Obama’s FAKE Steel Worker – the LIES continue


From the Gateway Pundit

Obama Camp to Deploy Fake GST Steel Employee to Bash Mitt Romney Before Debate

Posted by Jim Hoft on Sunday, September 30, 2012, 8:54 AM
The Obama Campaign will attack Mitt Romney’s business record before the debate this week by sending out a phoney GST steel employee to bash the Republican nominee. David Foster spoke against Mitt Romney at the DNC too.

David Foster’s first line at the DNC:
“I’m David Foster and I was a steelworker for 31 years.” (He forgot to mention he was a union organizer and not an employee of GST steel.)

But David Foster never worked for Bain or GST. He was a union organizer.

The Politico reported:

The Obama campaign will deploy a group of surrogates to go after Mitt Romney’s Bain Capital record in the days surrounding the first presidential debate on Oct. 3, a campaign official said Saturday.

Among those surrogates will be multiple ex-employees of companies owned by Bain. Randy Johnson, the former Ampad worker who spoke at the Democratic National Convention, will campaign in Wisconsin on Oct. 2 and 3. Former Dade Behring employee Cindy Hewitt will appear in Florida on Oct. 3 and 4. And David Foster, who was a union negotiator for workers at the Bain-owned company GST Steel, will visit Ohio on Oct. 3 and 4 and join some of Johnson’s events in Wisconsin.

But former “steelworker” David Foster never worked at GST or Bain. He was a union organizer.
ABC reported on this during the DNC convention:

David Foster was never an employee of GST Steel’s Kansas City plant. He was employed by the United Steelworkers of America as their regional union director to represent GST Steel, but was not employed at our facility,” according to BC Huselton, who was head of HR at GST.

Instead, Foster was a union organizer, who negotiated for workers that did work for the company.

Read More

Obama’s EPA Honors Marxist Murderer Che Guevara


Obama’s EPA easily makes the ‘Despicable Democrats’ list with this one.  If you don’t know the truth about the cowardly murderer Che Guevara – read HERE for just a bit of it.  Democrats either support Guevara fully KNOWING the type of person he really was or they are complete and utter idiots – either way it makes them despicable to EVER honor or support this heinous monster.


IBD Editorials

EPA Honors Noted Environmentalist Che Guevara

Mon, Sep 17 2012 00:00:00 EA16_ISSUES

Posted 09/14/2012 07:06 PM ET

Regulators: The EPA has commemorated the start of Hispanic Heritage Month with an emailed picture of Marxist thug Che Guevara. Considering the agency’s totalitarian energy policies, it’s somehow appropriate.

The internal email sent by EPA management analyst Susie Goldring was said to have been issued without clearance from higher-ups. EPA said it was “drafted and sent by an individual employee, and without official clearance.”

But sent it was, a document with a photo of a mural with a visage of the murderous revolutionary that was lifted without attribution from the website, Guevara, of course, was an enemy of the very freedom that Hispanics, particularly from Cuba, came here seeking.

Was honoring Guevara an accident in an administration led by a disciple of Saul Alinsky, where self-avowed Marxist Van Jones gets the prime post of President Obama’s “green jobs” czar?

Wasn’t Obama friend and unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers also an admirer of Guevara? Did Goldring ever work at Obama’s Houston office in 2008, where posters of the Marxist killer adorned the walls?

Guevara was Fidel Castro’s right-hand-man, thought to be personally responsible for scores of murders carried out in the name of Castro and the revolution. Maybe the EPA staffer couldn’t find any murals of freedom fighters such as Jose Marti and Simon Bolivar.

Actually, Guevara may have found himself in tune with the EPA culture and policies that also claim to be based in creativity but are bringing nothing but a loss of freedom for people and entrepreneurs and the destruction the American economy.

We are reminded of what EPA regional administrator Al Armendariz once said about his “philosophy” of enforcement. It was, he said, to single out an oil company, punish it “as hard as you can” and make an example of it to scare others into submission. Armendariz described how Romans would conquer villages. They’d go into a town, he said, and “find the first five guys they saw, and they would crucify them” to make an example of them.

We don’t know if Armendariz had a picture of Che Guevara on the wall of his college dorm, but we wouldn’t have been surprised if he did. The thread of totalitarian arrogance runs both through the current EPA and the Marxist Cuban revolution.

Read More

Obama helped destroy the Middle East

Read More

Obama will Necessarily make Electricity prices Skyrocket

While the insane Cap & Trade plan didn’t pass, Obama’s EPA is hard at work forcing regulations that don’t make any sense and necessarily hurt businesses, consumers and taxpayers.

Obama in his OWN words:

Read More

Wages of Obama

A picture is worth a thousand words – or shows the epic FAILURE of the Obama Administration

Read More

The Shocking TRUTH about Unemployment

The truth about unemployment is far worse than any Democrats will tell you.  They cheer when the unemployment rate goes down but neglect to tell you it’s going down because more people are leaving the workforce than jobs created.  The charts below show the long unemployment rates and then the historical trends regarding recessions.  The gray bars represent recessions. You’ll notice historically there are job losses then job gains – until Obama.   These charts should scare the living hell out of you.  You can read the full story here.





Read More

Obama in his OWN Words

Obama is his OWN WORDS.


h/t Pat Dollard

Read More

Obama doesn’t care about NON-union Workers

This video says it all and this was with taxpayer money

Read More

Welfare Spending Increased under Obama

Welfare spending has indeed increased under Obama despite what many Democrats try to spin.   Note that numbers for 2012 are only estimates as the actual numbers have not been released.

Charts below are from and back up the data in the chart above.

Read More

Spending – Bush vs Obama – Republicans vs Democrats

Seeing as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid hasn’t bothered to do his job an put a budget into place in over 3 years… it’s time to take a gander at spending under Obama and versus Bush because the Democrats still like to blame Bush after 3.5 years of having control.




Read More

Obama Won’t Raise Taxes

18 New Taxes in Obamacare that will necessarily affect the working and middle classes!!!

Read More

Obama Campaign Calls Romney a Felon

Obama lies about it to reporters

Read More

The Democrats’ $6,400 Medicare LIE

Updated August 19, 2012, 10:24 p.m. ET

The $6,400 Myth

Breaking down a false Obama Medicare claim.


One of President Obama’s regular attacks on Paul Ryan’s Medicare reform is that it would force seniors to pay $6,400 a year more for health care. But merely because he keeps repeating this doesn’t mean it’s in the same area code of accurate.

The claim is based on a now out-of-date Congressional Budget Office estimate of the gap between the cost of health care a decade from now, in 2022, and the size of the House budget’s premium-support subsidy for a typical 65-year-old in 2022.

Editorial board member Joe Rago critiques the latest Obama Medicare ad.

In other words, the $6,400 has no relevance for any senior today. None. But it also is unlikely to have any relevance for any senior ever because CBO concedes that its number is highly uncertain and “will depend on the evolution of the health care and health insurance systems over time, which is hard to predict.” That’s for sure.

Republican Vice Presidential candidate, U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) speaks during the Victory Rally in Florida at Town Square, Lake Sumter Landing on August 18, 2012 in The Villages, Florida.

The more fundamental problem is that the CBO analysis has nothing to do with the current Mitt Romney-Paul Ryan plan. Nada. Over the last year Mr. Ryan has made major adjustments to his original proposal as he sought a compromise with Democrats. In its most up-to-date analysis, CBO admits that it “does not have the capability at this time to estimate such effects” in the new version. That is, it does not have the tools to make its $6,400 exaggeration again.

The reason CBO can’t model the 2013 House budget and the Romney-Ryan plan is that they harness markets with competitive bidding. Congress’s budget gnomes can’t handle these dynamic forces.

So how would Ryan 2.0 work in practice? Traditional Medicare and all private insurers in a region would make bids to cover seniors and compete for their business by offering the best value and prices. Then the government would give everyone a subsidy equal to the second-lowest bid.

If seniors chose that No. 2 option, whether it was Medicare or another plan, they’d break even and pay nothing extra out of pocket. If they picked the cheapest plan, they’d keep whatever was left over after the government subsidy—that is, they’d get a cash refund. If they instead picked the third-cheapest option, the fourth-cheapest, etc., they’d pay the difference above the government subsidy.

That structure ensures that seniors would have at least two choices (and likely far more) that they are guaranteed to do better than they do now. The amount of the premium-support subsidy would also be tied to underlying health-care costs, so it would not shift costs to beneficiaries, as Democrats also falsely claim. The very reasonable Romney-Ryan policy bet is that costs could nonetheless fall over time because seniors would have the incentive to switch to the most competitively priced Medicare plan.

The latest real-world reason to expect that would happen comes from a new paper by the Harvard economists Zirui Song, David Cutler and Michael Chernew. The researchers—Mr. Cutler used to be an Obama health adviser—looked at Medicare Advantage, the program that currently gives one of four seniors private alternatives (and that ObamaCare deliberately undermines).

The Advantage insurers make bids today against a benchmark set by traditional Medicare spending, and the Harvard trio find that the second lowest bid in 2009 came in 9% below the normal program on average. Medicare costs $717 per person per month, but the cheapest private plan could provide the same coverage for 87 cents on the government dollar. The second cheapest could do it for 91 cents.

Messrs. Song, Cutler and Chernew are alarmed because they say their results imply—broadly speaking—that seniors in traditional Medicare would have to pay $64 a month more if they kept that coverage. (Note: That totals $768 a year, not $6,400.) But a better way of reading the data is that seniors would migrate to more cost-effective options, saving both themselves and taxpayers a bundle.

None of these facts are likely to deter Democrats from their distorted claims. But the truth is that the Ryan-Romney reform isn’t anywhere close to Mr. Obama’s cartoon version.

A version of this article appeared August 20, 2012, on page A10 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The $6,400 Myth.

Read More

Stolen History

MUST watch video

Read More