes me so angry the lack of common sense displayed. Don’t even get me going that my tax dollars support this establishment.

Federal Debt – as the US National Debt approaches 16 trillion dollars – politicians will be vocalizing their plans on how to slow its growth and eventually make the increasing number go backwards. Regardless of which party wins the White House what will likely be put forth is a plan to reduce the debt using magical numbers, smoke and mirrors – and the ACTUAL debt reduction will occur at some later date on someone else’s watch. The sad reality: It’s just not going to happen. In order to reduce the debt the government MUST stop spending more than they are taking in. Pretty scientific, huh? They must also cut costs to do this. Those costs that are cut will effect people – like you and me. Social security, unemployment, federally funded medical care, defense – the federal programs related to these and other will have to be effected. Those people effected by those cuts will not be happy and guess what – WILL NOT VOTE FOR SOMEONE WILLING TO MAKE THE HARD CHOICES. It is just not realistic that the government will do the right thing. Look to take care of yourself.

Weather – I am not going to get in the debate over global warming/climate change. What I will say is it seems like the weather has been getting crazier and crazier the past few years. Seems like the weather is getting more dangerous with larger swings in temperature and volatility.

Government Again – I am sure you have heard about the Department of Homeland Security placing an order for 450 million rounds of .40 S&W hollow point ammunition. Why would the DHS do this? 450 million rounds? I am not sure how many agents the DHS has but 450 million round is an awful lot. I wonder how many rounds are fired annually in action. Two things of note – First is the fact that these are all hollow point bullets. These are expensive and not for training purposes. Second – this ammunition apparently are to be used only within the borders of the United States as hollow points are banned from use by the Geneva Convention. Makes me wonder. How about you?

Israel/Iran/Middle East – The volatility continues as it has for years however many believe the situation with Iran and Israel is coming to a head. As Iran makes their way in possession of a nuclear weapon the threat to Israel and the rest of the world becomes more imminent – especially for Israel. It is just a matter of time before Israel strikes. The significance of military action against Iran cannot be overstated as to how it will effect the worlds economies.

North Korea – North Korea continues to play a dangerous game increasing its military might (as unreliable as it is). Many propose that if an EMP attack were to take place here in the US it would come from North Korea. North Korea has a submarine fleet and of course nuclear weapons.

Nuclear/Chemical Weapons smuggled into the US? – As many tens of thousands of 20′ and 40′ foot shipping containers arrive in the United States from various foreign ports all over the world one must wonder if undesired cargo may be entering the United States. We all know that vast quantities of illegal drugs (let alone people) are smuggled into this country – why not nuclear, biological or chemical weapons? The video below is a bit old but take it for what it is worth:

Solar Activity – Solar activity has been on the increase with some tremendous flares. Much like the threat of an EMP attack – a major solar EMP event would wreak havoc on life today.

Morale Decay – Society is falling and falling quick. I remember sitting in US History class in school and learning about events covering 200 years. I look back now just 20 years and see how this country has changed. Sure – there have been tremendous technological ”advances” however the “way of life” and how people live today is disappointing. I believe that society is decaying in its morale’s and that the decaying is increasing in speed with each passing year. It’s really a shame.

The Pentagon was inundated with so many studies in 2010 that it commissioned a study to determined how much it cost to produce all those studies.

Now the Government Accountability Office has reviewed the Pentagon’s study and concluded in a report this week that it’s a flop.

The study of a study of studies began in 2010 when Defense Secretary Robert Gates complained that his department was “awash in taskings for reports and studies.” He wanted to know how much they cost.

Two years later, the Pentagon review is still continuing, which prompted Congress to ask the GAO to look over the Pentagon’s shoulder. What they found lacked military precision.

The GAO found only nine studies that had been scrutinized by the Pentagon review, but the military was unable to “readily retrieve documentation” for six of the reports.
The Department of Defense’s “approach is not fully consistent with relevant cost estimating best practices and cost accounting standards,” the GAO concluded. In fact, they often did not include items like manpower, the report found.

The Pentagon “partially concurs” with the GAO’s report.
The cost of the study of the study of the studies was not available from the GAO.

Obama has signed 3 new executive orders: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/05/01/executive-order-promoting-international-regulatory-cooperation
and

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/05/10/executive-order-identifying-and-reducing-regulatory-burdens

and

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/15/executive-order-establishing-white-house-council-strong-cities-strong-co

This latest executive order will allow the soviet socialists in our local communities through their committees to adopt and enact United Nations regulations designed to establish absolute United Nations’ control over our every resource. The laws of the United States, individual states, counties, cities, and local municipalities, under our Constitution must be legislated. These executive ordersbypass the legislative process and essentially nullify our representative form of government under the guise of allowing us to voice our opinion in reference to new regulation rather than enforce our will through elected representation. If one examines these three executive orders closely, Obama’s agenda becomes clear. The international socialists, known as the United Nations, are worming their way into our political system at every level. Through the local socialist committees that will be assembled, local commissars will be elected.

These commissars, working in coalition with state and local agencies and sovereign nations/Indian Tribes, will attempt to initiate UN dictatorship over our lands, both private and public. And through regulation of the land, they will attempt to establish dictatorial control over the actions of we the people.

This is a sneak attack and it will not be publicized in the mainstream media. You will know these words are true when you see the soviet socialists in your area seizing control over your public and private lands using regulatory powers derived directly from the United Nations Agenda 21.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/05/01/executive-order-promoting-international-regula

www.whitehouse.gov

EXECUTIVE ORDER
- – - – - – -
PROMOTING INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY COOPERATION

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to promote international regulatory cooperation, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. Executive Order 13563 of January 18, 2011 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), states that our regulatory system must protect public health, welfare, safety, and our environment while promoting economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation. In an increasingly global economy, international regulatory cooperation, consistent with domestic law and prerogatives and U.S. trade policy, can be an important means of promoting the goals of Executive Order 13563.

The regulatory approaches taken by foreign governments may differ from those taken by U.S. regulatory agencies to address similar issues. In some cases, the differences between the regulatory approaches of U.S. agencies and those of their foreign counterparts might not be necessary and might impair the ability of American businesses to export and compete internationally. In meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation. International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.

Sec. 2. Coordination of International Regulatory Cooperation. (a) The Regulatory Working Group (Working Group) established by Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993 (Regulatory Planning and Review), which was reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563, shall, as appropriate:
(i) serve as a forum to discuss, coordinate, and develop a common understanding among agencies of U.S. Government positions and priorities with respect to:
(A) international regulatory cooperation activities that are reasonably anticipated to lead to significant regulatory actions;
(B) efforts across the Federal Government to support significant, cross-cutting international regulatory cooperation activities, such as the work of regulatory cooperation councils; and

(C) the promotion of good regulatory practices internationally, as well as the promotion of U.S. regulatory approaches, as appropriate; and

(ii) examine, among other things:

(A) appropriate strategies for engaging in the development of regulatory approaches through international regulatory cooperation, particularly in emerging technology areas, when consistent with section 1 of this order;

(B) best practices for international regulatory cooperation with respect to regulatory development, and, where appropriate, information exchange and other regulatory tools; and

(C) factors that agencies should take into account when determining whether and how to consider other regulatory approaches under section 3(d) of this order.

(b) As Chair of the Working Group, the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) shall convene the Working Group as necessary to discuss international regulatory cooperation issues as described above, and the Working Group shall include a representative from the Office of the United States Trade Representative and, as appropriate, representatives from other agencies and offices.

(c) The activities of the Working Group, consistent with law, shall not duplicate the efforts of existing interagency bodies and coordination mechanisms. The Working Group shall consult with existing interagency bodies when appropriate.

(d) To inform its discussions, and pursuant to section 4 of Executive Order 12866, the Working Group may commission analytical reports and studies by OIRA, the Administrative Conference of the United States, or any other relevant agency, and the Administrator of OIRA may solicit input, from time to time, from representatives of business, nongovernmental organizations, and the public.

(e) The Working Group shall develop and issue guidelines on the applicability and implementation of sections 2 through 4 of this order.

(f) For purposes of this order, the Working Group shall operate by consensus.

Sec. 3. Responsibilities of Federal Agencies. To the extent permitted by law, and consistent with the principles and requirements of Executive Order 13563 and Executive Order 12866, each agency shall:

(a) if required to submit a Regulatory Plan pursuant to Executive Order 12866, include in that plan a summary of its international regulatory cooperation activities that are reasonably anticipated to lead to significant regulations, with an explanation of how these activities advance the purposes of Executive Order 13563 and this order;

(b) ensure that significant regulations that the agency identifies as having significant international impacts are designated as such in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions, on RegInfo.gov, and on Regulations.gov;

(c) in selecting which regulations to include in its retrospective review plan, as required by Executive Order 13563, consider:

(i) reforms to existing significant regulations that address unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements between the United States and its major trading partners, consistent with section 1 of this order, when stakeholders provide adequate information to the agency establishing that the differences are unnecessary; and

(ii) such reforms in other circumstances as the agency deems appropriate; and

(d) for significant regulations that the agency identifies as having significant international impacts, consider, to the extent feasible, appropriate, and consistent with law, any regulatory approaches by a foreign government that the United States has agreed to consider under a regulatory cooperation council work plan.

Sec. 4. Definitions. For purposes of this order:

(a) “Agency” means any authority of the United States that is an “agency” under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1), other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5).

(b) “International impact” is a direct effect that a proposed or final regulation is expected to have on international trade and investment, or that otherwise may be of significant interest to the trading partners of the United States.

(c) “International regulatory cooperation” refers to a bilateral, regional, or multilateral process, other than processes that are covered by section 6(a)(ii), (iii), and (v) of this order, in which national governments engage in various forms of collaboration and communication with respect to regulations, in particular a process that is reasonably anticipated to lead to the development of significant regulations.

(d) “Regulation” shall have the same meaning as “regulation” or “rule” in section 3(d) of Executive Order 12866.

(e) “Significant regulation” is a proposed or final regulation that constitutes a significant regulatory action.

(f) “Significant regulatory action” shall have the same meaning as in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.

Sec. 5. Independent Agencies. Independent regulatory agencies are encouraged to comply with the provisions of this order.

Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof;

(ii) the coordination and development of international trade policy and negotiations pursuant to section 411 of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2451) and section 141 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2171);

(iii) international trade activities undertaken pursuant to section 3 of the Act of February 14, 1903 (15 U.S.C. 1512), subtitle C of the Export Enhancement Act of 1988, as amended (15 U.S.C. 4721 et seq.), and Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2171 note);

(iv) the authorization process for the negotiation and conclusion of international agreements pursuant to 1 U.S.C. 112b(c) and its implementing regulations (22 C.F.R. 181.4) and implementing procedures (11 FAM 720);

(v) activities in connection with subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31 of the United States Code, title 26 of the United States Code, or Public Law 111-203 and other laws relating to financial regulation; or

(vi) the functions of the Director of OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

Website Reveals Recallers Owe $17 Million in Back Taxes
| Posted in News | By MacIver Institute | Posted May 10, 2012 10:18 AM

MacIver News Service | May 10, 2012
[Madison, Wisc...] After refining the dataset created by Verify the Recall, a Wisconsin man began running it against other public records and discovered 571 tax delinquents signed Recall petitions.

His findings? The total in back taxes owed by petitioners is more than $17 million. The list of individuals can be found through the website, www.putwisconsinfirst.com

The creator of the site told the MacIver News Service, his databases should be considered to be tools and not definitive source documents. The source documents are from the State of Wisconsin and the Verify the Recall effort and can be found through links on the site, all he’s done is connected the names and addresses together.

That being said, the site’s creator said he had to throw a lot of names out, to be sure his tables are as accurate as possible. Misspelled and nicknames signed on the petitions were removed. That means the actual number of tax delinquents could be three times higher than the 571 listed.

Before Put Wisconsin First began releasing its databases, petition signers initially tried to convince the Government Accountability Board not to release copies of the recall petitions to the public at all. Signers then criticized Put Wisconsin First and Verify the Recall for creating searchable databases of the petitioners’ names. Now that Put Wisconsin First is running their names against other public records, they really aren’t happy. The site has received plenty of hate mail.

“They had every right to do this (sign the petitions), and I have every right to match them up. They have every right to not like it, and I have every right not to care,” the site’s creator said.

Put Wisconsin First’s database was assembled using refined data from Verify the Recall’s effort.

“I took that database and ran every address through the GAB’s web site here: http://legis.wisconsin.gov/w3asp/waml/waml.aspx What this does is return a corrected address and a ZIP+4 for all addresses the GAB thinks are ‘good’,” he explained.

Using VTR’s datasets, Put Wisconsin First actually beat them in getting a searchable database up by a couple of days. That was possible because VTR had posted the unsearchable datasets to its website after they had initially uploaded a searchable database.

Put Wisconsin First’s creator noticed although the names and addresses still needed to be cleaned up after VTR’s first pass, the zip codes, which were simpler to enter, seemed to be usable. From that he was able to create a stopgap searchable database, hoping to buy VTR more time.

Once VTR made multiple additional passes to clean up data entry mistakes on names and addresses, Put Wisconsin First was able to create a more extensive and accurate database of its own.

The site’s creator plans to continue running the petitioners against other public records, and releasing his findings. He has chosen to remain anonymous so angry petitioners cannot launch red herring attacks against him, and are forced to focus on his site. So far they’ve only been able to send him angry emails demanding he stop running his analyses.

“Why do I want everyone to know everything about every recaller? I guess, why wouldn’t we want to know who they are, what businesses they run, what things they did in their past,” he said. “I didn’t make the rules The rules are, we get to see who demanded to stand against Walker, they demanded to be heard. They asked to have their names public. I didn’t force anyone to sign a public document!”

LYNCHBURG, Va. — Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith has shaped his life, but he barely mentioned it as he spoke to graduates at an evangelical Christian university Saturday.

And he barely touched on hot-button social issues like abortion and gay marriage, instead offering a broad-based defense of values like family and hard work.

“Culture — what you believe, what you value, how you live — matters,” Romney told graduates gathered in the football stadium on Liberty University’s campus in the Virginia mountains. “The American culture promotes personal responsibility, the dignity of work, the value of education, the merit of service, devotion to a purpose greater than self, and at the foundation, the preeminence of the family.”

Instead of a red-meat conservative policy speech, Romney discussed his own family and offered a defense of Christianity, saying that “there is no greater force for good in the nation than Christian conscience in action.” Still, he was inclusive: “Men and women of every faith, and good people with none at all, sincerely strive to do right and lead a purpose-driven life,” Romney said.

He had one sustained applause line in a 20-minute speech delivered days after President Barack Obama historically embraced gay marriage. “Marriage is a relationship between one man and one woman,” Romney said to a cheering crowd of students who have to follow a strict code of conduct that considers sex out of wedlock and homosexuality to be sins.

The late Rev. Jerry Falwell founded Liberty University in 1971 to be for evangelical Christians “what Notre Dame is to young Catholics and Brigham Young is to young Mormons,” as his son, University Chancellor Jerry Falwell Jr., said on commencement day. It’s become a destination for Republican politicians looking to speak to the religious right, and Romney’s campaign team — planning the speech long before gay marriage became a central issue — viewed it as an opportunity to address the kind of socially conservative audience that had been wary of him during the prolonged GOP primary fight.

For Romney, the challenge is twofold. His past policy positions, including support for abortion rights, don’t sit well. But his personal faith is also an issue because many evangelicals don’t consider Mormons to be fellow Christians. Evangelicals are a critical segment of the GOP base; many of those voters backed his GOP rivals in the prolonged primary.

When he locks in the Republican presidential nomination, Romney will make history as the first Mormon nominee from a major party. His faith is central to him and to his family — he spent two years in France as a missionary, a time when he lived in occasionally primitive conditions. When he returned home, he attended Brigham Young University, a Mormon school, and married his wife, Ann, who had converted to Mormonism. As they built a life in Boston, Romney took on a significant leadership role in the church, serving as a lay pastor, fighting to build a temple in town, and counseling families in need.

But he’s mostly avoided talking about it on the campaign trail, largely avoiding religious forums and events throughout the primary season.

And at arguably the most religious venue he’s addressed during the campaign — since announcing his bid, Romney hasn’t made a public appearance in a church of any kind — he continued to keep his own faith in the background.

“This isn’t a speech about Mormonism,” senior adviser Eric Fehrnstrom told reporters Friday on a conference call. Fehrnstrom pointed to the speech Romney gave in Texas in 2007 outlining his faith and defending religious freedom — the last time the former Massachusetts governor has addressed his faith in any detail.

Still, it was clear the campaign was keenly aware of the overtones. Romney was introduced by Mark DeMoss, an evangelical who has repeatedly defended Romney’s faith on the campaign trail. “I suspect I won’t agree with Mitt Romney on everything, but I will tell you this: I trust him. I trust him to do the right thing,” said DeMoss, who went on with a lengthy testament to Romney’s values.

Despite the concern, surveys have shown for months now that whatever reservations Republican evangelicals have about Romney’s faith, they are likely to back him in a general election.

A spokesman for Liberty said that Romney is not the first Mormon to speak at a university commencement. “This is our 29th commencement speaker, and 21 of those 39 speakers would not necessarily meet Liberty’s doctrinal theological statement,” said the spokesman, Johnnie Moore, explaining that anyone who teaches at the university is held to that doctrinal standard.

Romney’s selection as commencement speaker was an issue for some students who graduated from Liberty this weekend. When the school announced Romney as commencement speaker, hundreds of angry comments were posted on Liberty’s Facebook page by people who said they were students or alumni, objecting to giving a Mormon a platform. The school responded by affirming its welcome to Romney.

“There was some concern in my family, yes,” because of Romney’s Mormonism, said Robert Maginnis, a retired Army colonel whose nephew is a member of the 2012 class.

Ahead of Romney’s remarks, University Chancellor Jerry Falwell Jr. said the school’s invitation to him should not be considered an endorsement. He noted that his father, the school’s founder, said that Christians should vote for the candidate who shares their political positions “not the candidate that shares his or her faith or theology.”

Read more on Newsmax.com: Romney Tells Liberty Students to Honor Family Commitments

The Green River Formation, a largely vacant area of mostly federal land that covers the territory where Colorado, Utah and Wyoming come together, contains about as much recoverable oil as all the rest the world’s proven reserves combined, an auditor from the Government Accountability Office told Congress on Thursday.

The GAO testimony stressed that the federal government was in “a unique position to influence the development of oil shale” because the Green River deposits were mostly beneath federal land.

The Green River Formation–an assemblage of over 1,000 feet of sedimentary rocks that lie beneath parts of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming–contains the world’s largest deposits of oil shale,”Anu K. Mittal, the GAO’s director of natural resources and environment said in written testimony submitted to the House Science Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.

“USGS estimates that the Green River Formation contains about 3 trillion barrels of oil, and about half of this may be recoverable, depending on available technology and economic conditions,” Mittal testified.

“USGS estimates that the Green River Formation contains about 3 trillion barrels of oil, and about half of this may be recoverable, depending on available technology and economic conditions,” Mittal testified.

“The Rand Corporation, a nonprofit research organization, estimates that 30 to 60 percent of the oil shale in the Green River Formation can be recovered,” Mittal told the subcommittee. “At the midpoint of this estimate, almost half of the 3 trillion barrels of oil would be recoverable. This is an amount about equal to the entire world’s proven oil reserves.”

In her oral statement before the subcommittee, Mittal said that developing the shale oil would create wealth and jobs for the country, but also challenges for government.

“Being able to tap this vast amount of oil locked within this formation will go a long way to help to meet our future demands for oil. The U.S. Geological Survey, as you noted, estimates that the formation contains about 3 trillion barrels of oil of which half may be recoverable,” she said.

“As you can imagine having the technology to develop this vast energy resource will lead to a number of important socioeconomic benefits including the creation of jobs, increases in wealth and increases in tax and royalty payments for federal and state governments,” she said.

“While large-scale oil-shale development offers socioeconomic opportunities it also poses certain socioeconomic challenges that also should not be overlooked,” she testified. “Oil shale development like other extractive industries can bring a sizable influx of workers who along with their families put additional stressed on local infrastructure. Development from expansion of extractive industries has historically followed a boom-and-bust cycle making planning for growth difficult for local governments.”

In her written testimony, Mittal noted that three-fourths of the Green River shale oil is under federal land.

“The federal government is in a unique position to influence the development of oil shale because nearly three-quarters of the oil shale within the Green River Formation lies beneath federal lands managed by the Department of the Interior’s (Interior) Bureau of Land Management (BLM),” she testified.

The GAO also cited potential environmental impacts from producing oil from the Green River shale that included the need to draw large amounts of water, possible harm to water quality, and temporary degradation of air quality and the clearing of large amounts of vegetation.

“Developing oil shale and providing power for oil shale operations and other activities will require large amounts of water and could have significant impacts on the quality and quantity of surface and groundwater resources,” Mittal said in her written testimony. “In addition, construction and mining activities during development can temporarily degrade air quality in local areas. There can also be long-term regional increases in air pollutants from oil shale processing and the generation of additional electricity to power oil shale development operations. Oil shale operations will also require the clearing of large surface areas of topsoil and vegetation which can affect wildlife habitat, and the withdrawal of large quantities of surface water which could also negatively impact aquatic life.”

[This article was first posted on JBS.org on January 28, 2009, and is reposted here due to the likelihood that the Senate will vote on ratifying the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) as early as this June of 2012. See brand-new video at bottom of this article from May 7 or 8, 2012, where Dick Morris tells Sean Hannity about the dangers of LOST and says a ratification vote was only delayed from this month to June because its main promoter, Dick Lugar, had a primary election on May 8. Lugar lost anyway.]

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea … is perhaps one of the most significant but less recognized 20th century accomplishments in the arena of international law…. Its scope is vast: it covers all ocean space, with all its uses, including navigation and overflight; all uses of all its resources, living and non-living, on the high seas, on the ocean floor and beneath, on the continental shelf and in the territorial seas; the protection of the marine environment; and basic law and order…. The Convention is widely recognised by the international community as the legal framework within which all activities in the oceans and the seas must be carried out. (“25th Anniversary of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,” Oct. 17, 2007; emphasis added.)

If you wonder why some of us have been so vigorously opposing ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) since it was negotiated at a series of UN conferences between 1973 and 1982, read the above quote very slowly and with comprehension. This statement from the 25th anniversary celebration of the completion of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), also known more simply as the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST), says LOST’s “scope is vast: it covers all ocean space, with all its uses, including navigation and overflight; all uses of its resources, living and non-living, on the high seas, on the ocean floor and beneath, on the continental shelf and in the territorial seas…. The Convention is widely recognized by the international community as the legal framework within which all activities in the oceans and the seas must be carried out.”

If you read the quote carefully, you’ll see that the UN Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea which administers LOST would have authority over everything, everything, over, on, and under the oceans and seas of the world. Ratification of LOST would be a very large step toward world government. And, remember under the UN division that administers LOST, our nation wouldn’t have veto power like we do in the UN Security Council. We’d have just one vote among 150 or more votes. Just as the League of Nations ultimately fell apart without the United States, let’s stay out of the UN’s LOST regime, thus denying its legitimacy.

And, just in case someone has told you that the agency set up to administer LOST is not really part of the UN, here’s its logo (see graphic at top of article). Can you detect the UN’s logo anywhere? Here’s its URL: http://un.org/Depts/los/index.htm. Do you see any portion of the UN’s official URL, http://un.org, anywhere?

If you’re still not convinced that the implementation and administration of the LOST Convention is part of the United Nations, consider this statement from the Sixty-second United Nations General Assembly Plenary meeting, December 21, 2007:

The Assembly had before it a 22-part resolution on oceans and the Convention on the Law of the Sea … by which it would call on States to harmonize, as a matter of priority, national legislation with the provisions of the Convention and, where applicable, relevant agreements and provisions…. The Assembly then adopted the resolution by a recorded vote of 146 in favour to 2 against….

As this UN General Assembly document from December 21, 2007, shows, the General Assembly adopted a resolution by a vote of 146 to 2 calling on all member-nations of the UN to harmonize, as a matter of priority, the legislation of their nations with the LOST Convention.

In 1956 the United Nations held its first Conference on the Law of the Sea. The second UN Conference on the Law Sea was held in 1960, but did not produce any agreements. However, the third such conference, which lasted from 1973 to 1982, did produce what we now know as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), or more simply, the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST).

In 1982 President Reagan refused to sign the treaty due to disagreements with provisions in Part XI of LOST pertaining to the establishment of an International Seabed Authority (ISA) to authorize seabed exploration and mining and collect and distribute the seabed mining royalties. However, by 1994 UNCLOS went into force when the 60th nation ratified the treaty. To date at least 157 nations and the European Union have joined in the Convention. Nonetheless, the United States Senate has still not ratified LOST, even though both presidents Clinton and Bush strongly advocated ratification.

However, this year it is virtually certain that a vote on ratification of LOST will be held in the Senate. President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton, and Chairman of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, John Kerry, all agree that LOST should be ratified. Not only that, but ratification of LOST is being elevated into a kind of centerpiece for the new Obama administration’s foreign policy initiative of closer cooperation with other nations. This is very clear from Hillary Clinton’s testimony at her confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on January 13. When Senator Murkowski asked Clinton, “Will ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty be a priority for you?” Clinton answered: “Yes, it will be, and it will be because it is long overdue, Senator.”

Click here to view a video of the most pertinant portion of Clinton’s testimony.

At the same confirmation hearing for Clinton, Senator John Kerry, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee also went on record as strongly in favor of ratification of LOST. Kerry stated:

Let me just say to you and to others interested that we are already — I have talked to Senator Lugar about this, and I’ve talked to Senator Clinton about it. We will be — we are now laying the groundwork for and expect to try to take up the Law of the Sea Treaty. So that will be one of the priorities of — of the committee, and the key here is just timing, how we proceed. (“Senate Confirmation Hearing: Hillary Clinton,” nytimes.com, January 13, 2009)

Given the powerful forces that will be arrayed in favor of ratification, it will take an extraordinarily powerful outcry from the grassroots to defeat LOST in the Senate. While it does take two-thirds (67) of the Senators to ratify a treaty, it will be a very tough fight to produce the 34 senators we’ll need to stop LOST.

[UPDATE, May 10, 2012: Remember this article was written in 2009. The Senate is expected to vote on ratification of the LOST Treaty as early as June 2012.] It’s hard to judge just when a ratification vote might be held. There will be one or more hearings by one or more Senate committees first. You can count on these hearings leading to a recommendation for a ratification vote by the full Senate. Then, we’ll have the actual ratification vote.

We have to begin building grassroots opposition to ratification of LOST now. If you’re interested in helping to do this, I recommend you begin networking with like-minded Americans now.

Take action now by clicking here to contact your senators in opposition to ratification of LOST. [This "Take Action" link has been updated to use now in 2012.]

It’s up to ordinary grassroots Americans like you and me to create enough understanding soon enough to defeat LOST, which would put sand in the gears of the UN world government movement and preserve our national independence.

Please join with us!

Friends there is hope! I have a “worse president ever” magnetic door sign on both sides of my car. I was in a parking lot and a car with 4 teenagers honked their horn and gave me the thumbs up! I stopped and asked them if they were going to vote for him. The driver and her name was Amy said” I enlisted in the Army, this president is cutting defense spending and wants us unprotected while fighting terrorists. The two …boys chimed in and one was decked out in “ghetto” clothes and said ” He’s a muslim and there isn’t any jobs. The other girl said her sister graduated from college 2 years ago and can’t find a job. I offered to give her a bumper sticker for her car, she said “NO” she wanted to buy them, she despises handouts! Yes friends the youth has a moral sense and we can and will defeat the cancer in the white house and his socialists progressive union buddies! God bless you Amy for enlisting and your three friends and God bless America, the armed services and all of you my friends! I will pray as I have witnessed hope that their will be change! Nobama 2012 we can’t wait for another 4 years!
This is the latest Magnetic Door sign. It measures almost 12 x 18″ come see this and my other magnetic door signs and political bumper sticker at : http://www.rickparis.com/photocart/index.php?category=25
Thanks – Rick Paris , remember we can’t afford 4 more years of Obama!

Those are some ugly details that our Kimberley Strassel has been turning up about the effort to smear Mitt Romney’s campaign donors. The dirt-digging exercise re­flects the character of Presi­dent Obama’s re-election campaign, as well as what’s really behind the drive for more “transparency” in po­litical donations.As Ms. Strassel has reported in recent col­umns, Idaho businessman Frank VanderSloot has become the target of a smear campaign since it was disclosed earlier this year that he had donated $1 million to a super PAC sup­porting Mr. Romney. President Obama’s cam­paign website teed him up in April as one of eight “less than reputable” Romney donors and a “bitter foe of the gay rights movement.” One sin: His wife donated to an anti-gay-mar­riage campaign, of the kind that have passed in 30 or so states.

Now we learn that little more than a week after that Presidential posting, a former Dem­ocratic Senate staffer called the courthouse in Mr. VanderSloot’s home town of Idaho Falls seeking his divorce records. Ms. Strassel traced the operative, Michael Wolf, to a Wash­ington, D.C. outfit called Fusion GPS that says it is “a commercial research firm.”

Fusion GPS is run by a former Wall Street Journal reporter, Glenn Simpson, who wouldn’t say who is paying him for this high-minded slumming but said in an email that Mr. VanderSloot was a “legitimate” target be­cause of “his record on gay issues.”

If Mr. Simpson and Democrats really favor disclosure, then surely Mr. Simpson should disclose who is paying him to rummage through the personal lives of opposition do­nors. Someone should also ask the White House, the Obama campaign and the Demo­cratic National Committee if Mr. Simpson’s chop shop is on their payroll and if they ap­prove of such tactics. Does Mr. Obama think the lifestyles and divorce records of campaign donors should be fair political game?

The attack on Mr. VanderSloot is also nota­ble for its focus on his wife’s contribution to the anti-gay-marriage cause. Gay-marriage activists are winning the debate in much of
the country, but as they do they are becoming more intolerant.

After California voters approved Proposi­tion 8 banning same-sex marriage in 2008, oppo­nents published the names of donors, who were later linked with zip codes and Google Maps. Donors re­ported getting death threats. Boycotts were set against busi­nesses, and activists encouraged customers to call and harass business owners. Among the activists’ arguments for why Mr. Vander­Sloot is antigay is that his wife donated to the campaign for Proposition 8.

The fight over gay marriage is passionate because it concerns deeply held beliefs about religion, the role of the family and the human condition. Social mores like marriage that have held for thousands of years aren’t easily changed, and they should do so by consensus, not thuggery. If the political left is going to treat everyone who supports traditional mar­riage as bigots, and target them for personal smears, then we are in for another ugly run of the culture wars.

All of this is also a reason to reconsider rules that require the disclosure of political donations. This sounds appealing in theory, the Supreme Court has ruled that disclosure is Constitutional, and these columns have supported it as part of a political compromise that would allow unlimited donations.
But it’s increasingly clear that the real point of these disclosure laws is not to inform voters but to get donor names in order to in­timidate them from participating in politics. The goal is to dispatch hired guns like Mr. Simpson on political opponents to trash their reputations.

Democrats and their left-wing allies should understand that Republicans and Mormons will not be the only targets. If Democrats think it is “legitimate” to prowl and publish the di­vorce records of Romney donors, no one should feign shock if some right-wing investi­gator is soon doing the same to Mr. Obama’s bundlers and super PAC donors. A President who claims to want “civility” in political dis­course will reap what he sows if he plays by DIRTY Nixonian rules.

by Pam Suggs

‘FEMA Coffins’ Being Moved Northbound On Georgia Highway 5-8-2012;
When the driver of this truck noticed the photographer taking pictures, he immediately pulled off of the highway.
“Posted by Nickadeemus on Tuesday, May 08, 2012 9:03
Thank you for posting on this forum! I was the photographer. This picture was taken on highway 85 Northbound two miles south of Elberton, Ga. It is absolutely true. I blew past the truck doing 82MpH. My tail lights were even with the front of the rigs cab when it occurred to me what they were. I slammed on my brakes to let the rig pass. As I pulled out my blackberry and positioned for the shot, the driver looked in his side-view mirror and slammed on his brakes. He then banked right to exit the highway onto an exit ramp towards Elberton. I could not operate the manual transmission, save the shot, and maneuver my vehicle to follow. When the driver of this truck noticed the photographer taking pictures, he immediately pulled off of the highway.

WATCH NOW ! NOW THAT THE HOMELAND SECURITY ACT HAS CHANGED THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION AND THAT AMERICANS WHO DISAGREE WITH THE GOVERNMENTS MADNESS PLAN [CONTROLED BY ILLUMINATI/MASONS] YOU NOW ARE A TERRORIST A PATRIOT TERRORIST ALEX JONES WAS RITE PLEASE STUDY
WITHOUT FEAR.

President Obama, speaking earlier today at a campaign event in Seattle, Washington:

“It was a house of cards and it collapsed in the most destructive, worst crisis that we’ve seen since the Great Depression,” Obama said. “And sometimes people forget the magnitude of it. You know, you saw some of that in the video that was shown. Sometimes I forget.”

Mitt Romney’s press secretary, Andrea Saul, responds: “It’s not surprising that a president who forgot to create jobs, forgot to cut the debt, and forgot to change Washington has now admitted that he’s forgotten about the recession. In fact, it seems that the President has forgotten that he’s been in office for the last three-and-a-half years. In November, the American people won’t forget.

OCCUPIER SAYS BREAKING WINDOWS AND BURNING COP CARS ISN’T VIOLENCE

Yesterday we learned that the SEIU, a union with heavy ties to President Obama, is paying $4,000 per month for office space in downtown Washington D.C. What is the office space for? Occupiers to organize and meet. President Obama supports Occupy Wall Street. So yesterday, I decided to take a trip down to the Occupy offices and check it out for myself. The office is located on 16th and L and is on the 6th floor.

I walked up to the door, took a picture of it and asked if there was someone in there I could talk to. I was then brought into the front room of the office where I was greeted with a “Jesus Christ!” when I told them I was a reporter. I received the same reaction when they found out I was a conservative. Regardless, they seemed willing to talk. I was taken into another smaller room, where the conversation began. I noticed an Apple corporation computer on the desk to the left and a Dell corporation computer to my right. “Ironic” I thought, considering Occupy claims to hate corporations, but whatever. In case you’re wondering, people in the office looked clean, a step up from their hygiene level back at the park.

The Occupiers were upset and felt “betrayed” by a Washington Examiner article about their new space, calling it unprofessional and inaccurate. They said SEIU is paying for their office space, but that they are in no way working for President Obama or the unions and that they absolutely refuse to be co-opted. Karina Stenquist, editor of the newspaper D.C. Mic Check, said it was unethical for Examiner reporter Aubrey Whelan to bring the SEIU’s connection to President Obama into a story about their new office space, making the argument that the SEIU’s connection to Obama in an election year is irrelevant. Occupiers also argued that the space lease ending on just after election day 2012 is irrelevant when I asked if they felt they would be used as political pawns.

Anyway, moving on. I talked the most with Johnny Mandracchia, who describes himself as an anarchist and anarcho-syndicalist (don’t ask me what that means, just Google it.) He agreed to say on an audio recording, that violence is not smashing Starbucks’ windows, “because Starbucks isn’t a private business it’s a corporation” or burning cop cars, but is instead simply vandalism.

.

Bill Clinton thought so little of President Obama — mocking him as an “amateur” — that he pressed his wife last summer to quit her job as secretary of state and challenge him in the primaries, a new book claims,

“The country needs you!” the former president told Hillary Clinton, urging her to run this year, according to accounts of the conversation included in Edward Klein’s new biography of Obama.

The title of Klein’s explosive, unauthorized bio of Obama, “The Amateur” (Regnery Publishing), was taken directly from Bill Clinton’s bombshell criticism of the president, the author said.

“Barack Obama,” Bill Clinton said, according to book excerpts, “is an amateur.”The withering criticism is incredible, given the fact that Bill Clinton is actively campaigning for Obama’s re-election.
But according to the book, Bill Clinton unloaded on Obama and pressed Hillary to run against her boss during a gathering in the ex-president’s home office in Chappaqua last August that included longtime friends, Klein said.
“The economy’s a mess, it’s dead flat. America has lost its Triple-A rating . . . You know better than Obama does,” Bill said.
Bill Clinton insisted he had “no relationship” with Obama and had been consulted more frequently by his presidential successor, George W. Bush.
Obama, Bill Clinton said, “doesn’t know how to be president” and is “incompetent.”
But Hillary resisted the entreaties, according to two of the guests interviewed for the book.
“Why risk everything now?” a skeptical Hillary told her husband, emphasizing that she wanted to leave a legacy as secretary of state.
“Because,” Bill replied, his voice rising, “the country needs you!”
“The country needs us!” added Bill.
He later even joked about the prospect of having two Clinton presidential libraries — about the only time that Hillary cracked a smile.
“I want my term [at the State Department] to be an important one, and running away from it now would leave it as a footnote,” Hillary argued.
She said she had the option of running again in 2016.
But Bill wouldn’t let go.
“I know you’re young enough!” Bill said, his voice booming. “That’s not what I’m worried about. I’m worried that I’m not young enough.”
“I’m the highest-ranking member in Obama’s Cabinet. I eat breakfast with the guy every Thursday morning. What about loyalty, Bill? What about loyalty?” she responded.
“Loyalty is a joke,’’ Bill shot back. “Loyalty doesn’t exist in politics.”
Bill’s verbal battle with Hillary over the presidency, if anything, intensified when daughter Chelsea showed up with her husband, Marc Mezvinsky.
“You deserve to be president,” Chelsea said.
Bill was clearly pleased that Chelsea was on his side and vowed to have allies commission polls on a Hillary-Obama matchup.
“What are you trying to do — force my hand?” Hillary said.
“I want everyone to know how strong you poll,” Bill said.
Hillary said, “Go ahead and knock yourself out.”
The book’s explosive claims were shot down last night by spokesmen for the White House and the Clintons, who closed ranks last night.
Bill Clinton’s spokesman Matt McKenna said the excerpts were “totally and completely false” and called Klein “a known liar.”
Phillipe Reines, a spokesman for the secretary of state, noted that Hillary Clinton challenged the veracity of an earlier book Klein wrote about her, “Truth About Hillary.”
White House spokesman Eric Schultz accused Klein of making up facts to sell books.
“Nobody in their right mind would believe the nonsense in this one, especially since both Secretary Clinton and President Clinton have been loyal and supportive of the president at every turn.”
Klein, a former editor of The New York Times Magazine and Newsweek, defended the book and his earlier one as factually sound.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/bill_blockbuster_an_amateur_XJHYdaV5LT1vpr5I39IKrN#ixzz1uZpHnHLE

Here is a development in Tacoma WA (Salishan) that was built for Illegal Immigrants! 1325 Homes created! Refugee Pay offers them $2642 per month in SSI benefits, plus Food Stamps, plus Section 8 Housing. You will see new expensive cars in this video. Wouldn’t you like to get a free ride like the illegals?