The First Lady Hosts President’s Committee on the Arts And The Humanities

By Jueseppi B.





First lady Michelle Obama hugs Lianyun Wu during an awards ceremony for the President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities in the East Room at the White House on November 19. The first lady talked about the importance of afterschool and out of school arts and humanities education and presented awards recognizing programs across the country that benefit underserved youth.









First Lady Honors Honors National Arts and Humanities Youth Program Award Recipients


Published on Nov 19, 2012

Twelve exemplary after-school and out-of-school arts and humanities program are honored by FIrst Lady Michelle Obama as recipients of the President’s Committee on the Arts and Humanities Youth Program Awards. November 19, 2012.

















NOW…..for something totally different…….Some Stupidity…….






America’s bankruptcy laws need to re revamped. A company/business such as Hostess, should never be allowed to file chapter 11 or chapter 7 bankruptcy while handing the types of salary increases and bonuses mentioned in the above graphic.



Chapter 7 of the Title 11 of the United States Code (Bankruptcy Code) governs the process of liquidation under the bankruptcy laws of the United States. (In contrast, Chapters 11 and 13 govern the process of reorganization of a debtor in bankruptcy.) Chapter 7 is the most common form of bankruptcy in the United States.



For businesses

When a troubled business is badly in debt and unable to service that debt or pay its creditors, it may file (or be forced by its creditors to file) for bankruptcy in a federal court under Chapter 7. A Chapter 7 filing means that the business ceases operations unless continued by the Chapter 7 Trustee. A Chapter 7 Trustee is appointed almost immediately, with broad powers to examine the business’s financial affairs. The Trustee generally sells all the assets and distributes the proceeds to the creditors. This may or may not mean that all employees will lose their jobs. When a very large company enters Chapter 7 bankruptcy, entire divisions of the company may be sold intact to other companies during the liquidation.


Fully secured creditors, such as collateralized bondholders or mortgage lenders, have a legally enforceable right to the collateral securing their loans or to the equivalent value, a right which cannot be defeated by bankruptcy. A creditor is fully secured if the value of the collateral for its loan to the debtor equals or exceeds the amount of the debt. For this reason, however, fully secured creditors are not entitled to participate in any distribution of liquidated assets that the bankruptcy trustee might make.


In a Chapter 7 case, a corporation or partnership does not receive a bankruptcy discharge—instead, the entity is dissolved. Only an individual can receive a Chapter 7 discharge (see 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(1)). Once all assets of the corporate or partnership debtor have been fully administered, the case is closed. The debts of the corporation or partnership theoretically continue to exist until applicable statutory periods of limitations expire.



Chapter 11 is a chapter of the United States’ Bankruptcy Code, which permits reorganization under the bankruptcy laws of the United States. Chapter 11 bankruptcy is available to every business, whether organized as a corporation or sole proprietorship, and to individuals, although it is most prominently used by corporate entities. In contrast, Chapter 7 governs the process of a liquidation bankruptcy (although liquidation can go under this chapter), while Chapter 13 provides a reorganization process for the majority of private individuals.


When a business is unable to service its debt or pay its creditors, the business or its creditors can file with a federal bankruptcy court for protection under either Chapter 7 or Chapter 11.


In Chapter 7, the business ceases operations, a trustee sells all of its assets, and then distributes the proceeds to its creditors. Any residual amount is returned to the owners of the company. In Chapter 11, in most instances the debtor remains in control of its business operations as a debtor in possession, and is subject to the oversight and jurisdiction of the court.



Hostess made it’s bed, trying to bust up the unions, now I hope they enjoy laying in that bed but 18,000 fired Americans don’t need to be forced to the unemployment lines right before the holiday season…..of for that matter, at any time.



The Soap Box: Truth And Facts Versus Lies And Misinformation

By Jueseppi B.









The Lie: The TeaTardedRepubliCANT Pseudo-Freudian Psycho-Sexual Secret-Whore Pro-caucasian Pro-Racist Anti-LGBT Anti-Feminist Reich Wing Party tells us that spending has been OUT OF CONTROL under President Of The United States Barack Hussein Obama.


The Truth:







The Lie: TeaTardedRepubliCANT Pseudo-Freudian Psycho-Sexual Secret-Whore Pro-caucasian Pro-Racist Anti-LGBT Anti-Feminist Reich Wing Party tells us that POTUS Obama has raised taxes on American citizens creating more of a hardship on Americans economically. I’ve heard it said POTUS Obama has raised taxes on income, property and the poor working class American citizen.


The Truth:

Items that are clearly taxes, and that are already in effect

• Increasing the federal excise tax on tobacco. Obama signed legislation raising taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco productssoon after taking office; that money goes to pay for children’s health insurance programs. The law went into effect in 2009.

• A 10 percent excise tax on indoor tanning services. This tax is narrowly targeted at tanning bed users, but it is still a tax. This took effect July 1, 2010.

• Increasing corporate taxes by making it more difficult for businesses to engage in activities that reduce their tax liability. This appears to refer to the closing of a half-dozen existing exemptions and credits relevant only to large international corporations. (We wrote about this recently.) While this is a provision targeted narrowly at big conglomerates — and while it’s popular as a way to keep deep-pocketed countries from sheltering excessive amounts of income — our experts said it does count as a tax increase. Obama signed the bill into law on Aug. 10, 2010.

• Imposing an annual fee on manufacturers and importers of branded drugs, based on each company’s share of the total market. While some industry-specific levies are intended to help foot the bill for regulatory processes, this one is more of a revenue raiser for the more general goals of the health care overhaul. It took effect on Jan. 1, 2011.

Items that are clearly taxes, but which are not yet in effect

Listed in chronological order of date they will take effect:

• Increasing the hospital insurance portion of the payroll tax from 2.9 percent to 3.8 percent for couples earning more than $250,000 a year, or $200,000 for single filers. Takes effect Jan. 1, 2013.

• Applying the 3.8 percent hospital insurance tax to investment income for couples earning more than $250,000 a year, or $200,000 for single filers, for the first time. Takes effect Jan. 1, 2013.

• A 2.3 percent excise tax on manufacturers and importers of certain medical devices. This is a narrowly targeted tax, but still a tax (and will likely be reflected in consumer prices once it begins). Takes effect Jan. 1, 2013.

• Raise the 7.5 percent adjusted gross income floor for the medical expenses deduction to 10 percent. People who would have qualified for the deduction this year would pay more. Takes effect Jan. 1, 2013.

• Annual fee levied on health insurance providers, based on each company’s share of the total market. Same logic as the levy on branded drug companies cited above. Takes effect Jan. 1, 2013.

• Limiting the amount taxpayers can deposit in flexible spending accounts to $2,500 a year. While the Obama camp says this provision is intended in part to stop abuse of the system, our experts consider it a tax because it increases taxable income. Takes effect Jan. 1, 2013

• Eliminating the corporate deduction for prescription expenses for retirees. According to the Society for Human Resource Management, certain employers were not only “qualified to receive a subsidy equal to 28 percent of covered prescription drug costs for their retirees,” but the employer also was entitled to an income tax deduction for the subsidy. The idea behind providing both a subsidy and a tax deduction was to reduce taxpayer costs for the Medicare drug plan by encouraging companies pay their retirees’ costs, but the way it was structured was criticized by some as double-dipping. No matter the justification, our experts agreed it was still a tax hike. It takes effect Jan. 1, 2013.

• Increasing taxes on health insurance companies by limiting the amount of compensation paid to certain employees that they can deduct from their taxes. According to Congress’ Joint Committee on Taxation, this will be effective for compensation paid in taxable years “beginning after 2012, with respect to services performed after 2009.” Once again, this is narrowly targeted at health care company executives — not a popular group — but it’s still a tax.

• A 40 percent excise tax on employer-provided “Cadillac” health insurance plans costing more than $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families. Takes effect Jan. 1, 2018.



The Lie: Mitt Romney lies that he created jobs while the CEO of Bain Capital.


The Truth:





A Brief History of Mitt Romney’s Record of Putting Profits Ahead of People as CEO of Bain Capital

What is Bain Capital? Co-founded by Mitt Romney in 1984, Bain Capital is a classic “strip and flip” shop — a private equity firm that made its money buying businesses and sucking profit out of them by any means possible that often resulted in a stack of pink slips for everyday Americans. As the New York Post reported, during his 15 years as head of Bain, Romney “made fortunes by bankrupting five profitable businesses that ended up firing thousands of workers.”


Here’s how it often went down. Romney’s Bain would buy a company and increase its short-term earnings through firing workers and shuttering plants in order to borrow enormous amounts of money. The borrowed money was used to pay Bain dividends, however, those businesses needed to maintain that high level of earnings to pay their debts. When they couldn’t, that meant plant closures, more layoffs, bankruptcies, and in many cases, the end of the business. Yet these bankruptcies still meant huge profits for Bain’s investors. Furthermore, Bain continued to collect management fees even as companies failed.


Michael Rumbin, a vice president for technology management at Dade told the Los Angeles Times, “My experience at Dade during those Bain Capital years was that it was strictly an investment, not to create jobs.” Rumbin also spoke with Bloomberg in July:

Dade borrowed so much money to make that payment that when sales declined and interest rates rose the company struggled to pay its creditors. Standard & Poor’s downgraded its outlook for Dade Behring to negative from stable. The company later filed for bankruptcy.

“They leveraged this thing to the hilt and got out when they could,” Rumbin said. “We were left holding the bag.”


According to the Boston Globe in 2008: “Romney had chances to fight to save jobs, but didn’t. His ultimate responsibility was to make money for Bain’s investors, former partners said.”


One former official who worked on the labor contracts of the Bain-created company GS Industries told the Los Angeles Times that Bain “bled the company.”

“Bain was demanding certain financial performance with no understanding of what the problems were on the ground,” said David Foster, a former steelworkers union official who negotiated labor contracts with GSI management from 1994 until the bankruptcy. He said Bain “bled the company,” withdrawing cash for dividends and management fees even as circumstances in the steel industry deteriorated.

“If I were looking for effective management of a project, a company or a country, this is exactly the kind of management I would not want to have,” Foster said of Bain. “Bain partners think the profits they made are a sign of their brilliance. It’s not brilliance. It’s lurking around the corner and mugging somebody.”


recent report from the Los Angeles Times notes Romney’s colleagues admit they were not in the business of creating jobs.

Bain managers said their mission was clear. “I never thought of what I do for a living as job creation,” said Marc B. Walpow, a former managing partner at Bain who worked closely with Romney for nine years before forming his own firm. “The primary goal of private equity is to create wealth for your investors.”


And make money he did — Mitt loads of it. For an eight year period starting in 1987, Romney’s Bain invested 22 percent of the money it raised in five businesses that ended up filing for bankruptcy and walked away with a $578 million in profit. Judging by the photos at the time, finding places to stuff all those profits became something of a joke among the Bain cohorts. Such a display of greed and excess that would make Gordon Gekko — the fictional cut-throat corporate raider in Oliver Stone’s Wall Street — blush. Romney left Bain with a staggering $4 billion in assets.


It’s no wonder Wall Street lobbyists are lining up to throw campaign money Romney’s way today, by far more than any other presidential candidate. Mitt Romney is the poster child for the greed of Wall Street and excess of the 1%. A guy who made hundreds of millions putting profits ahead of peoples’ jobs is exactly the kind of guy Wall Street would love running things in Washington. Mitt Romney would let the Gekkos of the world go back to same greedy and reckless behavior that wiped out trillions in savings and cost millions of Americans their jobs.


Here’s a few examples of “stripping and flipping” companies — sucking cash out of businesses, laying off workers, and eventually hitting bankruptcy all while making investors like Mitt Romney even richer.


Since Mitt Romney had a mediocre record of job creation as the governor of Massachussetts, he has touted his record of creating jobs at Bain Capital. He’s noted time and time again that he created 100,000 jobs at Bain and has presented this to voters as a core reason why they should vote for him. Additionally, part of the response to the incredibly effective ads featuring people who lost their jobs because of Bain has been, “Well sure, some people lost their jobs, but Mitt created a lot more jobs than he killed.”


The problem with this is that there is no meaningful evidence other that Mitt Romney’s word that it’s so. The way Mitt has repeatedly lied to America, I am not taking anything Romney says at face value.


The first indication the 100,000 jobs created number’s dodgy is that when Mitt ran against Ted Kennedy in 1994, 2/3 of the way through his tenure at Bain, he was only claiming in ads that he created 10k jobs. Now, he’s claiming a 10 fold increase up to 100,000 jobs. That’s enough to make you raise an eyebrow, but not ironclad that he’s fudging.


However, there was a more serious indication of trouble: Romney, who could fairly be called the best prepared candidate of the election season, had no firm numbers to back up his 100,000 jobs-created claim. Of course, this is extremely suspicious. Here we have one of the biggest reasons voters are supposed to back Mitt Romney, but his campaign was presenting no real evidence to back it up.


Governor Romney claimed to have created 100,000 jobs at Bain and you know, people are wanting to know: Is there proof of that claim? And was it U.S. jobs created for United States Citizens?


It’s not a small matter for Mitt Romney to be offering up an imaginary number as a central reason to vote for him, particularly since the number of people who were put out of work by Bain Capital will end up being much more concrete. If Mitt Romney’s actual number of “jobs created” is closer to the 10,000 he mentioned in the 1994 campaign, then it’s entirely possible Mitt Romney killed more jobs than he created at Bain Capital since the private research I’ve seen, which is more likely to be low than high, suggests roughly 17,000 people were fired, laid off, or were in firms that went out of business while Mitt Romney was in charge.


In other words, is it entirely possible Mitt Romney was a net job killer, not a net job creator during his time at Bain? Absolutely.



The lie: I heard on TV yesterday. from Mitt Romneys mouth, POTUS Obama has done “nothing since taking office in 2009″.


The Truth: The Top 50 accomplishments of POTUS Barack Hussein Obama, this is only the top 50, below I will link you to the latest list of his over 370 accomplishments from the White House web site.


The Top 50 Accomplishments Of POTUS Barack Hussein Obama.


Presidential Actions




Nominations & Appointment


List Of POTUS Obama Achievements 


List Of President Obama’s Accomplishments



Now, go out among the TeaTardedRepubliCANT Pseudo-Freudian Psycho-Sexual Secret-Whore Pro-caucasian Pro-Racist Anti-LGBT Anti-Feminist Reich Wing Party Members and spread the facts & truth.


“BARACK” The Vote.


Disagree Intelligently, Use Facts & Truth™


Know What I Mean?




Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 280,955 other followers

%d bloggers like this: