The Obama Administration, The Democrat Political Party, And The UN Will Cancel The 2nd Amendment - UPDATED

 New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg may prefer “No Labels” but in his case, many feel “gun grabber” is a pretty fitting one. As part of his misguided crusade to tighten up gun laws nationally, The New York Times reports that Hizzoner sent undercover cops to gun shows in Arizona and found they were violating the law (ctrl-click HERE to launch video alert by Dick Morris). Image Credit: weaselzippers.us

The Obama Administration, The Democrat Political Party, And The UN Will Cancel The 2nd Amendment

Do the words LAME Duck mean anything to you? What does international treaty and its application to the laws of a sovereign country mean to the people of said sovereign country?

Well, the answers to these two questions and the effect on our freedoms here in the United States may have real and serious consequences to our way of life as the Obama Administration, the Democrat political party, and the United Nations seek to curb access to ones self-protection and self-determination here in the United States through a treaty.

Private, unlicensed sellers are not required to run background checks using the FBI database, but they must cancel a sale if they have reason to believe the buyer would fail such a review. Image Credit: nashvillescene.com



This excerpted and edited from ConsortiumNews -

Seeking Rules for the World’s Guns
By Paul R. Pillar / x-CIA analyst - July 9, 2012

A conference opened last week under the auspices of the United Nations to draft a multilateral treaty aimed at controlling the international trade in conventional arms. Such a treaty potentially could do significant good, although many legitimate questions remain concerning its terms and feasibility.

Neither the good nor the bad is likely to be clarified in public discussion about the treaty within the nation that is the world’s biggest arms exporter and thus the most important player in this process: the United States. We are more likely to hear the sort of ill-informed debate that too often has characterized treatment of multilateral conventions, as we have seen most recently with the law of the sea treaty.

The background of the prospective arms-trade treaty being discussed in New York should make politicization of the issue in the United States unsurprising. A resolution of the U.N. General Assembly intended to advance the subject in 2006 passed with 153 states in favor, twenty-four abstentions and a vote against by the United States. Three years later, the Obama administration reversed its predecessor’s opposition and announced its support for negotiating the treaty.
----
What debate has already taken place in the United States on the prospective treaty has featured some of the same infringement-of-sovereignty notions that were heard in opposing ratification of the law of the sea convention. In the case of the prospective arms-trade treaty, the National Rifle Association has been out in front with warnings about how the treaty supposedly would circumvent the Second Amendment.
----
Some of the legitimate reasons to raise doubts about an arms-trade treaty concern its effectiveness — and its effect on the arms balances in local conflicts — given the extent of gray-market arms dealing outside the control of governments that would be parties to the treaty.

Other legitimate concerns involve the inevitable differences of view in trying to develop criteria for proscribing or limiting arms transfers and in applying any such criteria consistently in different areas of conflict. One man’s contribution to local security is another man’s stoking of regional instability.

Informed debate about these and other legitimate concerns is likely to be less prominent than ill-informed statements about such things as taking away the people’s right to bear arms. The fact that the conference in New York is scheduled to conclude its work near the end of this month — amid a U.S. presidential election campaign — will make the subject ripe for the crasser forms of politicization.

On U.S. insistence, the rules of the conference provide that unanimity is required for a draft treaty to emerge directly from it.
----
That will repeat the experiences of the law of the sea convention and the treaty that established the International Criminal Court, with all the uncertainties of the United States not being a party to a major element of otherwise widely accepted international law. If that happens, among those likely to be disappointed will be American arms exporters, who look favorably on an arms-trade treaty as a way of standardizing the many different national rules with which they now have to deal.
[Reference Here]

What this means, even though this former CIA analyst feels that the United States will not sign on to any treaty placed in front of it by the United Nations, is that world powers are desperate to find a way to control the freedom of access to firearms through "standardizing the many different national rules" worldwide regardless of their intent.

Again, "the Obama administration reversed its predecessor’s opposition and announced its support for negotiating the treaty" and we all know what that means to the average American citizen, the United States Constitution, and the desire by the progressive political class to apply CONTROL over the majority who believe that rights outlined by the 2nd Amendment are valid and unalterable.

Remember what happened with transparency during the healthcare debate in this country? Remember how most American citizens felt about the Stimulus and Omnibus spending bills and the results to our opposition to the expansion of government spending (an additional 6 Trillion dollars of debt and NO BUDGET in only 3.5 years)?

One of the main protections and rights outlined in the United States Constitution is about to be sold down the river in a "bow" to the world through a treaty put together by political progressives in the United Nation.

Here, during Carter's Second Term, to be clear - The Obama Administration, the Democrat political party, and the United Nations are teeing up to essentially cancel our 2nd amendment rights through the signing of an international treaty during the Lame Duck session (after the November 2012 election) of Congress.

UPDATE:

Farewell to the arms treaty – for now

Kenneth Epps – The Globe and Mail – Published Wednesday, Aug. 01 2012, 2:00 AM EDT
Lost in the hoopla of the opening ceremony of the Olympics, a vital international marathon of another kind ended Friday with a race suspension just before the finish line. At the United Nations in New York, a month of intensive multilateral negotiations on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) to regulate international transfers of conventional weapons concluded without agreement, largely because the United States called for more time on the final day.

The U.S. announcement was a surprise. Just a few hours earlier, many participants were anticipating a positive outcome after Ambassador Roberto Garcia Moritan of Argentina, who presided over the conference, introduced a revised text that gained widespread support.

For Control Arms, the international coalition of NGOs that has campaigned for a treaty for more than a decade, Mr. Moritan’s text was not perfect. 

The real reasons the United States pulled the plug are known only within the Obama administration, but many conference delegates suggested the impending U.S. presidential election was a factor.
—-
The ATT has been cynically portrayed by the National Rifle Association as a UN instrument to attack U.S. Second Amendment rights. That the U.S. gun lobby has deliberately misrepresented the treaty for its own ends is not in question. The question is whether the NRA message is believed by U.S. voters, and the assessment of the administration appears to be yes.
—-
[This is troubling] Fortunately, the ATT process did not end on Friday. The United States has called for the negotiating conference to reconvene in 2013, again operating on a consensus basis. Other countries may not wait that long nor be willing to negotiate under a consensus constraint.
[Reference Here]

----

** Article first published as Obama Administration, Democratic Party, and UN Will Cancel the 2nd Amendment on Technorati **

Obama Administration Delivers Another Swift Kick To The Gut

"Middle class is also an attitude. It's not just about income, it's about knowing what's important, and not measuring your success just based on your bank account ... It's about your values, and being responsible, and looking after each other, and giving back." - President Obama speaking in Parma, Ohio. Image Credit: BarackObama.com

 Obama Administration Delivers Another Swift Kick To The Gut

The economy added 80,000 jobs last month, the Labor Department reported Friday, after a revised increase of 77,000 in May. The unemployment rate remained at 8.2 percent.

Economists are expecting tepid job growth for the rest of the year, too.

Soon after the June unemployment numbers were announced, Mitt Romney made the following live statement from Wolfeboro, N.H., where he and his family were vacationing.,  “This is a time for Americans to choose whether they want more of the same, it doesn’t have to be this way. America can do better. And this kick in the gut has to end.”

Real unemployment, when judged factoring in with those who have given up looking for work, but want to work - 10.1%.

President Barack Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt responded in a statement.

“The President brought us back from the brink of another Depression but he doesn’t believe our work is done -- he’s got a plan to restore the middle class and create a million jobs now that Mitt Romney opposes and Republican leaders have blocked," LaBolt's statement read in part. "Mitt Romney says he has a better path, but over the past decade we saw where that took us -- to the slowest job growth since World War II, the collapse of our financial system and the deterioration of the middle class."

President Obama, on the second day of his campaign buscapade across Ohio and Pennsylvania, told supporters the creation of 80,000 jobs last month is "a step in the right direction," albeit a small step. This number barely covers the growth in population let alone the number of jobs it would take to begin a track for recovery and growth ... that number is in access of 300,000 jobs (look it up).

Little responsibility is taken by this 44th Presidency or its Administration, even though the policies they pursue continue and deepen this self-inflicted economic downturn on the American economy.

This excerpted and edited from a Mitt Romney 2012 press release -

Broken Record, Broken Promises
Mitt Romney Press | July 6, 2012

Today, the Obama Administration told Americans “not to read too much into” monthly jobs reports.
As it turns out, they’ve been encouraging Americans to do that for years. But after 41 straight months of unemployment over 8%, you don’t have to read between the lines to see the truth. President Obama’s policies have failed to get America working again.

June 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is informative to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK:http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/07/06/employment-situation-june)

May 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK:http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/06/01/employment-situation-may)

April 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK:http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/05/04/employment-situation-april)

March 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK:http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/04/06/employment-situation-march)

February 2012: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report; nevertheless, the trend in job market indicators over recent months is an encouraging sign.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/03/09/employment-situation-february)

January 2012: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report; nevertheless, the trend in job market indicators over recent months is an encouraging sign.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/02/03/employment-situation-january)

December 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/01/06/employment-situation-december)

November 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/12/02/employment-situation-november)

October 2011: “The monthly employment and unemployment numbers are volatile and employment estimates are subject to substantial revision. There is no better example than August’s jobs figure, which was initially reported at zero and in the latest revision increased to 104,000. This illustrates why the Administration always stresses it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK:http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/11/04/employment-situation-october)

September 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/10/07/employment-situation-september)

August 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/09/02/employment-situation-august)

July 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/08/05/employment-situation-july)

June 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/07/08/employment-situation-june)

May 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/06/03/employment-situation-may)

April 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/05/06/employment-situation-april)

March 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/01/employment-situation-march)

February 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/03/04/employment-situation-february)

January 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/02/04/employment-situation-january)

December 2010: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/01/07/employment-situation-december)

November 2010: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/12/03/employment-situation-november)

October 2010: “Given the volatility in monthly employment and unemployment data, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/11/05/employment-situation-october)

September 2010: “Given the volatility in the monthly employment and unemployment data, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK:http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/10/08/employment-situation-september)

July 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.  It is essential that we continue our efforts to move in the right direction and replace job losses with robust job gains.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/08/06/employment-situation-july)

August 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/09/03/employment-situation-august)

June 2010: “As always, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/07/02/employment-situation-june)

May 2010: “As always, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/06/04/employment-situation-may)

April 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/05/07/employment-situation-april)

March 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/04/02/employment-situation-march)

January 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/02/05/employment-situation-january)

November 2009: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2009/12/04/employment-situation-november)
[Reference Here]

The last three employment snapshots released by the Labor Department have been persistently weak, and marked a distinct slowdown from earlier in the year. In the latest report, the department said employers added a meager 80,000 jobs in June, leaving the unemployment rate unchanged at 8.2 percent. The number of jobs added in June was lower than expected, and rounded out a poor second quarter for 2012.

The average number of monthly jobs created in the first quarter of the year was 226,000 ... by contrast, that average in the second quarter was just 75,000.

Dismal June job figures could also prompt the Federal Reserve to take further action to try to boost the economy. The Fed last month downgraded its economic outlook for 2012. It predicted growth of just 1.9 percent to 2.4 percent for the year and little change in the unemployment rate.

All of this points out that after nearly four years of a central government expansion of debt and tinkering during Carter's Second Term, the best the Obama Administration can do is deliver another swift kick to the gut in a long line of kicks to the gut on the American people and the economy they have to live in.

Gross Domestic Product growth revised by Obama's Commerce Department down 15.6%

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Spain's Finance Minister Elena Salgado, Bank of Korea Governor Kim Choong-soo, South Korea's Finance Minister Yoon Jeung-hyun and France's Economy Minister Christine Lagarde at the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors meeting. Image Credit: Reuters

Gross Domestic Product growth revised by Obama's Commerce Department down 15.6%

The Obama Administration was wrong in its initial estimate of the growth in our economy during the first quarter (January through March 2010) of this second year of the 44th Presidency.

The first estimates released to the public by the Commerce Department placed the growth in the GDP, which measures consumer spending, at an anemic but sustainable 3.2%. This growth would have shown some positive effect of the nearly one-trillion dollar Stimulus Government Spending legislation that was passed into law over one year ago ... if it were true, but this initial estimate was a fabrication.

Today, the Obama Administration released a second revised figure which set the level of growth downward to only 2.7%. This growth represents a negative growth because it does not keep up with the expansion in our population and shows how little Government spending can do to spur the economy in creating wealth through economic growth.

This excerpted and edited from the Wall Street Journal -

Economists React: ‘Not an Encouraging Mix’ in GDP Report
By Phil Izzo, Wall Street Journal - June 25, 2010, 10:42 AM ET

Economists and others weigh in on the downwardly revised 2.7% advance in first-quarter GDP.

–The revision was a result of a downward adjustment to consumer spending and higher than originally reported imports, which were only partly offset by upward revisions to exports and inventories.
----
The biggest debate is over the path of the labor market recovery and hence the ability of consumers to help drive real growth.
–Joshua Shapiro, MFR Inc.

–The economy is still vulnerable to a double dip scenario. The downward revision from 3.2% in the advanced report to 3% in first revision and now just 2.7% shows that as the Obama/Bernanke stimulus wears off so does the upward momentum in the economy. With the banking and consumer sector still struggling with weak balance sheets , exogenous events like the European Sovereign Debt crisis are more likely to have lasting negative effects on the recovery.
–Steven Ricchiuto, Mizuho Securities

–The 2.7% first quarter GDP gain is below the Fed’s 2010 central tendency of 3.2% to 3.7%. Growth would have to average between 3.3% and 4.0% the rest of the year to hit the Fed’s forecast. –Jonathan Basile, Credit Suisse
Reference Here>>

Do not look for any grand leadership that has our country looking to make growth our primary agenda.

This also excerpted and edited from the Wall Street Journal -

Our Agenda for the G-20
Countries should work to stabilize debt levels, enact new financial regulation, and reduce their dependence on fossil fuels.
By TIMOTHY GEITHNER And LAWRENCE SUMMERS - WSJ Opinion Journal - JUNE 23, 2010

While the U.S. was the major source of demand for the world economic growth before the crisis, global demand must rest on many pillars going forward. That is why the G-20 must support Europe's reform program and the financing that Europe and the IMF will provide to countries facing acute fiscal challenges.
----
To maintain the momentum of the U.S. recovery, we need strong, balanced and sustainable global growth. Global growth will help double U.S. exports over the next five years, supporting several million American jobs, a key goal of the president's export initiative.
----
In this new era, when emerging markets account for two-thirds of global growth, concerted action by the G-20 is the only effective way to confront the challenges that lie ahead.
Reference Here>>

Now ... doesn't that make one feel confident about the economic leadership and growth here in this era of Carter's Second Term!

We need a new coach - we can not play the "World's Game" with a leadership that doesn't care that the team has as a goal ... to win the league! ... every other team on the field has that as the goal.

The Obama Administration as Hugo Chavez - Governance through "Rule Of Edict"

The Obama Administration's U.S. Labor Secretary, Hilda L. Solis; Congressman John Larson (D-CT); and Capital Workforce Partners, Tom Phillips, discuss the importance of Summer Youth Employment Programs and developing our future workforce. (l-r) AFL-CIO, John Olsen, U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, Congressman John Larson, CWP Tom Phillips, and CWP Board Chair, Rich Cohen. Image Credit: Capitalworkforce.org

The Obama Administration as Hugo Chavez - Governance through "Rule Of Edict"

It was leaked to the Associated Press today that the Obama Administration plans on making and enforcing law without involving the actual body that is the only Governmental body to create law ... the Congress.

This is a disturbing precedent, for if a President and his Administration is allowed to over reach its authority in the making and application of law in this way our country becomes a dictatorship where laws are the purview of the "Strongman" and his staff as opposed to a country that is ruled through the processes and rule of law.

This excerpted and edited from the Associated Press -

AP sources: Gay workers to get family leave
By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer – Mon Jun 21, 8:00 pm ET

The Labor Department intends to issue regulations this week ordering businesses to give gay employees equal treatment under a law permitting workers unpaid time off to care for newborns or loved ones.
----
The Family and Medical Leave Act allows workers to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave each year to take care of loved ones or themselves. The 1993 law, which also allows employees to take time off for adoptions, has previously only been applied to heterosexual couples.

The Labor Department planned to extend those rights based on a new interpretation of the law, the officials said. There was no plan to ask Congress to change the law.
----
Earlier this month, Obama issued orders for government agencies to extend child care services and expanded family leave to their workers. Obama's order for federal employees, though, covers only benefits that can be extended under existing law, without congressional action. Legislative action would be required for a full range of health care and other benefits.
Reference Here>>

If a non-lawmaking authority is able to interpret the procedure-based properly made law to EXTEND rights spelled out in the law ... the same bastard process could TAKE AWAY rights without the proper application of the rule of law.

With the way this 44th Presidency is allowed to make decisions ... it makes one believe they think, "HELL, why do we even have a Constitution, a Bill of Rights, and a separation of powers through three branches of Government?"

Welcome to the realities of Carter's Second Term!

WaPo and Obama Administration shape numbers and claim fiscal restraint

United States Surpluses & Deficits Graph (in billions of dollars) Image Credit: The Washington Post / Hugh Hewitt (blog)

WaPo and Obama Administration shape numbers and claim fiscal restraint

The average person stumbling upon an article appearing in The Washington Post, yesterday, about the economy and Government spending would think that our current leadership was having success at being responsible with the citizens money that had been collected in taxes.

The article begins with the following quote excerpted from The Washington Post:

Obama team points to smaller deficit numbers
By David Cho - Washington Post Staff Writer - Tuesday, April 13, 2010

"The federal deficit is running significantly lower than it did last year, with the budget gap for the first half of fiscal 2010 down 8 percent over the same period a year ago, senior Obama administration officials said Monday."
Reference Here>>

While, technically, this statement may be true, it masks the fact that the larger truth is that this adjusted figure moved from being ten (10) times larger than the deficit created by the previous leadership in 2007, to just nine (9) times larger. The Washington Post does reveal the information of this fact in two areas in their article on the Obama Administration report, in a graphic (above) and not until the 13th paragraph of this glowing piece of how well this administration is really not spending that much!

Quote from the 13th paragraph of the same Washington Post article:

"The deficit figure released by the Treasury Department for March means that the federal government has been spending more than it collected for a record 18 consecutive months, dating to the Bush administration."
Reference Here>>

The graph shows the truth of the deficits and Government spending and it is astounding that the Washington Post does not make the lead of this article that the improved spending number of $1,288,000,000,000 (1.3 trillion) is a whopping NINE TIMES larger than $158,000,000,000 ($1.6 billion) of the 2007 deficits of the Bush Administration, the first year with a Democrat Party controlled House of Representatives.

Nationally syndicated talk show host Hugh Hewitt could not have summed up how wrong this article is in its reporting of the effects of the policies of Barack Obama and the reporting job by the Washington Post.

This excerpted and edited from the blog of Hugh Hewitt -

"This is a ruinous level of spending, the sort of wildly-out-of-control hosing of printed money that could lead to a national fiscal stroke. Happy talk about a hundred billion of possible savings here and there and a reduction in earmarks should not divert attention from the fact that President Obama has led the country over a fiscal cliff, and has no solution in the offing except for a commission that will recommend vast tax hikes the prospect of which already chills investment and job growth."
Reference Here>>

In short, we all should expect a higher standard of context and truth in reports issued from our current leadership and more importantly, reporting of this information by the Fourth Estate (MSM).

Climategate: Todd Stern of the US State Department pushes forward on AGW agenda

Todd Stern, a climate negotiator during Bill Clinton’s presidency and more recently a fellow at the Center for American Progress, will assume the role of special envoy for climate change at the State Department. “We have no shortage of evidence that our world is facing a climate crisis,” said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the appointment of special envoy ceremony, who went on to attribute a large part of the problem to the burning of fossil fuels [evidence we now know was based on fraudulent data]. Image Credit: EPA

Climategate: Todd Stern of the US State Department pushes forward on AGW agenda

In the wake of Climategate, the level of consequences brought about due to the fraudulent activities put forth by the climate control political activists and scientists begins to make itself clear.

Todd Stern, the State Department's special envoy for climate change, stated at a February 16, 2010 briefing in Washington, "slightly less than 100 countries have indicated they want to be part of the accord ... but others may still sign on."

Further, on January 28, 2010, Todd Stern placed this statement on the State Deparment's website that read in part, "The United States today officially announced its desire to associate with the Copenhagen Accord and submitted its emissions reduction target to the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The U.S. submission reflects President Obama’s continued commitment to meeting the climate change and clean energy challenge through robust domestic and international action that will strengthen our economy, enhance our national security and protect our environment."

Why is the United States State Department playing a role in this effort of participating and policing the Copenhagen Accord when the science that is at the core of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW)/Climate Change has been exposed as being based on fraud?

Todd Stern serves as Special Envoy for Climate Change. He speaks about the "Focus the Nation" Clean Energy Town Halls and the Obama Administration's climate policy - "President Obama’s stimulus plan provides $80 billion of new spending and loan guarantees to accelerate our clean energy transformation. In addition, the President has called for a dramatic expansion in our investment in clean energy research and development." [ctrl-click Image to launch video of Todd Stern statement] Image Credit: engeria.gr

This excerpted and edited from AllAfrica.com -

Africa: Nearly 100 Nations to Reduce Emissions Under Copenhagen Accord
Cheryl Pellerin, AllAfrica.com - 18 February 2010

Nearly 100 countries have signed on to the Copenhagen Accord, a nonbinding agreement crafted in the final hours of the U.N. climate change conference in December 2009, meeting the first official deadline of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) secretariat.
----
The Copenhagen Accord is a 12-paragraph document (PDF, 182 KB) developed by leaders of 25 major greenhouse-gas-emitting nations, including the United States, covering the actions needed by industrialized and developing countries to avoid the worst effects of global climate change.

The accord seeks to limit global temperature rise by pushing developed countries to make deep but unspecified cuts in greenhouse gas emissions and by setting global and national emissions peaks "as soon as possible," with a longer deadline for developing countries.
----
By January 31, countries that wish to be associated with the accord were to notify the UNFCCC secretariat of their support. To date, Todd Stern, the State Department's special envoy for climate change, said at a February 16 briefing in Washington, "slightly less than 100 countries have indicated they want to be part of the accord ... but others may still sign on."
----
In other progress on the accord, a new high-level advisory panel on climate change financing has been created. It will be co-chaired by U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Ethiopia Prime Minister Meles Zenawi.

"The advisory group will develop practical proposals to significantly scale up both short-term and long-term financing for mitigation and adaptation strategies in developing countries," U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki moon said in a February 12 press conference with Brown and Meles. "In particular, it will look at how to jump-start the mobilization of new and innovative resources to reach $100 billion annually by 2020. Funding would include both public and private sources."

Funds will support adaptation, mitigation, technology development and transfer, and capacity building in developing countries, with priority for the most vulnerable. Panel members will include a balance of representatives from developed and developing countries.

Ban expects the group to present initial findings during the UNFCCC parties' May 31-June 11 negotiating session in Bonn, Germany, and final recommendations before the 16th conference of the UNFCCC parties (COP-16), to be held November 29-December 10 in Mexico City.

"There are probably four or five elements of the accord that need further work," Todd Stern, the State Department's special envoy for climate change, said, "and those things need to be carried forward."

These include:

• Climate fund: A Copenhagen Green Climate Fund will be established to support activities in developing countries related to climate change mitigation. The new advisory panel will study potential sources of revenue for the fund.

• Technology mechanism: A mechanism will be established to enhance ways to develop and transfer technology to support country-specific adaptation and mitigation efforts.

• Transparency: The actions of developed and developing countries will be subject to international measurement, reporting and verification in accordance with guidelines adopted by the conference of the parties. The guidelines have yet to be established.

"Whatever the ups and downs of this process at any particular moment, there is only one direction that this process can go, which is in the direction of action to reduce emissions," Todd Stern, the State Department's special envoy for climate change, said,. "I very much hope we get there sooner rather than later, and we will be doing everything we possibly can to advance that goal."
Reference Here>>

The AGW HOAX has placed the lives of people in nearly 100 nations under a process based on activities that were designed to promote life lived ... under a lie. The lie is that the science is "settled" about the effects of human activity and industrialization in our modern world ... in fact, the only settled science is that all of the data used to put forth the concept that human activity creates global warming and climate change was based fraud.

Climategate, as this discovery of mass FRAUD is becoming known, created a gusher of money that flowed into climate research and made clear just how much "AGW/Climate Change research professional fortunes" became tied to the notion of climate catastrophe. It was the fear of catastrophic climate change, after all, that unleashed the rising ocean of money by which their research came to be funded. Findings that might call the hysteria into question would also put at risk the flow of funds into their field and had to be shut down through owning the peer review process.

This article points out the these forces will not go away until they are made to pay back the money these promoters of this hoax have received already. To them, (and this includes Todd Stern, the State Department's special envoy for climate change) keeping the hoax alive is the only thing that matters.

FOLLOW THE MONEY!

Taxpayers and the Obama nuclear agenda

At Halias technologies, we develop advanced computer systems that meet our clients' specific requirements. Our team has an extensive experience in scientific computing for industry as well as in software engineering. We have experience in Oil and Gas, Energy and Micro-electronics. Caption & Image Credit: Halias Technologies

Taxpayers and the Obama nuclear agenda

The Obama administration, yesterday, pledged $8.3 billion, taxpayer backed loan guarantee to support the construction of two nuclear reactors in Georgia. This would represent activity on the first new U.S. nuclear plants in more than three decades at a time we do not have any money to loan.

The monies are being loaned with a condition - the amount of credit subsidy that nuclear developers must pay to the government to cover the risk that a project is not completed and the government has to repay the project's lenders. Industry officials have said an upfront credit subsidy payment of 1 to 2 percent of the loan amount would be manageable, but a significantly higher number would kill the proposed new reactor projects.

Simply stated this, condition to be worked out, removes the free-market investor from the risk side of the equation and transfers it to the taxpayer if the nuclear projects were to default.

How a nuclear power plant works? - why nuclear?, what is nuclear energy, nuclear and the environment, top 10 facts, learn more, nuclear glossary, the pressurized water reactor(PWR): containment structure, pressurizer, steam generator, control rods, reactor vessel, turbine, condenser, generator., boiling water reactor(BWR). Caption & Image Credit: Download Electrical and Electronics Books

This excerpted and edited from The New York Times -

DOE Delivers Its First, Long-Awaited Nuclear Loan Guarantee
By PETER BEHR of ClimateWire - Published: February 17, 2010

Administration climate adviser Carol Browner said yesterday that the Energy Department's preliminary commitment to Southern Co. and its partners in the $14 billion Plant Vogtle development was hopefully "the first of many new nuclear projects."
----
Yesterday's anticipated announcement produced the political anomaly of a Democratic president being cheered by the nuclear power industry for supporting nuclear's long hoped-for revival, while being condemned by nuclear power opponents on the left for putting billions of taxpayer money at risk. The program stalled during the Bush administration, and Southern Co. CEO David Ratcliffe said yesterday that there were times he lost hope for it.
----
The guarantee "is a dirty and dangerous distraction from the clean-energy future the president promised America," said Jim Riccio, nuclear policy analyst at Greenpeace.

The administration's unreserved backing of a group of advanced design reactor projects reflects the conviction of President Obama and key aides that the nation cannot reach its goals for reducing carbon emissions from power plants without a bigger contribution from nuclear power, officials say.
----
Southern and its partners, Oglethorpe Power Corp., the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, and Dalton Utilities, have 90 days to conclude the agreement announced yesterday. The guarantees would not take effect until the NRC approves operating licenses for the reactors.
----
Doug Koplow of Earth Track Inc., in a paper published last year by the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, said loan guarantees could reduce nuclear plant financing costs by $500 million a year. "These savings are not 'free' money, as the industry likes to portray them," he said. "Quite the contrary: the savings to a specific industrial facility arise because their business risk is being moved from the investors who will profit from the new reactor to ... taxpayers. It is clearly a good deal for the nuclear industry; far less clear is how the taxpayer is benefiting."

Nuclear power critics assert that there is a substantial risk that the new projects will default, citing a Congressional Budget Office study that estimated a 50 percent likely failure rate. The CBO study, however, was made in 2003, before the loan guarantee program was created. The failure rate calculation assumes that nuclear power from new plants could not complete economically against generating plants fired by coal or natural gas. It did not consider whether future climate policies would make coal or natural gas generation more expensive, or whether environmental regulations would force the closure of coal plants.
Reference Here>>

The biggest risk for the investor and the taxpayer is not if a nuclear power plant goes into default ... however large this may become. The biggest risk comes as to where does one would put the nuclear waste now that the Obama Administration has shut down the only site where the nuclear waste could be deposited - Yucca Mountain, Nevada.

So, the Obama Administration fronts our money to promote nuclear development and prime the pump but PLUGS the valve on the waste this completed development would create thereby insuring a default of process!

And as the last sentence of the article reference states --- "It [the taxpayer loan commitment] did not consider whether future climate policies [of Carol Browner and the Obama Administration's EPA] would make coal or natural gas generation more expensive, or whether environmental regulations would force the closure of coal plants.

This nuclear agenda all adds up to a chaos being created in our country's energy sector by the Obama Administration to pair up with the chaos they have already created in our economic sector. Even Carter could not envision this kind of subversive control and command of chaos on behalf of the progressive/liberal political agenda!

Michelle Obama's Ten Billion Dollar Beat-Up

Tweaks to children's diet can make a positive difference in their health, Michelle Obama told CNN's Larry King. Image Credit: CNN

Michelle Obama's Ten Billion Dollar Beat-Up

Let's be honest, we did not vote for Michelle Obama when we elected Barack Obama to the office of President of the United States. We only agree to allow her to live off of our public monies as the wife/spouse of the person we elect into this office. But something has changed with the approach to our understanding of how our elected ... and now, unelected positions ... that occupy our executive branch of Government.

On Tuesday, February 9th, 2010, the President of the United States signed an executive order establishing and funding to the tune of $10,000,000,000 (that is ten billion dollars or using a population number of 300 million people, a tax donation of $33.33 for every man, woman, and child in the United States) the "Let's Move" campaign that seeks to increase awareness and solve the problem of childhood obesity with a comprehensive approach that will encourage families and communities, schools and states, doctors and coaches, private industry and not-for-profits to work in a coordinated effort to attack childhood obesity on multiple fronts simultaneously. “We think that this has enormous promise,” the president said. Turning to his wife, he added, “It’s done, honey.”

Michelle Obama called for overhauling many federal laws and guidelines, including adding $10 billion over the next decade to “update” the Childhood Nutrition Act, which feeds 31 million children at school and would add funding to feed more children.

At this time of expansive Government debts, why can't the first lady issue a simple Public Service Announcement (PSA) and work through existing agencies and not-for-profit organizations without taking an additional $33.33 out of each and everyone's pocket (a family of four will be expected to pony up $143.33)? After all, doesn't this crowd have enough control over our lives?

This excerpted and edited from NEWSWEEK

Michelle Obama's Childhood-Obesity Plan: Reaching Out to America's Moms
Patrice Wingert, The Human Condition - NEWSWEEK - Posted Tuesday, February 09, 2010 3:26 PM

When Michelle Obama became first lady, she stressed that her "No. 1 job" would be "first mom." Following through on that focus, today at the White House she elevated her personal concern for her own kids' health and eating habits into a massive national campaign aimed at solving the U.S. epidemic of childhood obesity in a generation.

Calling the issue "one of the most serious threats to their future," Obama noted that childhood-obesity rates have tripled in the past three decades, and that the excess weight kids are carrying these days increases the risk of developing diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, cancer, and asthma. As a result, Obama said, she had "great concern" that too many of today's kids were on track to live shorter and less healthy lives than their parents, even though the problem is "so imminently solvable."

President Barack Obama signs the executive order giving Michelle Obama $10,000,000,000 of federal tax money for the "Let's Move" campaign that will be run out of the office of the first lady. Image Credit: Pablo Martinez Monsivais

"This isn't like a disease where we're still waiting for the cure to be discovered, we know the cure for this," Obama told an audience packed into the White House's State Dining Room. "This isn't like putting a man on the moon or inventing the Internet—it doesn't take some stroke of genius or feat of technology. We have everything we need, right now, to help our kids lead healthy lives ... so let's move to solve it."
----
Not only did she call on schools to provide their students with healthier meals and more active playtime, but she said she would work to encourage communities to promote farmers' markets and recreation, pediatricians to write prescriptions for more vegetables and exercise, and the USDA to identify and eliminate "food deserts," often located in poor neighborhoods, where grocery stores don't exist and residents have little option but to buy junk food at convenience stores.
----
And even though she has gotten flak for previously talking about how she struggled with this issue with her own kids, she didn't back away from expanding on her personal experiences, noting that childhood obesity is "an issue of great concern to me, not just as a first lady, but as a mom."
----
But these days, she said, parents often work longer hours and can't always eat together as a family. The cost of fruits and vegetables has risen 50 percent faster than other foods in the past 20 years, making some of the healthiest foods more expensive. While government, private industry, and philanthropies can do some things to help, she stressed that the main responsibility for making healthy decisions for kids ultimately rests with adults, and encouraged parents, particularly, to lead the way by doing simple things, like replacing soda with water or skim milk, encouraging kids to walk places, cutting back on portion size.
----
"Our kids didn't do this to themselves ... no matter how much they beg for pizza, fries, and candy, ultimately, they are not, and should not be, the ones calling the shots at dinnertime. We're in charge. We make these decisions. But that's actually the good news here. If we're the ones who make the decisions, then we can decide to solve the problem."

While the plan she laid out Tuesday was ambitious and multilayered, in the end, it may be her attempts to talk mom-to-mom that may make the biggest impact.
Reference Here>>

If it actually is "her attempts to talk mom-to-mom that may make the biggest impact" as this article suggests, then why doesn't Michelle Obama just issue a PSA as opposed to having her husband issue an executive order creating and funding with uncollected taxes, the ten billion dollar "Let's Move" campaign?

We can not afford the money or the "paid for" parental beat-up by this, or any, First Lady!

Barack Obama's second year - More 153 & 411 moments

"Obama has cut the remembering-what-we-don't-like-about-Democrats stage of this process down from two to four years to about 10 months. Folks, I'm convinced that if we all work really hard, we can get it down to three months." - Ann Coulter, from "That Old Obama Magic Is Back" 1-20-2010 - Image Credit: Organizing For America

Barack Obama's second year - More 153 & 411 moments

This morning, Don Imus mentioned that Barack Obama has given about 153 interviews and issued or delivered 411 comments and speeches on health care reform since he has taken office.

Don mentioned this information in reaction to what Barack Obama said in an interview he granted to ABC’s George Stephanopoulos right after Scott Brown was elected to assume the Senate seat previously occupied by the recently deceased Edward M. (Ted) Kennedy from Massachusetts.

This excerpted and edited from The Daily Caller -

Obama’s failure to communicate on health care
By Jon Ward - The Daily Caller 01/20/10 at 9:14 pm

President Obama on Wednesday said the reason his health-care reform is on life support because Congress took too long to debating it and he didn’t talk enough to citizens about its benefits for them.
----
“One of the things that I have learned in Washington is you have to repeat yourself a lot because because unfortunately it doesn’t penetrate,” he said.

The president, making his first public comments after a Republican candidate on Tuesday won the special election to fill Sen. Ted Kennedy’s Massachusetts Senate seat, said he understands that some Americans view his administration as a bunch of “technocrats up here … making decisions.”

But he said the main reason for this was not his policies but rather his communications strategy.

“What I haven’t always been successful at doing is breaking through the noise and speaking directly to the American people in a way that during the campaign you could do,” he said.
----
He also admitted he has failed to “change the tone here in Washington.”
Reference Here>>

With the context of this being the first day of the second year of this 44th Presidency, why don't we just recognize what we can see is the obvious delusional mind of Barack Obama ... it isn't that He has failed to change the tone in Washington, just the TONE DEAFNESS.

Also, He fails to hear the American people when they speak through Tea Party gatherings, Town Hall questions, and now votes in Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts ... even though he believes that the American people have NOT been listening and hearing what he has said over the 153 interviews and 411 comments and speeches.

We American people have heard what has been said ... when will the Obama Administration resolve to begin to listen to the American people, in this, the first day of year two, of the destructive path of this 44th Presidency?

SOURCE: LA Conservative Examiner

A speedbump down the ruination road of Carter's Second Term

All the leftist talking heads are saying double down on health care after Scott Brown won Massachusetts. We now know that many moderate Democrats aren’t going to listen to that advice and are considering picking up their chips before they lose it all. It’s time for the Democrats to choose if they are going to listen to pundits or the people. Congressmen in the fly over states better get the message or start packing their bags. Thankfully some of them are. Caption & Image Credit: David Horowitz's Newsreal

A speedbump down the ruination road of Carter's Second Term

The predictably impossible, happened ... the tax day Tea Party protesters, summertime Town Hall Meeting questioners, and the jilted Obama Independents raised their collective ugly head and rejected a Government being run as a one political party rule and voted a registered Republican to replace Edward M. (Ted) Kennedy in the United States Senate.

Scott Brown was swept into office by waging a campaign based upon actually being a representative of the constituents who purposely voted him into office as opposed to having a political party rubber stamp vote occupying the one of one-hundred voting seats in the United States Senate.

Do not let people who talk on the news programs tell you that this win in Massachusetts was a just a typical mid-term rejection of the ruling party ... "this happens all the time" ... this win by Scott Brown was a historic rejection of Barack Obama and his policies aided by the unbridled leadership approach employed by Nancy Pelosi in the House of Representatives and Harry Reid in the US Senate. This election was an example of a "Power To The People" moment.

The very liberal U. S. Congressman from New York, Anthony Weiner probably said it best, and he was a person who's philosophy benefited from the last full year of a one-party rule paradigm --

"Large numbers of independent voters saying they're upset about health care, that's not just their fault, that's our fault, too. And we have to think about what we're doing wrong here and to have a conversation as if nothing happened, whether you're in Massachusetts or not, is being tone deaf, -- I don’t think it would be the worst thing to take a step back and say we are going to pivot to do a jobs thing…If there isn’t any recognition that we got the message and we are trying to recalibrate and do things differently, we are not only going to risk looking ignorant but arrogant.” Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-New York, said.

Other notable quotes:

“Moderates and independents even in a state as Democratic as Massachusetts just aren’t buying our message. They just don’t believe the answers we are currently proposing are solving their problems. That’s something that has to be corrected.”-Evan Bayh (D-In.)

Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) said it “would only be fair and prudent that we suspend further votes on health care legislation until Brown is seated.”

Massachusetts voters and Scott Brown have changed the debate on health care reform. In his acceptance speech he was right on when he said:

“When there’s trouble in Massachusetts, there’s trouble everywhere and they [the ruling Democrats in Washington DC] know it. One thing is clear, people do not want the trillion dollar healthcare plan that is being forced on the American people.”

Let’s hope more and more Democrats really do know it.

Just maybe, liberalism in Massachusetts wasn't ... too big to fail!

Make no doubt about it, this election was a referendum on more than Healthcare, it was also a referendum on Taxation, Jobs, Transparency, and most of all, the Obama Administration & its process of one-party rule ... and represents a speedbump here, down the "first year" ruination road of Carter's Second Term.

Obama Administration diverts CIA resources to AGW Scientists

Obama Administration diverts CIA resources to AGW Scientists

Acting CIA Director, Leon Panetta, has directed the CIA to share data collection assets, time, and classified information with about 60 select scientists. The National Reconnaissance Office, which operates the nation’s fleet of spy satellites, is providing much of the data.

Former Vice President Al Gore is credited with helping restart the collaboration by urging Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, to convince the CIA and others it was time to bring Medea (Measurements of Earth Data for Environmental Analysis - a Clinton Administration program that operated from 1992 to 2001) back to life.

This excerpted and edited from The National Center for Public Policy Research -

Experts with The National Center for Public Policy Research are decrying this practice as a distraction from important counter-terrorism duties. They further question if it a possible avenue to renew climate change subterfuge already plaguing some of these scientists.

"This is another example of President Obama not taking terrorism seriously," said Deneen Borelli, a fellow with the National Center's Project 21 black leadership network. "Our enemies must be laughing at the Obama Administration's incompetence."
----
"Given the very real threat posed by terrorists, it is ridiculous and downright dangerous to divert any intelligence resources to monitoring polar ice," added Project 21's Deneen Borelli. "Its said this won't hinder regular intelligence-gathering, but it's also clear that agencies can't yet share data and track a terrorism suspect who was identified by his own father. It's unwise to further distract our intelligence network by forcing it to consult with scientists about icebergs, polar bears and sea lions. The Obama Administration appears to be putting a left-wing political agenda before the safety and security of our nation."

Speaking on the involvement of Al Gore, Tom Borelli, Ph.D., director of the National Center's Free Enterprise Project, noted: "If anything, Al Gore is the real national security threat. Gore's climate change fear mongering, which lines his own pockets with cash has stoked a war against the fossil fuels so vital to our nation's economic prosperity and national security. His self-serving agenda is stymieing domestic energy exploration and production efforts. Now, he successfully lobbied to resurrect this diversion of our intelligence assets after the Bush Administration wisely ended it."

The claims of some scientists are already suspect after the Climategate scandal. Tom Borelli pointed out: "We've already seen climate scientists discussing the idea of destroying raw data to preserve climate change models that may be seriously flawed, and then it turns out that very same sort of data was allegedly 'lost.' How can we trust them to not behave similarly with CIA data - such as denying the proper peer review under the guise that the data is secret? The real question is: who's going to be watching the scientists?"
Reference Here>>

Additional Question:

Will the Obama Administration vet these scientists as it relates to their involvement with "Climategate" tactics ... or will they just be vetted as other Czars and advisors to the Obama Administration have been in the last 11 months (Van Jones, Mark Lloyd, Timothy Geithner, Harold Koh, John HoldrenCass Sunstein and others)?

Problem:

Scientific Method is the search for Truth ... Climate Change data collection is the gathering of information in search for data that supports an AGW Ideology!

This process of diverting classified CIA assets and time takes away from their real job ... to gather information about real threats and assaults on the sovereignty of the United States.

Paint The Obama Administration With Halliburton Brush Coated With AIG

Officials handling the multibillion dollar bailout of insurance giant American International Group Inc. mismanaged an initial rescue attempt and may have overpaid other banks to wind down AIG's business relationships, a government watchdog says. Image Credit: Mark Lennihan

Paint The Obama Administration With Halliburton Brush Coated With AIG

The facts are surfacing about the activities of Timothy Geithner and his transition into the Obama Administration and the bail-out of AIG.

These facts should have the press take out the Halliburton brush and begin painting the Obama Administration with a healthy coat of AIG.

The reference here is to compare the point of view that the Mainstream Media held with respect to the relationship the Bush Administration had with the exclusive contract bid process they used to engage Halliburton Corporation in providing services on a sub-contract basis in the war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan.

With Halliburton, however, the argument can be made that this corporation was unique in being able to provide the services required and the Government did, in fact, receive the services contracted for. The American people got what they paid for.

What did the American people get from the management of its money spent on AIG and how was this effort managed.

For his part, Barack Obama assured us all how the Government would operate in a speech just after the $787 Billion dollar Stimulus Bill was passed by Congress.

With the party-line voting on the stimulus marking a defeat for his push for bipartisanship, Obama shifted focus to something else most un-Washington: making government spending transparent.

"Washington hasn't set a very good example in recent years, and with so much on the line, it's time to begin doing things differently," he said.

"I've tasked my Cabinet and staff to set up the kind of management, oversight, and disclosure that will help ensure that."

Enter (tax-cheat) Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner ... it was revealed today in an article appearing in the Washington Post that he did not negotiate with the AIG corporate primaries, let alone the additional connected web of companies associated with AIG, a discount on the money to be paid to financial institutions to secure their sub-prime portfolio assets in order to save these institutions from collapsing. The taxpayer money committed paid 100% on the value of the assets purchased.

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner: The Federal Reserve Bank of New York didn't even try to get a good deal for taxpayers when it caved to demands from AIG's creditors that they should be paid in full. Image Credit: Clusterstock

This excerpted and edited from the Washington Post -

Fed criticized for not negotiating harder with AIG creditors
Inspector general says decisions during bailout 'came with a cost'
By Brady Dennis, Washington Post Staff Writer - Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Federal Reserve officials made only a passing attempt to negotiate discounts from the creditors of American International Group last fall before directing the company to fully pay what it owed on its troubled derivatives contracts, according to a report from the special inspector general overseeing the government's financial rescue program.

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, who was then the president of the New York Fed, concurred with advisers that it would be impractical to impose losses on AIG's counterparties and that they essentially should be paid at 100 cents on the dollar, the report by special inspector general Neil Barofsky states.
----
The government extended an $85 billion loan to AIG in September 2008 as the company struggled to pay obligations related to derivatives contracts at its Financial Products unit. According to Barofsky, that initial loan came with a high interest rate, which "inadequately addressed AIG's long term liquidity concerns, thus requiring further government support."

Later, New York Fed officials agreed to buy tens of billions of dollars worth of complex securities that would allow Financial Products to cancel its most troublesome contracts, and staff members developed talking points that stressed to AIG's trading partners that they were benefiting from the bailouts and asked them to agree to concessions, according to Barofsky.
----
Ultimately, AIG's trading partners received more than $62 billion, which many critics have branded as "backdoor bailouts."

In a letter commenting on Barofsky's report, Fed officials called the original AIG loan "appropriate in light of the circumstances at the time." In addition, they argued that the Fed had done what it could in trying to negotiate with AIG's trading partners.

"We believe that the Federal Reserve acted appropriately in conducting these negotiations, and that our negotiating strategy, including the decision to treat all counterparties equally, was not flawed or unreasonably limited," the letter said. It said the Fed actively sought concessions from AIG's counterparties, "but was unable to obtain any such agreements." The officials added that they were wary of using their supervisory authority on behalf of AIG to impose losses on other companies.
Reference Here>>

The American taxpayer got what it paid for ... through the tens of billions of dollars to AIG and its network of companies. A 'still ugly' economy with a group of financial executives that will be giving some of the money they received with their intact multi-million dollar pay bonuses, political contributions to this one-party "CONTROL" Government regime we have three more years (hopefully, only one) to endure.

It is high time to start painting!